INTEGRAL WORLD: EXPLORING THEORIES OF EVERYTHING
An independent forum for a critical discussion of the integral philosophy of Ken Wilber



powered by TinyLetter
Today is:
Publication dates of essays (month/year) can be found under "Essays".
Giorgio Piacenza Giorgio Piacenza is a sociologist student in the Certificate program leading to a Master's degree in Integral Theory at JFK University.

SEE MORE ESSAYS WRITTEN BY GIORGIO PIACENZA

The Inca "TAWA CHAKANA" and Integral Theory's "Four Quadrants"

Can They Together Improve a Scientific and Metaphysical Understanding Needed for Exopolitical Thinking?

Giorgio Piacenza

What could be the complementary knowledge between the quadrants of Integral Theory and the sides of the Inca or ANDEAN CROSS? Both systems use complementary dualities and these might provide similar patterns. Could there be a similarity between the Quadrants and the four “suyos” after the Chakana?

In Integral Theory four “Dimensions” (The Interior-Exterior and Individual-Collective) combine to generate the four distinct “quadrants” which cannot be reduced to each other. While the “dimensions” depend on each other and seem to function with a more fluid, complementary and relational “logic,” the “quadrants” are independent expressions that arise simultaneously when we experience any object. While quadrants in Integral Theory (and correspondingly, the SUYOS or regions of Inca Culture) seem to relate to an “either-or” logic (of making clear distinctions) and seem to apply more specifically to the prevailing organization in the Classical Physical World, both the pre-quadratic “dimensions” in Integral Theory and the complementary dualities perhaps represented on each external side of the Tawa Chakana (Inca-Andean Cross) may represent a pre-physical type of relation.

Integral Theory may be a “second tier” understanding only available after a modern and post-modern development but there may be a Universal Knowledge after all and universal patterns may have come up in different “pre-second tier” and even pre-modern cultures and been differently understood/interpreted. Here we would be speaking universal patterns reflecting how the Kosmos is structured and reflecting a universal knowledge. It would be too much hubris to assume that pre-modern cultures (according to our standards and developmental psychological studies) were incapable of their own kinds of rational thinking and also of recognition of the universal patterns (such as the pre quadrants and the derived quadrants). There might be more to what pre-modern peoples were capable of developing and understanding than meets the eye.

Now, interestingly, in my view, while Integral Theory's “quadrants” and the Inca “Suyos” (normally recognized as the four regions of the Inca Empire's actual physical territory) correspond more to the physical world as is classically experienced (but not to its hidden non-local connections and its quantum, retrocausal influences); also the pre-quadratic “dimensions” (themselves derived after a living dual relation experienced between that which is and what is not or implying that which is not) and the sides of the Chakana correspond to a more fluid, interconnected world which, I think is the Subtle Realm. In this world/realm distinctions stand less on their own and are mutually dependent. They depend on their opposites to exist or to be recognized. They obey what I summarize as a general “both-and” logic more compatible with tribal wisdom traditions and with making less clear-cut distinctions between differences.

While these tribal traditions can be said to have been “less rational” (meaning less dependent on the use of classical either-or logic and thus also less capable of manipulating the classical physical world using technology derived from this logic) they can also be said to have been “more rational” because classical either-or thinking is a subset of the more comprehensive “both-and” thinking. In “both-and” logic we can consider complementary opposites as mutually necessary, interrelated, implied but they must also be recognized as distinct for them to relate. Thus, in essence it is a more inclusive and superior logic. It may even be the logic used by advanced extraterrestrial races which can be clear and specific and also relate the Physical world(s) with their origin within a Subtle Realm in a psychic way.

Pre-modern Andean peoples may have not been able to develop physical technology as much (although they also had some significant and ingenious advances in this respect) but by combining Subtle World/Realm energies/powers with Physical live, they may have occasionally been able to manipulate physical objects temporarily reprogramming ordinary space-time characteristics. By not privileging or valuing classical either-or distinctions over a complementary RELATIONAL way of thinking they may have not clearly distinguished between the Physical (more exterior-dominated) and the Subtle-Psychic worlds as our modern and post-modern societies do in our current stage of planetary evolution and cultural integration. However, while in some sense they were less advanced, in another they were more advanced and this may be why (for those keeping their original mindset and traditions alive) contact with other worlds are something NORMAL, ordinary, OBVIOUS.

When trying to find our future directions for a serious practice of Exopolitics we could learn much from this higher form of logic and knowledge intuited by the Andeans and the Quechua (a.k.a. “Incas”). We must learn that this way of thinking under a “both-and” logic is accompanied by a RELATIONAL culture in which (ideally) all sentient beings (including the spirits of material objects like lakes, rivers and mountains) are potentially recognized and fairly given something in return and gratitude. This is why Andean customs involve gifts to the Earth and to these entities. While in the West, under a predominant “either-or” culture geographic and geological nature is largely “insentient” or “dead,” in the Andes they can be understood as “alive” because their Subtle/Psychic Realm conscious energies are accepted and thus more easily perceived. This is why “PACHA MAMA” is perceived as alive and is not simply a series of non-regulating and automatically regulating insentient systems. “Her” mind, her feelings, her sentience is experienced through people (and “curanderos” and “Pacos” “Andean priests” in particular) experiencing her directly through the connections their own Subtle Realm energy bodies can make with her.

While Integral Theorists tend to think of themselves as more advanced, “Second Tier” and inclusive than the original pre-modern Andeans they may be missing a lot and really be more in an “integrative” stage than in a truly “integral” one. They may be dismissing evidence for actual intelligent extraterrestrial and psychic interactions, not because of it not revealing important aspects about Life and reality that need to be included and integrated and not because of lack of evidence accumulated over decades of adequate research, but because of a pre-integral “hubris.” I really hope that this changes and the best knowledge from all eras and all parts of the world can be reconciled and integrated under a truly grand and complete vision. In fact, most of Integral Theory's model (in part related to a universal wisdom that surfaces in various forms during different cultural periods) is already able to work with the so-called “paranormal” and should become more available to shed some light on the meaning of quantum physics and non-locality. In fact some of the next major steps in Integral Theory development should have to do with HOW REALMS relate in order to understand our human situation in a vast Kosmos which seems to be subdivided into three main “regions” so to speak.

The Quechua people and other Andeans speak of THREE PACHAS or worlds of time and space (they seem to stress “time” more than space). This could also coincide with Integral Theory's THREE REALMS (of which we are said to possess three experiential bodies which should be acknowledged in order to heal and evolve). Two Andean Pachas (a higher one in the past and a lower one in the future) are related to our “present” conscious experience of conscious choices and this reminds me of the Advanced and Retarded Waves of quantum relativistic physics mentioned by John A. Wheeler, Richard Feynmann, John Cramer and Swanson. It is also not too far from the Holographic model being developed by Physicist astronaut Edgar Mitchell. Time as experiential potentialities combine in the experiential present.

The Incas held there was a pacha of abstract givens and this reminds me of the Causal Realm of Vedanta which in one way or another has been acknowledged within Integral Theory. That “Pacha” is called “HANAN” (a variant is “JAWA”) and is supposed to be a loftier realm of more abstract existence already existing in the (metaphysical) past. The other Pacha is “UKU” (sometimes also related with the concept of “URIN” which means lower in geographical position). This “UKU” is in the future and (in a metaphorical but also actual way) is physically underground. It is the future as how germinating seeds are to emerge into the surface of our “present” experience. The present is “KAY” Pacha and this is where we are….and our role is also that of connecting what to us is Hanan and Uku.

Life and Consciousness exists in all pacha levels but where it is focused is its “present” level. Life and consciousness goes “all the up” and “all the way down” but it hides as if inexistent and in a potential state in contrast to the conscious level we are experiencing. If we become conscious in two levels that intersect more than usual, our present experiential pacha may be like a more expansive “TINKUY” (encounter) and become a more harmonious complementary “Yanantin” that acquires combined characteristics. With the aid of ritual, the Andean priest (or anyone seriously doing the ritual) may connect his or her consciousness to this and facilitate an inter-realm/inter pacha Yanantin. By ritual and consciousness participation it is possible to enhance it; understanding the math and hyper physics of it is another matter. Considering all this mythic; only perhaps in the sense of being useful to sustain the cohesion of a pre-modern society but not to be taken as significant in our emerging integral age is a biased limitation.

The thinking sense of Complementarity has both been applied to Integral Theory and to Inca-Andean cosmology and should generate four 'poles', or fundamental relational corners. This is the origin of the “HOLONS” before they are expressed as “QUADRANTS” and express as “DIMENSIONS” (using Integral theory's terms). This is true for a complementarity that generates 'wholes' and 'parts' (simultaneously complete and incomplete “holons” relating with each other) and for other types of complementarities arising from additional mirror-like relations because in all of these cases exists a shared state of complementary duality.

In “Integral Quadrants in History” I was trying to find other both-and, dialectic-based examples in which working with the quadrant-forming complementary duality had generated alternative quadratic models recognized before the advent of Ken Wilber's Integral Theory. I found that these models had at least some of the elements of integral-level representations even if created by a pre-modern culture like the Quechua. Furthermore, even if modern pattern recognition using structuralism may have truly unveiled some more inclusive ways of experiencing the world in latter modern cultures than in earlier ones, I also think that there were genuine collectively validated experiential/empirical disclosures of aspects of reality not recognized by structuralist research. While part of the more advanced esoteric knowledge of the Incas may have been suppressed or gone underground, much of their original spirit also creatively survived as some of the ideas that came with Christianity were found syncretically compatible with what the Andeans already possessed. Their “both-and” relational sense of things was capable of INTEGRATING perhaps more than modern and postmodern integrative thinkers are willing to admit or are able to integrate due to their still strong reliance on “either-or” clear distinctions.

The Andeans are willing to learn from all cultures with which they RELATE and may have an adaptive flexibility which in itself is an Integral Quality. What characterizes Andean cultures is the felt concept and living practice of RECIPROCITY (also called Ayni) in which relations are kept in good standing by fairly exchanging goods, services and rituals indistinctively both with physical living persons and with subtle spiritual entities and forces because both are considered as equally real. They may not have had the precision of Westerners in many ways related to space and time-based subdividing of their reality experiences nor (perhaps with the exception of the more advanced high Andean priests or “Alto Misayoc”) the universality of ethical embrace regarding all persons under a world-centric consciousness (which – for instance - led to the Declaration of Human Rights) but they were able to experience the convergence of at least two realms in a conscious ways of practical living and for this reason, on many occasions, their cultures developed a healthy symbiosis with nature and a kind of communal (not communist) life (in the Ayllu) which was quite harmonious.

Were the Incas Non-Dual? I think that some recognized a higher level of integration than that of complementary duality and its “both-and” relational wisdom associated. In fact, I think that many if not all cultures reached some understanding of the three logics that can derive from duality: Neither-nor” (primarily but not exclusively associated to the prevalence of Interiors over exteriors and how the Causal Realm operates); “both-and” (primarily but not exclusively associated with the equality of Interiors and Exteriors and how the Subtle Realm operates); “either-or” (primarily but not exclusively associated with the prevalence of exteriors over interiors in the experience of the Physical Realm or how it operates).

While it is difficult to find a clear concept of 'unity' or of the primacy of 'unity' over relational duality in the more organismic, reciprocity-based Andean-Quechua-Inca thinking, I do consider that the idea of 'unity' still existed and exists more in an intuitively felt/perceived way than in an explicitly emphasized state. One of the meanings of “Wiracocha” (an abbreviated name for “Illa Ticsi Wiracocha Pachayachachic”) or the more generalized supreme deity without , source and creator of everything may refer to a non dual 'unity' that is seldom explicitly referred to. It is said that knowledge of the transcendental “Wiracocha” was reserved to the Willaq Uma (transmitter of sacred knowledge and high priest), to the Amautas (teachers, erudites) and to the nobility. I don't know for certain but, perhaps, the word “wira” (meaning grease or foam) combined with the word “cocha” (water, lake) suggests the concept of a supreme entity capable of transcending the opposites and of uniting them (two substances that don't normally mix) in a non-dual state.

In “Integral Quadrants in History” (described as an “evolving article”), I used the word “Masintin” (the same-level, either competitive or harmonious, relation between equals) to represent a Quechua concept equivalent to Integral Theory's fundamental “Individual” distinction or pole. This is because I used the idea of 'equality' or of 'no difference' in lieu of 'Individuality' or 'that with no divisions'. I also used the word “Yanantin” (the creative, relation between complementary opposites) to represent a Quechua concept equivalent to Integral Theory's “Collective” or “Plural” distinction or pole (a perspective that recognized two or more elements). This might be adequate if we consider these concepts as included in the concept of “Tinkuy.”

I would also like to comment that, in relation to Integral Theory and its fundamental “holons,” it may be adequate to connect the concept of “Yanantin” to “wholes” and the concept of “Masintin” to “parts” since the relation between complementary poles can be said to form a more inclusive union, greater than the 'sum of the parts' and the concept of entities relating as 'equals' means that they (at least practically) exist at the same level in a holarchy.

In a previous article (published in Integral World) “Integral Quadrants in History” I made a mistake when ordering the next two fundamental quadrant-generating distinctions or poles: I used “Yana” to represent “Interior” or that without the need of an “other” (an “Exterior” distinction or pole) and I used “Yanan” to represent an equivalent of Integral Theory's “Exterior distinction or pole.” Now I'm correcting that oversight by re-establishing the adequate order of these two words: I should have used “Yanan” (meaning “pure,” “essence” and “kernel”) as an equivalent to “Interior” and “Yana” (meaning “dark” “enamored” or “dependent”) as an equivalent of “Exterior.”

I still find that the “Tawa Chakana” is an important symbolic representation of Andean-Inca cosmology and is in accord with an integral understanding of reality. “Tawa” means “four” and it is used because outwardly it is a four-sided “chakana.” Interestingly, an important meaning of the word “Chakana” is that of a “bridge” which can serve to cross beyond, to connect or to separate and one of the implications is that the levels of the “Kawsay Pacha” (the three-tiered, living “Cosmos” or universal world of the life-force) can be connected. The “Tawa Chakana” also represents the way the whole “Cosmos” is ordered in four sides with three levels each.

The four-sided (or four-direction) “Chakana” really has five sides or directions. The fifth direction is the open center (the “Chaupi”) of this (otherwise popularly known as) “Andean Cross” represents a fifth side or direction and also a non-dual opening to a life-actualizing element, from which the life-generating, universal force (“Camaquen,” “Camakin” or “Camaken”) issues forth into creation. This can also be known as “KAUSAY” or KAWSAY” meaning “living force” or “living energy” which flows (as the “Chi” should flow according to Taoism) and it is inherently good (unless blocked) and gives life to all beings. Moreover, it is also specified “good life force” or “Sami” is said to come out of this center but (by resisting its natural flow) humans can turn it into “Hucha” or “dense life force.” Hidden in this center of Life flow or “Chaupi” hides the “adversary” (“Awca” or “Auca”) which will create opposition as an “enemy” to test beings against the natural good ness of the life force and rendering tribute to the duality (if life is good, this implies an opposite). The “awca” is necessary to test but doesn't have to be obeyed. It can be understood, integrated and maintained in potential form. If we live our lives in good relation with the living source (Kawsay) and maintain good reciprocity-relations with others we can live under “ALLIN KAWSAY” (the Good Life) in harmony and wisdom.

The fifth side or direction at the center of the Chakana may relate to connections with inner levels of reality also reminding us of the Indian concept of “Akash” (or “Akasha”) which -in my view- is a prana-transmitting (life force-transmitting), space-forming, metaphysical principle that acts as an “element” (not in the sense of chemical elements). This also reminds me of the center of the geometry of the torus which (remembering Arthur Young and Naseem Haramein) can be considered as connected to all its parts or volume and to be infinitely small. In fact, the greatest Andean initiates are able to actually move into the three Pachas through the center or Chaupi. They are said to “thread” the three worlds even personally communicating with the highest, more abstract entities in the Hanan Pacha (which after Christianity has been related with “Heaven”).

The UKU Pacha can be considered as a potential world in the sense of an undefined, chaotic potential to become. The HANAN Pacha can be considered as a world of pre-given potentials from our lower, more contingent perspective. Both are actual and real in their own level but potential for us (in the present world of KAY PACHA) until we combine them as an expression of our experience. Thus, we have a power to relate these two worlds and a responsibility.

The Inka Empire was geopolitically organized into four main “suyos” (partialities or regions) because the “Chakana” had four external sides. The Temple of “Coricancha” (golden enclosed space) in Cuzco (“bellybutton”) represented the center or “Chaupi” from which lines of living force (“Ceques” or “Cekes”) also allegedly issued out into the four regions or “suyos” of the empire.

A Conceptual Attempt to relate the “Chakana” with the “Quadrant-Generating Poles” of Integral Theory

The “Tawa Chakana” may correspond and complement the “Quadrants” of Integral Theory in its own specific and wisdom-enhancing ways. This model not only represents the Quechua “cosmic order” based upon the three-realm concept of “Hanan Pacha” (the higher, abstract, orderly aspect of life and the super conscious), “Kay Pacha” (the present 'world' of shared, conscious, daily experience), and “Uku Pacha” (the lower, instinctive, open-ended, chaotic aspect of life and the subconscious). It also relates with the human need to choose between a higher option and a lower one, or between a “Hanan” source of higher, abstract intuitions and an “Uku” source of instincts through (as integral thinker Oleg Linetsky might say) feelings that actualize our “Kay Pacha” or world of present experience. Both these feelings and their associated manifestation or actualization of a 'present', 'actual' world of experience are represented in the central empty circle or void of the “Tawa Chakana.” In fact, the concept of Pacha, which could be interpreted as “time” “space” “world” and “nature” may also be understood as a shared way in which life can be experienced. For lack of a better broad definition we could also call it an “experiential space,” or, better, a “shared experiential world.” This “shared experiential world” would come about when a “Yanantin” or living relation between complementary poles (defined by the “Hanan Pacha” aspect and by the “Uku Pacha” aspect) creates shared characteristics and an original or creatively new relational “space.”

The “Tawa Chakana” represents the three realms and the four outer directions plus a fifth all inclusive direction, the central opening from which the 'present world' (in my view, any 'present' world) is actualized or comes through. This central opening or “Ticsi Muyo” (the foundational opening or circle) could be thought of both as the center of origin and as completing the totality. Besides serving to illustrate the three realms or levels of reality, the three-step sides in the four outwardly-sided “Tawa Chakana” are often used to describe other guiding Quechua ideas. For instance, we have the three main ways of knowing: “Yankay” (or practical know how and work), “Munay” (or knowledge through feelings, love, and sentiment) and “Yachay” (or intellectual knowing). Then we have the three levels of deity: The supreme level of Wiracocha, the second tier level of major deities like “Inti” (the visible Sun) and “Killa” (the Moon) and the third tier level of “Apus” (normally protective mountain spirit lords), “Awkis” (minor but also powerful local Apus) and “Wakas” (local sacred places and things). We also have the three ethical precepts “Ama Suwa” (be honest), “Ama Llella” (be truthful), “Ama Kella” (be productive).

I'm choosing four key Quechua words permanently used in relation to the idea of “Yanantin” and “Tinkuy.” “Yanantin” might be defined as a 'vertical', wholes-generating relation between two mirror-like, complementary opposites and the “Tinkuy” both as a more inclusive, 'tense' relational exchange between two mirror-like, complementary opposites or two same-level, horizontally equal entities. In other words, “Tinkuy” is a broader idea that includes “Yanantin” and more. Within “Tinkuy,” we have “Yanantin” and “Masintin.” Furthermore, “Masintin” (the horizontal relation between same-level, equal entities) can be conflicting and competitive or cooperative and brotherly. In other words, more complete relational exchanges in the concept of “Tinkuy” include the vertical wholes-generating “Yanantin” and a horizontal, parts-related, “Masintin.”

While the Quechua words I'm choosing do not literally mean “Individual,” “Collective,” “Interior” and “Exterior,” they IMPLY those fundamental distinctions or poles of existence which generate the quadrants. The words I'm choosing are “Hanan” (to replace “Individual”), “Uku” (to replace “Collective” or “Plural”), “Yanan” (to replace “Interior”) and “Yana” (to replace “Exterior”).

The Quechua people divided what we might call the “complete living Pacha” (with its three realms and-or specific types of expressions of being) or, perhaps, “the Cosmos,” “Creation,” “the Universe” (or using modern cosmology, “Multiverse”) into the directions of “above,” “below,” “left,” and “right.” I'm replacing “above,” “below,” “left,” and “right” with specific Quechua concepts connected to their understanding of a principle of what could be called a 'living duality', the polar complementarity and reciprocity that relates the resulting “Tawa Chakana” with the quadrants of Integral Theory.

UP-DOWN DISTINCTION

The Upper pole “HANAN” means “Upper” and “Superior” (not 'one' or 'individual') but one of its related meanings refers to an “abstract world” which (through the idea of 'abstracting') can be understood as reducing complexity towards, simplicity and oneness. Without the accompanying word “Pacha” as in “Hanan Pacha” (the upper celestial world of superior entities, time and space, and super conscious world of abstract ideas), “Hanan” would probably correspond to Integral Theory's “individual” pole.

The Lower pole “UKU” means “Under,” “Hole,” “Hidden,” “Inside” (not “two” or “collective”) but one of its related meanings refers to a vital, chaotic, and instinctive world of subconscious forces which can be understood as complexifying or tending toward complexity, plurality and duality. Without the accompanying word “Pacha” as in “Uku Pacha” (the lower, hidden, underground world, time and space, world that can be nourished by dense energy or “Hucha” and world of vital instincts), “Uku” would probably correspond to Integral Theory's “plural” or “collective” pole.

The four sided inner areas of the Chakana (which we can call “SUYOS”) may correspond to the simultaneous but mutually exclusive Quadratic perspectives which depend on the outer sides to be defined. Also, the outer sides of the chakana may correspond to the “dimensions” of (Interior, Exterior, Individual and Collective) which relate under mutual complementarity and a “both-and” relational logic. The inner areas may correspond to the “physical conscious experiential presents” and the outer areas on each side to the “subtle conscious experiential presents.” Both “quadrants” and “Suyos” as particular perspectives of manifestation and consciousness would exist in all three realms/pachas but be more explicit in the Physical Realm. They would also be less manifest and limiting in the Subtle Realm and almost non-existent in the Causal Realm. However, the influence of the complementary, relational “dimensions” would be greater in the Subtle Realm and the influence of the more basic dichotomy “self-not self” or “is – is not” would be greater in the Causal Realm.

The three steps in each side and also bordering each inner “Suyo” would represent the three realms or three pachas. Each realm/pacha would have four quadrants and let's not forget that “Chakana” basically refers to a log used to cross a chasm like a river. It is a symbol of connection between the worlds. It's center also is like a Torus center (can potentially be infinitely small and simultaneously connected with the rest of the figure).

I wonder whether either-or, exterior-logical, causal relations; the both-and, interior, organically- based, complementary, dialectical-logical interpenetration relations, and the spiritual-logical, mutual immanence, interiors-prevailing within everything relations (at the boundary between the causal initial duality phenomenal world and Non Duality) each represent a way to connect our experiences with the Physical, Subtle and Causal realms which may already be part of our complete constitution. How these logics relate with each other may be a clue to know how realms relate with each other and to how the three levels of the Tawa Chakana relate with its four sides or directions. Moreover, as I have been conversing with Lexi Neale (read his work on AQAL Cube Octodynamics) the “insides” of quadrants may be linked with the outsides of the same quadrants in a higher realm…all the way until the insides of the quadrants in the Causal Realm finally link with Pure Non-Duality connecting with all of the manifest realms and all the outsides of of its quadrants. A Conceptual Attempt to Relate Yanantin's Four Canchas with Integral Theory's Four Quadrants Hanan-Hanan Hanan-Urin Rising Sun Gold Rain Hail Inkarri Collarri Positive Positive A B B' A' Urin-Hanan Urin-Urin River Lake Negative Negative

If complementary dualities generate four irreducible spaces through which contingent things express and the Quechua idea of “Yanantin” offered logical dynamics similar to those that lead from “holons” to “quadrants” there might be important similarities and-or complementarities between the Quechua and integral theoretical models.

The Quechua idea to divide the Empire into four regions with Cuzco at its spiritual and administrative center derives from how they understood the “Yanantin” relation between the ideas of Hanan (“Higher”), “Urin” (“Unknown,” “Lower” or “Under”), Allauca (“Right side”) and Ichoq (“Left side”). This generates four “canchas” (or enclosed spaces) which can also be called “quadrants” and in some ways may correspond to or complement the quadrants of Integral Theory. These four “canchas” can also be called “Suyos” or “regions” in a geographical context. The point is that, due to a mirror symmetry principle they could connect diagonally. Thus, perhaps also quadrants should be understood under this symmetry and we should connect them diagonally.

Thinking of reality as divided into four irreducible but complementary aspects and as external to us and, looking out from the center of the two crossing lines, we can say that the four “canchas” are aspects of reality. In Integral Theory this can be known as a “quadratic perspective.” Inversely, if we were to view reality from our subjective perspective (also divided into four irreducible aspects) and towards an external, objective reality, technically speaking, we would be speaking about a “quadrivia” perspective. The following Quechua model based on “Yanantin” and on what the four directions represent depicts reality as “quadrants” should be depicted. Thus, I'm going to depict the right and left sides as if we were seeing an object in front of us or ourselves in a mirror.

What meanings may the Quechua “quadrants” have? I think that most of the meanings exactly assigned to “Hanan” “Urin” Allauca” and “Ichoq” have been lost. Nevertheless, perhaps “Urin” didn't always have negative connotations. According to XVI Century chronicler Inca Garcilaso de la Vega, the first five Incas to govern Cuzco could have been of the “Urin” dynasty. The next eight are said to have been of the “Hanan” dynasty. Much information has been lost and although the Quechua didn't have a clear-cut “good-bad” duality, I suspect that the generally negative interpretation of “Urin” may have come about during the second dynasty. Garcilaso de la Vega retransmitted the “Legend of Manco Capaq and Mama Ocllo” narrating that the first Inca and his wife (the Colla) came out of Lake Titicaca to civilize people. Perhaps in this legend a lake doesn't have a negative connotation. Then , the “Legend of the Ayar Brothers” (collected by Juan Díez de Betanzos)mentions that four brother and their wives came into the exterior world out of a cave called “Capac Toco,” located in a mountain called “Taputoco” in today's Cuzco province of “Paruro.” Legend says that Wiracocha had told them to teach and to civilize other people. Out of four brothers and their wives, only Ayar Manco (plus his main wife and the wives of the other three brothers) survived, plunged a staff into the Huanacaure Hill (in today's Cuzco) and went on to civilize and to found the “Tawantinsuyo” (what we popularly call the “Inca Empire”). These legends might refer to a time when coming from a hidden place below the Earth's surface didn't have negative connotations. There are mystics that hold that the Inca Empire founders had been educated by more advanced beings in a temple located inside a cavity under Lake Titicaca. Then they might have emerged onto the surface out of a cave as there may be interconnected underground tunnels and passages.

It is possible that the Quechua-Andean-Inca awareness included an esoteric feature that related this knowledge not just with a universal aspect of a “Perennial Philosophy” but with the general features of a basic extraterrestrial knowledge. This may be the reason why there still are reports about “Paco Pacuris” or ancient teachers living in enhanced underground caverns and mostly only in touch with Alto Misayoc (high level initiates). Maybe this is why for the most part until recently reports of Gray extraterrestrial abductions have almost been unknown. Perhaps higher, benevolent civilizations tried to gradually transmit some information to some ancient Peruvians. Evidence of current contacts referring to this ancient extraterrestrial educational attempt exist through contactees and, if they are able to produce programmed sightings previous telepathic appointment, this might be something worth considering with certain flexibility, a reasonable criteria and a good predisposition.

I wonder whether either-or, exterior-logical, causal relations, the both-and, interior, organically based, dialectical-logical interpenetration relations, and the spiritual-logical, mutual immanence relations (at the boundary between the causal phenomenal world and Non Duality) each represent a way to connect our experiences with the Gross, Subtle and Causal realms which may already be part of our complete constitution. How these logics relate with each other may be a clue to know how realms relate with each other and to how the three levels of the Tawa Chakana relate with its four sides or directions.

A Conceptual Attempt to Relate Yanantin's Four Canchas/Suyos with Integral Theory's Four Quadrants

If complementary dualities generate four irreducible spaces through which contingent things express and the Quechua idea of “Yanantin” offered logical dynamics similar to those that lead from “holons” to “quadrants” there might be important similarities and-or complementarities between the Quechua and integral theoretical models.

The Quechua idea to divide the Empire into four regions with Cuzco at its spiritual and administrative center derives from how they understood the “Yanantin” relation between the ideas of Hanan (“Higher”), “Urin” (“Unknown,” “Lower” or “Under”), Allauca (“Right side”) and Ichoq (“Left side”). This generates four “canchas” (or enclosed spaces) which can also be called “quadrants” and in some ways may correspond to or complement the quadrants of Integral Theory

Thinking of reality as divided into four irreducible but complementary aspects and as external to us and, looking out from the center of the two crossing lines, we can say that the four “canchas” are aspects of reality. In Integral Theory this can be known as a “quadratic perspective.” Inversely, if we were to view reality from our subjective perspective (also divided into four irreducible aspects) and towards an external, objective reality, technically speaking, we would be speaking about a “quadrivia” perspective. The following Quechua model based on “Yanantin” and on what the four directions represent depicts reality as “quadrants” should be depicted. Thus, I'm going to depict the right and left sides as if we were seeing an object in front of us or ourselves in a mirror.

I don't know how might the meanings, either genuinely recognized or artificially assigned by the Quechua to the “four canchas” relate with Integral Theory's “quadrants” of Subjectivity, Intersubjectivity, Objectivity and Inter Objectivity. The information I have is minimal. Information was lost, hidden or forgotten during the colonial period. Nonetheless, this could be an interesting area for further research. One thing to notice is that (besides the left-right and upper-lower symmetries) the mirror-like complementary relation between the “canchas” is also diagonal. In the following figure A and A' and B and B' are complementary reflections of each other. Their relations are diagonally depicted. To my knowledge, diagonal quadratic relations (as with Yanantin's A-A' and B-B') have not been widely explored by integral theorists.

If this “diagonalism” were geometrically applied to the Quadrants of Integral Theory, the upper-left, (individual) Subjectivity Quadrant would complement the lower-right, (plural) Inter Objectivity (or Systems) Quadrant, and the lower left, (plural) Inter Subjectivity Quadrant would complement the upper-right, (individual) Objectivity Quadrant. This (using the concept of mirror-like images) may be another way to relate “either-or” established quadrants that has not been explored.

Quadrants are said to be “irreducible to each other,” to “arise simultaneously” and to “tetra-mesh.” To me these descriptions imply correlation and interpenetration. The problem with either is that they are difficult to use in a causal manner. Simultaneous arising or parallelism (as in the parallelist solution to the Mind-Body problem) helps to recognize that the quadrants are all equally important. Interpenetration as in a “tetra mesh” implies a degree of distinction among the elements that interpenetrate, as with the threads of a web or a cloth. How could we use these in a scientific, causally explanatory manner? They (as Integral Theory itself) serve to produce important guidelines (a way of seeing the world and relating with it), but to make the theory more applicable to causal relations between aspects of reality we would probably have to find a way to elucidate the interaction between dissimilar quadrants.

I think that interaction requires differences but understanding interactive differences that arise from a common complementarity is not obvious. If a logic of complementarity revealing the “quadrants” and –apparently- the “canchas” itself reflects a deeper, organizing order which can be perceived by the mind, how can we use “quadrants” and “canchas“ to understand phenomena causally? Could we perhaps assign different degrees of intensity to different quadrants that represent a phenomenon according to how we enact, disclose and perceive it? Then, we might be able to treat the resulting relations in a causal manner. What are the “underground” connections between them, so to speak? Can we use them to move beyond the observation of “simultaneous correlations” and felt and-or deduced “interpenetrations” between them and to generate-perceive causal connections, strengthening the predictive applicability of the theory?

I wonder whether either-or exterior logical causal relations, both-and interior, organically based, dialectical-logical interpenetration connections, and spiritual-logical, mutual immanence relations each represent a way to connect our experiences with the Gross, Subtle and Causal realms which may already be part of our complete constitution. How these logics relate with each other may be a clue to know how realms relate with each other and to how the three levels of the Tawa Chakana relate with the its four sides or directions.

What further meanings may the Quechua “quadrants” have? I think that most of the meanings exactly assigned to the combinations of quadrant-generating elements “Hanan,” “Urin,” Allauca” and “Ichoq” have been lost.

Perhaps “Urin” also has more positive connotations than expected. According to XVI Century chronicler Inca Garcilaso de la Vega, the first five Incas to govern Cuzco could have been of the “Urin Dynasty.” The next eight are said to have been of the “Hanan” dynasty. Much information has been lost and although the Quechua didn't have a clear-cut “good-bad” duality, I suspect that the generally negative interpretation of “Urin” may have come about during the second dynasty. Garcilaso de la Vega retransmitted the “Legend of Manco Capac and Mama Ocllo” narrating that the first Inca and his wife (the Colla) came out of Lake Titicaca to civilize people. Perhaps in this legend a lake doesn't have a negative connotation? Then , the “Legend of the Ayar Brothers” (collected by Juan Díez de Betanzos)mentions that four brother and their wives came into the exterior world out of a cave called “Capac Toco,” located in a mountain called “Taputoco” in today's Cuzco province of “Paruro.” Legend says that Wiracocha had told them to teach and to civilize other people. Out of four brothers and their wives, only Ayar Manco (plus his main wife Mama Ocllo and the three surviving wives of the other three brothers) survived, plunged a staff into the Huanacaure Hill (in today's Cuzco) and went on to civilize and to found the “Tawantinsuyo” (what we popularly call the “Inca Empire”). These legends might refer to a time when coming from a hidden place below the Earth's surface didn't have negative connotations. Today there are mystics that hold that the Inca Empire founders had been educated by more advanced beings in a temple located inside a cavity under Lake Titicaca. Then they might have emerged onto the surface out of a cave in a temple located inside a cavity under Lake Titicaca. Then they might have emerged onto the surface out of a cave as there may be interconnected underground tunnels and passages.

Conclusion

The point is that neither Integral Theory nor Andean Wisdom totally recognize all the aspects of what reality entails. Both are reflections of the ways duality can be understood and both refer to three main types of worlds or realms. If they remain mutually exclusive of each other; if Integral Theorists do not recuperate the information about the reality of the Subtle Realm interacting with us primarily located experientially in the Physical, we'll not have a more “integral” Integral Theory. While much of the Inca lore can be judged as pre-rational and less integral metaphors they may also be hiding knowledge in a way oral cultures were capable of preserving. Moreover, the fact that elements of “Integral” (like the three ways of understanding duality differently emphasized by different cultures at different developmental stages: The “Neither-nor” (in broad term a la Nagarjuna, in Buddhism and forms of Indian Vedanta, Parmenides and the Plotinian system and, possibly, the loftiest ways in which the deity WIRACOCHA was understood); the “both-and” (in broad terms, the Hegelian dialectic, the complementarity of wholes and parts, the fluid dialectics of Heraclitus, the relational not-too-defined understandings of reciprocity about life in the Andes); or the “either-or” of no-nonsense, well-defined, physicalist cultures (perhaps well represented by the naturalist attitude of Aristotle)…these were all simultaneously present in one way or another in all cultures at all stages. It has been a matter of emphasis. If we are to develop an Integral understanding of Life open to in all its aspects we'd better recognize what the discoveries of all cultures using any of these three main ways of thinking. Let's include the reality of other worlds as well in this as previous cultures may have more easily experience them if not overly focused in exclusivist, clear-cut, “either-or” thinking. Many integralists validly using a more classical rational thinking may be opening up to some both-and thinking and even more to neither-nor a-perspectivalism (perhaps like with “neither-nor” thinking ultimately denying the independent substance of exterior objects) in order to connect with a safer non-committed academic understanding and use of “non-duality.” Exopolitically-speaking and in relation to the importance of recognizing(proving) survival of bodily death, our psychic nature, non-local consciousness and the world-changing presence of extraterrestrials using a technology that combines the Subtle Realm laws (and logic) with the Physical Realm laws (and logic), Integral Theory can offer important patterns but as it formally stands now it is very incomplete.

In Ufology and Exopolitics there's abundant evidence that people experiencing contacts of different kinds often experience a “reality blur” in which the concept of a well-defined physical reality becomes fused with a more fluid and mental/psychic reality. Time distorts, walls are passed through. Objects become more fluid, telepathy increases, dreams mix with objective detections: The “world” becomes an in-between world between the laws and logics of the Subtle and the Physical. Moreover, if ETs are able to transcend physical time and space restrictions they seem to do it by making use of a more comprehensive reality: The Subtle that (perhaps in accordance with some cosmologists and physicists like Vlatko Vedral) may be a realm of information that defines our physical world. Thus, a form of “transdimensional” technology and science combining realms seems to be in place and to make informed decisions in Exopolitics (what is more politically convenient?) it would behoove us to be more informed about how this process works. This “transdimensionality” (using a higher realm to control a lower realm) might be more understood if we were to familiarize ourselves with the laws that could operate under a more fluid “both-and” logic and how these could include the laws of physics that we know or are aware of. The degree with which different extraterrestrial civilizations (while remaining primarily focused in a physical conscious experience with physical bodies of different “densities”) are able to use or access Subtle Realm elements to affect (theirs and other's physical environments) would be part of what we need to understand to figure out with whom we are relating with. Moreover, we would also need to understand how to protect ourselves from this technology, how to use it and how it can affect our life in the physical world. Knowing about it would probably give us a more advanced understanding of the exopolitical laws that pertain to civilizations capable of using it. What are their responsibilities and limitations? Will different ET civilizations be forced to use it under shared intervention rules in spite of their different origins and motivations?

Three realms, three pachas, three logics (derived from how a relation between two opposites can be experienced in our consciousness), all are equally important. Finding how all three are mutually immanent, relational and interactive with each other would be a major integral step forward in our understanding of nature extended to all realms and to Body, Mind and Spirit in all its expressions. The four sided Chakana (Andean Cross) representing a bridge to the three worlds appears to have elements also recognized in different ways within the quadrants of Integral Theory. Its “sides” appear to be like the pre-quadratic “dimensions” (Interior, exterior, individual, collective) exist in a mutual complementary necessity as co-equals (in a “both-and” relation) that can be combined to define specific irreducible “either-or “experienced quadrants. The first corresponds more to the pre-physical Subtle Realm and the latter more to the Physical Realm. In the former (the Subtle) their Interiors and Exteriors relate under an equal cause-effect relationship. In the latter (the Physical) their Interiors and Exteriors relate under an uneven relationship in which (for an experiencing consciousness), causally-speaking, Exteriors predominate. I will just add that in the Causal Realm (perhaps corresponding to the Hanan Pacha of the Incas) causally-speaking (for an experiencing consciousness), Interiors predominate. Duality is maintained because a distinction with Exteriors exists but, nonetheless, Interiors predominate and the “neither-nor” logic proves that objects are inherently empty of objectivity, so to speak.

All three realms, their three logics, and three causal operational laws are present in each other even if for an experiencing consciousness primarily located in any of these, mutual immanence predominates in the Causal, equal relational complementarity predominates in the Subtle and differential interactions predominate in the Physical. When physically located the Subtle relational both-and complementarity relations and laws remain unconscious. They remain in an experientially potential state. Thus, our unconscious is more connected with the Subtle. Furthermore, the deepest unconscious (Turiya in Indian traditions) is connected with the Causal. However, all states are simultaneous; all laws are simultaneous; all logics are simultaneous. While realms interact (out of distinct differences), they can also equally relate and produce each other from their Interiors (be mutually immanent).

However, from a relative point of view, the Subtle is more inclusive than the Physical because it is necessary for the existence of the Physical and because its logic also implies (thus includes) the latter's logic. It's logic subsumes the latter's. Ignoring the importance of the Subtle by adapting it to current or recent modern-postmodern sensibilities is not the way to proceed in an Integral way while pretending to represent the most integral model or “Meta Theory” which the world needs. It is sorely incomplete and diminishes many of the real findings of past stages of cultural development; in particular important findings about our own vital participation in the Subtle Realm become relegated to the repressed shadow areas of our psyche. This is why so many issues related to this realm are limited to being stigmatized as monstrous or negative and feared so much while still holding a simplified and distorted fascination on us as the commercial success of horror movies attest. However, not consciously integrating/embracing the positive and healing our own Subtle qualities may prolong a negative shadow that in a more integral (or rather “integrative”) culture emerging may emerge as really destructive. I even think that humanity has a reincarnational line of connection with his own nature that normally becomes blocked when being born in a physical body and I think that this is a fundamental capacity (to reconnect with our own Subtle spiritual nature) has not been studied by developmental psychologists.

Discarding the findings of the activities of the Subtle Realm impinging into “our” (physically centered) reality is not the way to proceed, especially if evidence in parapsychology and quantum physics is accumulating that such an interaction defines “our” physical world. Being humble also is an Integral quality and is part of the integrity necessary to proceed. It opens up our receptiveness to the findings of previous cultures that we may otherwise be dismissing as too primitive or less developed than us. Re-discovering the contributions of the ancients which used any of the three “logics” without considering them invalid because they do not meet our modern-post-modern combined standards is not. In fact for Integral Theory to become more applicable as a useful predictive theory it should include the phenomena that many are (with prejudice, not-integrally and with hubris) unwilling to see.




Comment Form is loading comments...