
At the encouragement of c4chaos, I read a post by Alan Chapman of Open Enlightenment. Chapman offers us an interesting bit of writing on how he’s evolved after becoming enlightened. Admittedly, I spend a great deal of time with my own sangha cautioning about this kind of language since it implies that one has awakened to the Truth beyond name and form, personally, when there is nothing personal to be found in any authentic awakening. But before any of us dismisses Mr. Chapman’s potential and actual missteps, I would recommend letting his words in.
For example, I liked the digs he throws at those of us who unconsciously cloak ourselves in spiritual arrogance:
I’ve been on the wrong end of a patronising postmodernist a few times, and I’ve been so enranged [sic] and sickened by his or her unexamined smugness, that I’ve responded by informing them that, actually, I’m at a level of development above and beyond theirs, and so they’re just incapable of understanding me. Ha!
Of course there’s more than a little egoic clinging shown here for someone who’s enlightened, but his point should be soberly considered.
He then takes on Spiral Dynamics and suggests that it isn’t a very accurate map of human development. In some cases I agree with sentiments like these. However, it’s easy to see how someone like Mr. Chapman, who obviously finds his chosen practice of “Magick” maligned as something that merely supports partial awakening. And yet based on his article, this is what we find. Partial awakening, not fully integrated.