Gareth of Endless Possibilities interviewed awake scientist Pierce Salguero. Pierce has proposed a non-stages model of awakening with 4 “threads” that we might think of as styles of experiencing the process. It’s a very inclusive model of our unfolding.
The 4 Threads:
Emptiness: “Experiences and phenomena related to nonduality, nonself, nonexistence, spaciousness, transcendence, subject/object collapse, kensho, satori, jhana, samadhi, nirodha, nirvana, sunyata, anatta, etc.” He places TM in this category but I disagree. Not all meditations are equivalent. While early experiences of samadhi can indeed feel empty, what TM cultures is fullness, not emptiness. Many TMers can attest to that.
Oneness: (what I’d call Fullness) “Experiences and phenomena related to unity, love, divinity, sacredness, holiness, benevolence, compassion, joy, healing, God, Goddess, cosmic intelligence, etc.”
Here, I could suggest a value in sub-threads. For example, a thread related to the heart, and a thread related to Divinity. They’re related but have their own trajectories.
Energy: “Experiences and phenomena related to energy, kundalini, qi, prana, winds, bliss, meridians, dantians, chakras, auras, koshas, light-body, rainbow body, quantum fields, astral projection, etc.”
Again, I can see potential sub-threads like the kundalini and chakra process vs refined perception of the koshas and energy system. In my model, refinement relates to sattva development. The kundalini process is quite distinct.
Psyche: “Experiences and phenomena relating to the unconscious mind, including all traumatic, intergenerational, ancestral, sociocultural, transpersonal, archetypal, biological, elemental, and soul-level conditioning.” This includes past lives.
I’d frame this a little more broadly. Trauma is somatic, for example. It’s subconscious mentally, but mostly not stored there. I’ve certainly had this thread more prominent recently.
Near the end, he mentions a possible fifth thread: ordinary life, which I think should be included. The point of this process is to live it in the daily life.
He said that techniques make a big difference in what we’re culturing. I fully agree. Also that our background and nature will influence our experience. Someone on one path can have elements of another, something that path rarely supports. As they discuss, traditions can even reject some threads that their practice isn’t designed to culture. For example, someone experiencing subtle perception is told to reject it when the goal is emptiness.
Those familiar with the model I use may recognize that I have a “threads” model within the stages. Development of atman (consciousness) and sattva (clarity) both have a strong influence on the style of experience of the stages. Less sattva, for example, and we have little of the Refined stages. Sattva and soma directly relate to much of what he classifies as Oneness. As is the distinction between Emptiness and Oneness.
Gareth mentions Shiva and Shakti twice, which are also related to the threads. Shiva is the detached observer which leans on the Emptiness side. Shakti relates to the Oneness and Energy threads.
Threads and stages are not incompatible but 2 styles of framing our unfolding. His model is more inclusive of styles of experience than any stages model. Sometimes, it will better reflect someones phase of experience. And yet the support someone needs for Self Realization is very different than Brahman stage, even if the threads may be similar. Both models have value. We’re not defined by where we are on the path but it’s very useful to know how to support our experience, however it’s showing up.
His website has an early draft of the threads model while he works towards a book.
Davidya
Great talk. I like this model of all the threads intertwining along the path
Hi Patrick
Yes, the intertwining threads approach is a great understanding.