Good stuff. A barely formalized thought: Vajrayana romance seems susceptible to regression into stage 4-ish roles/identity if the dakini/vira model is taken too literally/solidly... instead of actually falling into the abyss of immediate action that intimacy can be. Hmm, that seems to be my general wariness about Vajrayana in general. Maybe it's sort of like training wheels that need to be taken off at some point if you really want to ride? (That sounds negative, but I don't think it is in a bigger picture of things.)
> Vajrayana romance seems susceptible to regression into stage 4-ish roles/identity if the dakini/vira model is taken too literally/solidly... instead of actually falling into the abyss of immediate action that intimacy can be.
A most astute observation! Yes, I think that is a potential pitfall (and I have seen it happen, now that I think about it).
> Maybe it's sort of like training wheels that need to be taken off at some point if you really want to ride?
Yes, this is exactly how tantra appears from the point of view of dzogchen. From that perspective, it's a somewhat fake preliminary practice, whose point is to get you to the "base" or starting point for dzogchen.
OTOH, you have to get there somehow... and tantra is highly enjoyable and extraordinary in its own terms.
Thanks - any insight of mine on this stuff is definitely due in strong part to years of reading your essays/websites. In this latest series, I've really been struck by how much Stage 5 is a safety net-free, high-wire walk compared to Stage 4 (prompting the comment) and how dangerous it can feel until you realize there is no ground to impact on... and how much simple joy there actually is in no longer demanding a sensible structure for immediate experience, if you can get past the sense of dramatic/tragic loss that is felt/indulged in 4.5 nihilism. Thanks again!
This is very very current for me, as I navigate a conflict with my partner that we may break up over. In discussion with some Evolving Ground buddies I went to *Entering the Heart of the Sun and Moon* for how to actually practice seeing the other's enlightened qualities, and seeing perceived lack as distorted forms of enlightened qualities.
I realised that your "unavailable daka" may not be some actual person who is so great as to be unavailable: it instead may be those exact qualities I perceive my partner as lacking (i.e they are currently unavailable in his display). I decided to look for signs of them.
You'll never guess ... I found them! It was like totally easy 😂😂 All my stuckness and anger and anxiety went. We went out for a meal and felt tender and present, and didn't mention The Relationship at all. We may still break up, who knows, but there's no urgency. I feel so free
maybe a silly question, but just out of curiosity: i've noticed that you keep saying things like "as far as i can tell kegan meant/discussed/was influenced by xyz," and i just realized that Kegan seems to be still alive and well. Have you reached out to him or had the chance to talk to him at all?
I've written a lot about adult stage theory... whether any of it will be helpful for you in particular, I don't know! But this page is a "table of contents" for all the relevant stuff: https://meaningness.com/adult-stages-index
An idea that keeps crossing my mind as you've been writing in this vein has been that BDSM relationships, with their negotiations born out of the need for safety, are a likely catalyst for people to make the 3 to 4 transition.
“I realized only after assembling my list of seven true romance stories that every one of them is about a witch.” I’m sure hoping for at least one example of a barbarian warrior prince story! This is a fantastic and illuminating series that I find myself returning to read again and again.
😢 If I knew of a good one, I would definitely include it—but sadly, I don’t. Most of these stories are from my own life (because they need a personal perspective), and I’m pretty much heterosexual.
I’m glad you are enjoying the series!
My very-unfinished tantric vampire romance novel (https://buddhism-for-vampires.com/the-vetalis-gift) has a major character who is a femme gay man (and not a vampire) and is also a mostly-civilized warrior prince in relationship with another warrior dude. But that part of the story is quite a few chapters ahead of where I have gotten to (and I’m managing less than one chapter per year, so…)
I'm no kegan expert, but I think the switch from 3-4 for a female in relation to a male at 4 is probably pretty common. I don't know what the catalyst would be exactly but I can imagine thst 4 would simply disdain 3 for their way of being and inability to love as an individuated being.
I took this as a call to look up some kind of “philosophy of the barbarian” myself, and ended up currently reading Nietzsche’s commentary of barbarism as an origin to nobility and cultural renewal. This seems like something up your alley as well, as a way to connect to your series on nobility and warriorship (though you are probably more well-read than me on this, and could parse Nietzche’s writings better than me, I confess it’s kind of above my understanding). Cheers!
I've been following you for years. Meaningness has been really helpful navigating nebulosity at work. First I thought: I am the only one close to level 5. Then I thought: Actually I am the only one at level 3. Then I thought, maybe what happens is that as a woman I'm not effective at communicating with the men above me.
This latest chain or articles has been great at solidifying some things I was thinking about the framework of human development as I learned it from Meaningness. It was sounding to me like (oversimplified, of course, or otherwise maps wouldn't be useful)
Level 3: emotions, woman like
Level 4: rational, man like
Level 5: rational with emotions, it's nuanced, depends on context
The overlay of Kegan's framework with the Vajrayana framework really helped me clear out my thoughts.
I realized when you showed the Vajrayana framework, there seem to be no hierarchy between 3 and 4. The ones who transcend are the ones who can do a bit of both (like the sorcerer).
It makes sense that if the framework is developed by a man (Kegan in this case), that being more man-like is higher level than being more woman-like. From a neuroscience perspective, men do have more local networks than women, and are better at isolating problems and keeping things systematic. Women have more global connections, so they perceive things that seem unrelated come together. This refers to distributions, just like generally men are taller than women.
Here are two resources about men's and women's brains (also autism), one scientific, and one not scientific but that I think about often as a neuroscientist:
Some more dissecting of the article in case this wasn't enough:
"Like Circe, the dakini’s magical power trans-forms anyone who attempts to relate to her. Her fluid meta-rational understanding executes the death sentence on rigid rationalist formalism. She cannibalizes the corpse of a lover’s systematic self-identification. She gives renewed birth to him as a cheerful, kind, useful monster.
The vira does not respect sloppiness, emotional incontinence, vacillation, lack of principle, evasiveness, manipulation, or conformity when used to avoid conflict. He will not take a girl-child seriously. If you want to ride with the prince, you must grow up and take your own form as a powerful, distinct individual. Stand your ground in battle, and master the forms of equestrianism and sword-play."
Comparing these two paragraphs, the man simply errs from: rigid rationalist formalism and systematic self-identification. However the woman errs from: sloppiness, emotional incontinence, vacillation, lack of principle, evasiveness, manipulation, or conformity when used to avoid conflict.
If a woman had written this article, maybe the man would err from: gaslighting, controlling, being psychopathic, care about ends not means, use others as pawns. the woman would simply err from: having feelings.
This is a teasing critique but I hope it brings attention to how female and male characteristics are portrayed in the ladder to ... level 5?
It also helped me reflect, because I do suffer of sloppiness and vacillation, and probably the other ones too.
Wonderful read. I need ro return to this and investigate further. You do your readers great service. 🙂
Good stuff. A barely formalized thought: Vajrayana romance seems susceptible to regression into stage 4-ish roles/identity if the dakini/vira model is taken too literally/solidly... instead of actually falling into the abyss of immediate action that intimacy can be. Hmm, that seems to be my general wariness about Vajrayana in general. Maybe it's sort of like training wheels that need to be taken off at some point if you really want to ride? (That sounds negative, but I don't think it is in a bigger picture of things.)
> Vajrayana romance seems susceptible to regression into stage 4-ish roles/identity if the dakini/vira model is taken too literally/solidly... instead of actually falling into the abyss of immediate action that intimacy can be.
A most astute observation! Yes, I think that is a potential pitfall (and I have seen it happen, now that I think about it).
> Maybe it's sort of like training wheels that need to be taken off at some point if you really want to ride?
Yes, this is exactly how tantra appears from the point of view of dzogchen. From that perspective, it's a somewhat fake preliminary practice, whose point is to get you to the "base" or starting point for dzogchen.
OTOH, you have to get there somehow... and tantra is highly enjoyable and extraordinary in its own terms.
Thanks - any insight of mine on this stuff is definitely due in strong part to years of reading your essays/websites. In this latest series, I've really been struck by how much Stage 5 is a safety net-free, high-wire walk compared to Stage 4 (prompting the comment) and how dangerous it can feel until you realize there is no ground to impact on... and how much simple joy there actually is in no longer demanding a sensible structure for immediate experience, if you can get past the sense of dramatic/tragic loss that is felt/indulged in 4.5 nihilism. Thanks again!
This is very very current for me, as I navigate a conflict with my partner that we may break up over. In discussion with some Evolving Ground buddies I went to *Entering the Heart of the Sun and Moon* for how to actually practice seeing the other's enlightened qualities, and seeing perceived lack as distorted forms of enlightened qualities.
I realised that your "unavailable daka" may not be some actual person who is so great as to be unavailable: it instead may be those exact qualities I perceive my partner as lacking (i.e they are currently unavailable in his display). I decided to look for signs of them.
You'll never guess ... I found them! It was like totally easy 😂😂 All my stuckness and anger and anxiety went. We went out for a meal and felt tender and present, and didn't mention The Relationship at all. We may still break up, who knows, but there's no urgency. I feel so free
Wonderful to hear!
maybe a silly question, but just out of curiosity: i've noticed that you keep saying things like "as far as i can tell kegan meant/discussed/was influenced by xyz," and i just realized that Kegan seems to be still alive and well. Have you reached out to him or had the chance to talk to him at all?
I haven’t… he’s 80… I should do that soon if I’m going to!
would love to hear what you learn if/when you talk to him!
Great one.
This article made me make a lot of sense on a lot of stuff i dealed with in the last year.
I got initiated by a Dakini, so i really see myself going from 4 to 5, being too large to fit into the concept of a relationshop, so... What now?
I know it's a fallacious question, but i'd like to know if there's more that will help me make sense of it, thanks.
I've written a lot about adult stage theory... whether any of it will be helpful for you in particular, I don't know! But this page is a "table of contents" for all the relevant stuff: https://meaningness.com/adult-stages-index
Great read, lots of helpful pointers here from both sides of the proverbial aisle
An idea that keeps crossing my mind as you've been writing in this vein has been that BDSM relationships, with their negotiations born out of the need for safety, are a likely catalyst for people to make the 3 to 4 transition.
Yeah, that's what "Liota" (story #2) is about :)
“I realized only after assembling my list of seven true romance stories that every one of them is about a witch.” I’m sure hoping for at least one example of a barbarian warrior prince story! This is a fantastic and illuminating series that I find myself returning to read again and again.
😢 If I knew of a good one, I would definitely include it—but sadly, I don’t. Most of these stories are from my own life (because they need a personal perspective), and I’m pretty much heterosexual.
I’m glad you are enjoying the series!
My very-unfinished tantric vampire romance novel (https://buddhism-for-vampires.com/the-vetalis-gift) has a major character who is a femme gay man (and not a vampire) and is also a mostly-civilized warrior prince in relationship with another warrior dude. But that part of the story is quite a few chapters ahead of where I have gotten to (and I’m managing less than one chapter per year, so…)
I'm no kegan expert, but I think the switch from 3-4 for a female in relation to a male at 4 is probably pretty common. I don't know what the catalyst would be exactly but I can imagine thst 4 would simply disdain 3 for their way of being and inability to love as an individuated being.
I took this as a call to look up some kind of “philosophy of the barbarian” myself, and ended up currently reading Nietzsche’s commentary of barbarism as an origin to nobility and cultural renewal. This seems like something up your alley as well, as a way to connect to your series on nobility and warriorship (though you are probably more well-read than me on this, and could parse Nietzche’s writings better than me, I confess it’s kind of above my understanding). Cheers!
Thank you! You are quite right. I wrote a bit about that somewhere… I forget where…
The one I was thinking of specifically was your “You Should Be A God-Emperor” essay. An all-time fave of mine! Thanks for writing it, for sure.
I've been following you for years. Meaningness has been really helpful navigating nebulosity at work. First I thought: I am the only one close to level 5. Then I thought: Actually I am the only one at level 3. Then I thought, maybe what happens is that as a woman I'm not effective at communicating with the men above me.
This latest chain or articles has been great at solidifying some things I was thinking about the framework of human development as I learned it from Meaningness. It was sounding to me like (oversimplified, of course, or otherwise maps wouldn't be useful)
Level 3: emotions, woman like
Level 4: rational, man like
Level 5: rational with emotions, it's nuanced, depends on context
The overlay of Kegan's framework with the Vajrayana framework really helped me clear out my thoughts.
I realized when you showed the Vajrayana framework, there seem to be no hierarchy between 3 and 4. The ones who transcend are the ones who can do a bit of both (like the sorcerer).
It makes sense that if the framework is developed by a man (Kegan in this case), that being more man-like is higher level than being more woman-like. From a neuroscience perspective, men do have more local networks than women, and are better at isolating problems and keeping things systematic. Women have more global connections, so they perceive things that seem unrelated come together. This refers to distributions, just like generally men are taller than women.
Here are two resources about men's and women's brains (also autism), one scientific, and one not scientific but that I think about often as a neuroscientist:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5blpY4J7y70
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=29JPnJSmDs0
Some more dissecting of the article in case this wasn't enough:
"Like Circe, the dakini’s magical power trans-forms anyone who attempts to relate to her. Her fluid meta-rational understanding executes the death sentence on rigid rationalist formalism. She cannibalizes the corpse of a lover’s systematic self-identification. She gives renewed birth to him as a cheerful, kind, useful monster.
The vira does not respect sloppiness, emotional incontinence, vacillation, lack of principle, evasiveness, manipulation, or conformity when used to avoid conflict. He will not take a girl-child seriously. If you want to ride with the prince, you must grow up and take your own form as a powerful, distinct individual. Stand your ground in battle, and master the forms of equestrianism and sword-play."
Comparing these two paragraphs, the man simply errs from: rigid rationalist formalism and systematic self-identification. However the woman errs from: sloppiness, emotional incontinence, vacillation, lack of principle, evasiveness, manipulation, or conformity when used to avoid conflict.
If a woman had written this article, maybe the man would err from: gaslighting, controlling, being psychopathic, care about ends not means, use others as pawns. the woman would simply err from: having feelings.
This is a teasing critique but I hope it brings attention to how female and male characteristics are portrayed in the ladder to ... level 5?
It also helped me reflect, because I do suffer of sloppiness and vacillation, and probably the other ones too.