"Right Bucks" by Ken Wilbur

[Friend]

Edited November 16, 2011 by Friend

[Birch]

Offered for your consideration.

 

Thanks Susan.

 

I don't think my reading it changed my original opinion about paying for tuition of techniques which is that it's IMO legit for a teacher of anything to ask for money (or exchange of goods or work) in exchange for teaching a skill. But really, once you've learned them, you're the person that has to do the work, the contemplation, the meditation, the research and the thinking for yourself.

 

Still, Ken's making pots of cash, isn't he? So is Adyashanti, so is Shinzen. Oh, and so is the Catholic church and the Scientologists and, well, really, lots of them are. I think that's interesting.

 

If Ken is convinced he's doing the right thing, why bother writing a spiel to justify it? Of course, if he's in any doubt, then maybe his classic textual approach of "throw a "here's how the world used to work, works and so should work" helps him feel better.

 

Why did you offer it for consideration by the TTB's? I'm curious.

[ShaktiMama]

Hi ShaktiMama,

 

I am not sure I understand this post and was wondering if you could help cast some light on it? I must admit upfront that I never read any other of the author's works - perhaps that is the source of my confusion.

 

I've been through the text twice now.

I see an 18 page rambling which attempts unapologetically (although I am not convinced) to justify the author having money (and spending it) given the authors acceptance and understanding of the concept of Dharma through time.

 

I would be curious to understand what you got out of it or was hoping that your fellow taobums should get out of it?

 

I really wanted to know what people think about it. I wanted to see what kind of discussion it might initiate. This is issue comes up now and then on the bums. I also thought it would be a nice reference to put in the archives if people wanted to ponder this more deeply.

 

I thought it was illuminating to view where the idea of non payment for spiritual teachers began or became institutionalized.

 

Ken's been around for at least 20 years and is quite popular because of his views. He also has many haters. He is an interesting, knowledgeable fellow and has had quite the impact in modern times with his Intergral Theory. He is polarizing and irreverent. I appreciate people who are iconoclastic and not afraid to look closely at our sacred cows. Wilbur isn't justifying at all IMO. That's not what I saw.

 

You can read more about him on his blog.

 

The pdf is actually more of a podcast that I downloaded to listen from Itunes but it came in this pdf form for some reason instead.

[ShaktiMama]

Thanks Susan.

 

I don't think my reading it changed my original opinion about paying for tuition of techniques which is that it's IMO legit for a teacher of anything to ask for money (or exchange of goods or work) in exchange for teaching a skill. But really, once you've learned them, you're the person that has to do the work, the contemplation, the meditation, the research and the thinking for yourself.

 

Still, Ken's making pots of cash, isn't he? So is Adyashanti, so is Shinzen. Oh, and so is the Catholic church and the Scientologists and, well, really, lots of them are. I think that's interesting.

 

If Ken is convinced he's doing the right thing, why bother writing a spiel to justify it? Of course, if he's in any doubt, then maybe his classic textual approach of "throw a "here's how the world used to work, works and so should work" helps him feel better.

 

Why did you offer it for consideration by the TTB's? I'm curious.

 

Hi Kate,

Just to stimulate conversation; find out what people might think. Also to place as a resource.

 

I don't think it was a justification. It was written in 2006 and he had been around long enough to get over any unease or conflict he may have had about charging for tuition and time. More than likely he was answering some questions posed by people who have difficulties resolving this issue or wonder why it is even an issue. I wasnt there but Ken and the Integral crowd are very popular in my area (he lives in downtown Denver or he did until recently,) so based on our shared acquaintances I do know it is out of character for him to be justifying anything he does.

[宁]

About 'paying for dharma', excuse my ignorance as it is, but

did Buddha's disciples paid the Buddha for dharma?

 

IMHO, paying adds a nasty vibe to a spiritual 'group' or person, and there are many out there that are in the 'business' because it's profitable.

Recognizing this fact doesn't make me a 'hater', it makes me more aware.

 

Besides, in the age of the internet, paying for [this kind of] information should become obsolete.

If there are cases where it doesn't, I suspect addiction to a guru's charisma.

You have to pay him, because he's going to tolerate you around, and 'bask' in his 'light', hehe.

 

What do ya'll think?

[Sunya]

About 'paying for dharma', excuse my ignorance as it is, but

did Buddha's disciples paid the Buddha for dharma?

 

IMHO, paying adds a nasty vibe to a spiritual 'group' or person, and there are many out there that are in the 'business' because it's profitable.

Recognizing this fact doesn't make me a 'hater', it makes me more aware.

 

Besides, in the age of the internet, paying for [this kind of] information should become obsolete.

If there are cases where it doesn't, I suspect addiction to a guru's charisma.

You have to pay him, because he's going to tolerate you around, and 'bask' in his 'light', hehe.

 

What do ya'll think?

 

In ancient India you could wander around as a monk/ascetic and people would feed you and offer shelter sometimes. They still somewhat do this Thailand to the monks who go on begging rounds. People view it as good karma to feed those on the spiritual path.

 

In most of the world today, that won't happen.

 

I think there is more to a relationship with a teacher than merely learning techniques that you can read in a book. If you're mentally ill, you can buy a book on cognitive behavioral therapy and try it on yourself, but it's a bit more effective when you have a trained therapist, who himself hopefully is a bit sane, to treat you.

[宁]

Yes, but that's a bit different, isn't it?

 

And, for instance, if you belong to a spiritual group, it's much like you belong to a family..

My mom never charged me money for raising me as a child..

Moreover, people that are inclined to the spiritual, oftentimes don't handle the material world very well. (maybe it's one of the reasons they choose the spiritual, the immaterial??)

And viceversa.

 

edit 'spells'

Edited January 16, 2011 by Little1

[de_paradise]

I've had dreams of a flash of bright light, and some sort of change of dimension where all the "good" people come together on Earth... I don't have any nuanced information to give out about this.

 

 

Wow, thats wonderful news.

 

As far as paying for some teaching, well I paid money for books or teachers and feel very lucky and grateful for this simple method. You will shut yourself off from many opportunities if you harbour the belief that it "ought to" be free.

[Sahaj Nath]

As far as paying for some teaching, well I paid money for books or teachers and feel very lucky and grateful for this simple method. You will shut yourself off from many opportunities if you harbour the belief that it "ought to" be free.

 

 

Agreed.

 

i tend to harbor the belief of "any means necessary," so long as it is congruent with my current stage of development.

 

i love supporting good teachers and organizations with my money. i don't even use bit torrent materials if there's a way to purchase that same material through the group who originally offered it.

 

BUT, when i was much younger and we were poor (like bologna and ketchup sandwiches for dinner... that kind of poor), i stole books left and right. i knew that my hunger for knowledge was a healthy hunger, but it seemed unfair that i be shut out of opportunities to feed that hunger because we were poor and my mother was... well... a bad parent.

 

if not for my book stealing days, i might never have risen above the conditions of my youth. but when i became a man, i put away childish things.

 

 

i should probably go back and read the Wilber article before commenting, but i won't. i think i've read and seen enough Wilber to know where he's coming from.

 

it's just not a black and white issue. teachers have always been paid for their time and energy; if they weren't, most of them wouldn't be able to teach. the issue is when profit becomes the MOTIVE for teaching. when teachers and groups turn what was meant to be a calling into a business. when more energy is put into advertising an image than offering quality teachings.

 

with Ken, i think he's right about a whole lot of things, but he also tends to be fast & loose with the facts when he has an agenda that isn't about the truth of the matter. in this case, he DOES have an agenda. i think Shaktimama is right that he doesn't need to justify anything to himself, but he doesn't write those articles for himself, and he DOES have an interest in making his elite base feel good AND justified in their excess. not unlike Tony Robbins, whose teachings aren't just about making money, but about quality living.

 

you'll never see Tony Robbins and Ken Wilber in conflict with each other. and it's NOT because they are both torch bearers of Truth.

 

charging for a retreat or an intensive makes perfect sense to me, but you can kiss my ass if you think i'm gonna spend 5K for a 5-day Integral Big Mind retreat being led by some guy in an Armani suit.

 

in other words: exchange of value is the nature of the human condition, i think. but don't piss on my head and tell me it's raining. i can TOTALLY smell the difference!

[9th]

Bitchin avatar!

[Sunya]

charging for a retreat or an intensive makes perfect sense to me, but you can kiss my ass if you think i'm gonna spend 5K for a 5-day Integral Big Mind retreat being led by some guy in an Armani suit.

 

in other words: exchange of value is the nature of the human condition, i think. but don't piss on my head and tell me it's raining. i can TOTALLY smell the difference!

[Jetsun]

When I first got into spiritual self development I saw Wilber was offering a revolutionary, integral system of self development which combines the best of modern science with the best of ancient knowledge which you can buy in a neat package for a few hundred $. I got all excited as I thought this was exactly what I was looking for and the hefty price would be worth it for something so revolutionary, but when I examined the detail of the method it was basically saying you have to combine weight training with Buddhist meditation and that's it, that's his system which he charges a lot of money for, pump iron and meditate, thankfully I downloaded it all from bittorrent for free so I got out of it exactly what I payed for

[宁]

pump iron and meditate? LOOLZZ!!

you know, he may have a point there, am sure he's smart enough to prove his point, and that's where the money goes into, his effort of proving he's right.

 

however i tend to agree with hundun also, there has to be some form of exchanging value, and money is the most convenient for most of us. good food for thought.

however, i don't think this is the only way, nor the best way.

[Sahaj Nath]

When I first got into spiritual self development I saw Wilber was offering a revolutionary, integral system of self development which combines the best of modern science with the best of ancient knowledge which you can buy in a neat package for a few hundred $. I got all excited as I thought this was exactly what I was looking for and the hefty price would be worth it for something so revolutionary, but when I examined the detail of the method it was basically saying you have to combine weight training with Buddhist meditation and that's it, that's his system which he charges a lot of money for, pump iron and meditate, thankfully I downloaded it all from bittorrent for free so I got out of it exactly what I payed for

 

c'mon, now you're just not playing fair. your post borders on libel. he's actually correct about most of his integral theory. folks who think that they can learn some super secret techniques, or that they can focus on just one dimension of their being and attain full realization are painfully naive. development in ALL dimensions is important for fast, balanced, and stable realization.

 

you work out the body with whatever you like. it could be a vigorous qigong routine. for him it was weights, for obvious reasons. you work out the mind with scriptural studies, debate, chess, mathematics, poetry. you work out the spirit with meditation of any kind, various forms of sadhana. you work out your psychological condition with therapy, cognitive study, psychoanalytic study, 3-2-1 shadow process.

 

those are the four core areas of development for achieving a realization that sticks. there are also more specific lines of development that one might want to focus on, like ethics, sex, work, emotions, and relationships. and there's obvious overlap. so qigong can cultivate the body, psychology, and spirit. and so on.

 

he calls the integral approach cross-training because by training in multiple lines of development at once, you grow faster in each of them than you would if you spent all of that time on just one line of development.

 

so let's be clear. maybe because you didn't pay for the material, you didn't take the time to actually study any of it, either. i don't know. but your statement was grossly off the mark.

Edited January 17, 2011 by Hundun

[VCraigP]

I found a few things about this thread remarkable.

 

It is astonishing how little actual dissection of the article there is and now much knee jerk reaction to each individuals preconceptions about the subject and what they think Ken Wilbur was saying, or in the case of those not reading it at all, what they suppose Ken W would say. (one of my more egregious runon sentences, Yes?)

 

What I got from it was first of all, CONTEXT.

 

What is the nature of agrarian societies in which the dharma and similar philosophies evolved? How does the agrarian society compare and differ from our Post-industrial society? How does this difference inform on the appropriateness of charging for so-called Dharma.

 

Also for me this article was quite valuable in defining the meaning of Non-Dual. What does it mean to acknowledge the ascendant, transcendent as well as the descendant, material world, and how is that contrasted from purely ascendant traditions and their rejection of MONEY, Sex (women), the Body and Food.

 

This perspective of acknowledging both impulses and not rejecting but embracing the material as part of spirituality, ie balance and harmony represents my ideal of what Taoist practices and philosophies have advised.

 

As for paying for Dharma, practices, etc my view is as always the same. ANY Teacher deserves to earn a living. However if said teacher seems to be taking far more than he needs or asking far more than seems proper to YOU, then YOU have the choice to view them as not being in Harmony with your values and therefore not a proper teacher for you. We are not an agrarian society and do not have the same support structures for Monks and the like as have existed in the past. Therefore the impulse to view money as "filthy lucre" and paying for spiritual teachings as a taint is an impulse in my view which needs to be grown out of.

 

FYI I speed read about 2/3 of the article before I ran out of patience today so Kudos to anyone else who may have studied it better.

 

That's what I got out of it.

 

Thanks ShaktiMama.

 

TTFN

 

Craig

[Sloppy Zhang]

I found a few things about this thread remarkable.

 

It is astonishing how little actual dissection of the article there is and now much knee jerk reaction to each individuals preconceptions about the subject and what they think Ken Wilbur was saying, or in the case of those not reading it at all, what they suppose Ken W would say. (one of my more egregious runon sentences, Yes?)

 

...

 

FYI I speed read about 2/3 of the article before I ran out of patience today so Kudos to anyone else who may have studied it better.

 

 

Naw, I'm just playin'

 

I did find a couple of his observations and thoughts to be quite interesting. As you pointed out, the context of teachings is very important and, if overlooked, can lead to a different understanding of teachings (right understand? wrong? warped? unique? I dunno)

 

That said, as has been pointed out, it's a very unique issue, not black and white, thus not something that is very easy to generalize.

 

While he makes a good point that separating money from the equation creates a type of duality that one is trying to avoid by not charging money, which only reinforces the duality, it's very easy to swing the other way: since everything is one I can charge as much money as I want/need to, but it's okay because it's just a manifestation of energy in a non-dual way, and someone who really REALLY wants/needs to get access to the teaching is going to have/make the money necessary to get it, because that physical money is just a physical representation of their burning desire to learn. (not necessarily saying that anyone here or in the article is making such a statement, it's merely an example of what happens if you "swing too far in the other direction", and it is a type of statement I've seen in various spiritual communities)

 

Soooooo, eh.

 

I was going to delve a bit into the text, actually, in my first post in this thread, but the post started getting kind of long, and I didn't really feel like getting in a long drawn out debate with someone over the issue Basically, I think he made some interesting points. I thought it was interesting how he established the context (but I found a good chunk, around half, was really just setting you up for the point he was going to make)

 

Basically, eh. It's not a black and white issue. And I don't know about the factual legitimacy of his claims regarding the development of history and whether things really played out like he outlines them. But it is an interesting thought.

Edited January 17, 2011 by Sloppy Zhang

[Jetsun]

c'mon, now you're just not playing fair. your post borders on libel. he's actually correct about most of his integral theory. folks who think that they can learn some super secret techniques, or that they can focus on just one dimension of their being and attain full realization are painfully naive. development in ALL dimensions is important for fast, balanced, and stable realization.

 

you work out the body with whatever you like. it could be a vigorous qigong routine. for him it was weights, for obvious reasons. you work out the mind with scriptural studies, debate, chess, mathematics, poetry. you work out the spirit with meditation of any kind, various forms of sadhana. you work out your psychological condition with therapy, cognitive study, psychoanalytic study, 3-2-1 shadow process.

 

those are the four core areas of development for achieving a realization that sticks. there are also more specific lines of development that one might want to focus on, like ethics, sex, work, emotions, and relationships. and there's obvious overlap. so qigong can cultivate the body, psychology, and spirit. and so on.

 

he calls the integral approach cross-training because by training in multiple lines of development at once, you grow faster in each of them than you would if you spent all of that time on just one line of development.

 

so let's be clear. maybe because you didn't pay for the material, you didn't take the time to actually study any of it, either. i don't know. but your statement was grossly off the mark.

 

I just didn't see what weights had to do with anything, the difference between Qigong and weights is huge as Qigong works all sorts of areas like improving your sensitivity to your body, healing and working your emotions, whereas weights appears to be more on the vanity side of exercise, which is fine but I don't see the connection to spiritual development. I remember he said something about weights improving your ability to sit for long lengths of time in meditation but in my experience things like Yoga and Pilates are far superior for this as they work your core in a more balanced natural way. A Qigong healing book I once read said that a lot of people who did weights were just damaging and unbalancing their bodies through unnatural restrictive exercises and when they got into Qigong they had to spend years healing their previous strains.

[ShaktiMama]

I found a few things about this thread remarkable.

 

It is astonishing how little actual dissection of the article there is and now much knee jerk reaction to each individuals preconceptions about the subject and what they think Ken Wilbur was saying, or in the case of those not reading it at all, what they suppose Ken W would say. (one of my more egregious runon sentences, Yes?)

 

What I got from it was first of all, CONTEXT.

 

What is the nature of agrarian societies in which the dharma and similar philosophies evolved? How does the agrarian society compare and differ from our Post-industrial society? How does this difference inform on the appropriateness of charging for so-called Dharma.

 

Also for me this article was quite valuable in defining the meaning of Non-Dual. What does it mean to acknowledge the ascendant, transcendent as well as the descendant, material world, and how is that contrasted from purely ascendant traditions and their rejection of MONEY, Sex (women), the Body and Food.

 

This perspective of acknowledging both impulses and not rejecting but embracing the material as part of spirituality, ie balance and harmony represents my ideal of what Taoist practices and philosophies have advised.

 

As for paying for Dharma, practices, etc my view is as always the same. ANY Teacher deserves to earn a living. However if said teacher seems to be taking far more than he needs or asking far more than seems proper to YOU, then YOU have the choice to view them as not being in Harmony with your values and therefore not a proper teacher for you. We are not an agrarian society and do not have the same support structures for Monks and the like as have existed in the past. Therefore the impulse to view money as "filthy lucre" and paying for spiritual teachings as a taint is an impulse in my view which needs to be grown out of.

 

FYI I speed read about 2/3 of the article before I ran out of patience today so Kudos to anyone else who may have studied it better.

 

That's what I got out of it.

 

Thanks ShaktiMama.

 

TTFN

 

Craig

 

It didnt take long, did it? That's why I pretty much refrain from commenting.

 

If people want to know Ken's professional qualifications:

http://www.kenwilber.com/professional/landing/index.html

 

s

[Sahaj Nath]

I found a few things about this thread remarkable.

 

It is astonishing how little actual dissection of the article there is and now much knee jerk reaction to each individuals preconceptions about the subject and what they think Ken Wilbur was saying, or in the case of those not reading it at all, what they suppose Ken W would say. (one of my more egregious runon sentences, Yes?)

 

 

fair enough. but to be honest, even after having read the article, i still stand by what i wrote. anyone who's familiar with Ken's work has read and/or heard his analysis on the issue before. very generalized = fast and loose.

 

i know your comment wasn't directed at just me, and i mostly agree with you that i still should have at least looked at it first, but it was what i thought it was, and the only context i cared to address was the one provided by shaktimama herself in the subtitle of the thread.

 

i used to have some great interview dialogues that occurred between Ken Wilber and Andrew Cohen (of whom i'm NOT much of a fan), and they talk about evolutionary enlightenment and incarnational nonduality. brilliant talks. far more compelling than this article in terms of analysis.

 

I just didn't see what weights had to do with anything, the difference between Qigong and weights is huge as Qigong works all sorts of areas like improving your sensitivity to your body, healing and working your emotions, whereas weights appears to be more on the vanity side of exercise, which is fine but I don't see the connection to spiritual development. I remember he said something about weights improving your ability to sit for long lengths of time in meditation but in my experience things like Yoga and Pilates are far superior for this as they work your core in a more balanced natural way. A Qigong healing book I once read said that a lot of people who did weights were just damaging and unbalancing their bodies through unnatural restrictive exercises and when they got into Qigong they had to spend years healing their previous strains.

 

you really ought to spend some quality time to actually study that material. and why take such a narrow-minded view on weight lifting? we live in the age of the cubicle, where muscles atrophy if we don't create activities that put demand on them. Wilber was like 8 feet tall and 150 lbs (i'm exaggerating, of course). constantly in poor health. i don't remember precisely what his health issues are/were, but weightlifting for him was a must. he had to put on mass to stabilize his body, and without weightlifting, his body simply wouldn't put on any weight.

 

weightlifting can be a very healthy thing, not just about vanity. and if you study the material that you pulled off of the bit torrents, you'll probably find that weightlifting, when done with a certain approach and mental state, can be very meditative, even indistinguishable from qigong. the iron bracelets used by some of the shaolin artists is weightlifting, just not the western conventional type.

 

i would encourage you and revisit the material you've downloaded. there's a lot more quality information there than you seem to think. it's simply laid out and very straightforward. it's certainly worth your time, i think.

 

 

...

 

Oh, and while i'm at it: what's with all the hate regarding Bubba Free-John/Adi Da Samraj? yes, Wilber did distance himself a bit from him due to the bad press, but he never denounced him. he used Da as sort of an example of being really enlightened in one or two important areas, and being underdeveloped in others. not unlike coming across a highly realized chinese master and discovering that he is racist, or sexist. it happens. but only the simple-minded would throw out the masterful qualities simply because that master still had prejudices. new practitioners often ask how backward-thinking traits can continue to exist in an otherwise realized being, and whether such qualities disqualify their realization. Wilber offers pretty kick-ass answers to this.

 

personally, i'm a fan of Adi Da. i don't have to swallow him whole to appreciate the areas in which he truly excelled as a spiritual adept. and if believing that he was the one and only True God Avatar was a necessary flaw for him to be able to share what he did with such brilliance and clarity, well, i can certainly forgive him that.

 

he doesn't have to be perfect to be amazing. none of us do.

[phore]

Kap was the best money ive ever spent hands down. Its the gift that keeps on giving. Its easily manifested more opportunities for financial prosperity than I could have gotten out of that money anyways

 

Spiritual teachers need to eat too.

[ShaktiMama]

but only the simple-minded would throw out the masterful qualities simply because that master still had prejudices. new practitioners often ask how backward-thinking traits can continue to exist in an otherwise realized being, and whether such qualities disqualify their realization. Wilber offers pretty kick-ass answers to this.

 

personally, i'm a fan of Adi Da. i don't have to swallow him whole to appreciate the areas in which he truly excelled as a spiritual adept. and if believing that he was the one and only True God Avatar was a necessary flaw for him to be able to share what he did with such brilliance and clarity, well, i can certainly forgive him that.

 

he doesn't have to be perfect to be amazing. none of us do.

 

Hudun?

Could you point me to where I could read those kick ass answers to this?

 

thanks,

s

[ShaktiMama]

Kap was the best money ive ever spent hands down. Its the gift that keeps on giving. Its easily manifested more opportunities for financial prosperity than I could have gotten out of that money anyways

 

Spiritual teachers need to eat too.

 

and pay rent, and car insurance and car payments, airplane tickets, publication expenses, rental hall expenses, a million incidental expenses like child care and help those who cant pay...and on and on and on....

 

s

[宁]

and pay rent, and car insurance and car payments, airplane tickets, publication expenses, rental hall expenses, a million incidental expenses like child care and help those who cant pay...and on and on and on....

 

s

 

 

Yang Jwing-ming once said something like this:

 

"at first, teachers were teachers, and students were students.

then, after teaching became a business,

teachers became students, and students became teachers."

The idea was, teachers have to please their students, because they become their costumers

 

 

if i will have anything worth teaching someday,

i'll make it a separate thing from my main means of earning a living.

 

to me that feels like an honest thing to do

 

 

edit darn 'spells'

Edited January 18, 2011 by Little1

[ShaktiMama]

 

if i will have anything worth teaching someday,

i'll make it a separate thing from my main means of earning a living.

 

 

edit darn 'spells'

 

 

That is what all the KAP teachers do. We all have main ways of earning a living other than teaching KAP. I am a nurse, Santi is a music producer and session guitarist who is under contract to Nickelodeon right now, Tao teaches yoga, Dr. Morris was a university professor, a couple others work for Nissan, another is a teacher in public school I think, another is an officer in the Air Force....

 

I would love to be teaching full time but I am dependent on a steady paycheck in the regular world to keep from living on the streets. Maybe someday.

 

s

[Sahaj Nath]

Hudun?

Could you point me to where I could read those kick ass answers to this?

 

thanks,

s

 

not sure that i can point you directly, but i can certainly point in the general direction.

 

i no longer own most of ken wilber's materials. i've loaned tons out and then never got them back. but a key element in his approach to spiritual practice is psychology. MOST of his material on psychology (and particularly on shadow elements) deals with the importance of the contribution of western psychology to stable overall development, because there are mental issues like disassociated character traights that don't necessarily become apparent simply by meditative technique. so without some specifically psychological forms of inquiry, many egoic flaws can get bigger and even reinforced by spiritual growth, mainly because the more one grows, the more one can convince themselves that they've dealt with all of their issues. or the more they realize that they don't have to if they don't want to, and they can still attain high levels of realization.

 

so look for his work on shadow elements and integral psychology. you're sure to stumble upon most of it. but it's thoroughly spread throughout a lot of his lectures as well. depending on the topic, his discussion is always informed by that perspective. and he doesn't just argue it in a vacuum; he tends to celebrate aspects of it because of what it implies about the ego, namely that the ego is not the enemy to spiritual development, and that a strong, healthy ego is key. also, that even the greatest teachers have limitations. going to a Tibetan Monk for marital advice might not be the wisest choice, for instance. which leads right to evolutionary enlightenment.

 

people often want the oldest, most ancient or original teachings, not appreciating the fact that we live in a different world than the teachers of old. we understand the material and ever-changing universe in ways that simply wasn't known in the past. so there's something to be said about seeking an enlightened realization that is informed by our modern times and understandings.

 

i believe he goes there in kosmic consciousness, which is like a 12-hour interview series of which i'm sure you can find clips on youtube if you're clever enough with search terms. there's plenty of ken wilber material there, i'm sure.