• home
• about
• new
• essays
• AI
• book

As the founder of his non-profit Infinity Foundation, Rajiv Malhotra has, on a full-time basis, been researching civilizations from a historical, social sciences and mind sciences perspective. He has authored several best-selling books and has also published a 14-volume series on the History of Indian Science & Technology.

Predator Project to Hijack Sri Aurobindo's Work

Chapter 7 of The Battle for Consciousness Theory

Rajiv Malhotra, Manogna Sastry & Kundan Singh

Challenging Ken Wilber, 'the Einstein of Consciousness' Studies

In Part 1 of this volume, we considered how Ken Wilber, the selfproclaimed genius of consciousness studies, had appropriated core concepts on a large scale from Sri Aurobindo's work and distorted them and other Indian traditions. Thereafter, Wilber repositioned himself and his institutes to be the foremost in the Integral movement, even if that meant subsuming core Aurobindonian organizations in India and across the world.

532 pages, 2024, Bluone.ink

Also considered was how the community of the sage's followers failed to rise to the challenge of actively studying and refuting Wilber, including career Aurobindonians and leaders of the movement. Infinity Foundation was the first to recognize, educate, work, and lead the efforts to counter the Wilberization of Sri Aurobindo studies.

Wilber had studied and appropriated many ideas from Vedanta, Sri Aurobindo, Madhyamaka Buddhism, and Kasmiri Saivism. By the mid-1990s, Rajiv Malhotra had studied Wilber's wide range of works and found that some of the earlier ones explicitly acknowledged Sri Aurobindo's experiences as sources. This was during a phase when Sri Aurobindo and other Indians were widely quoted in the West as authoritative sources on higher states of consciousness. However, as Wilber's reputation and confidence grew, so did his ego's ambition. He started marginalizing his Indian sources, even outrightly ignoring them and in some instances, criticizing them to establish his superiority. His intellectual journey morphed into heroic claims of originality to position himself in the lineage of great Western thinkers.

When this book project began in 2000, Malhotra was unable to find any prior Indian scholar willing to take up a project of this kind in such a comprehensive way—namely, to challenge Wilber's superficial mappings and highlight that he failed to study the Indian material which he uses so confidently and his sole reliance on second-hand interpretations. Unfortunately, most traditional Indian scholars are unable to understand his use of several different Western frameworks and theories, nor have they invested the enormous time and energy required, and in many cases, lack the courage to challenge him.

As for Western scholars, there had been some serious attempts to critique Wilber. However, they were limited in their breadth and depth of understanding Indian thought, to which Wilber offers a bridge.

With copious amounts of work written over four decades, Wilber today holds a very significant place in Western studies of consciousness and human evolution. His earliest work presents a picture of a person aiming to bring the profound realizations of Eastern knowledge systems to the Western world of materialism and synthesize the two.

Undoubtedly, Wilber was once a serious student of Indian spiritual philosophy, and he began to map Sri Aurobindo's ideas on the evolution of consciousness into Western terminology. His initial purpose was to educate Western psychologists who felt Western thought on psychology and cognitive sciences had reached a dead end. There was a frenzied search for new ideas. Many individuals came to India looking for answers, but they lacked knowledge of Sanskrit in order to have direct access to Indian texts. Sri Aurobindo's writings were in English and served as a great bridge for Westerners to access Indian thought. Wilber positioned himself as a middleman manning the bridge on which considerable traffic was passing in those days.

Wilber's first two books, The Spectrum of Consciousness and No Boundary, were his early attempts at translating Indian ideas for Western consumption. His subsequent book, The Atman Project, formalized his movement to appropriate Sri Aurobindo's theories on human consciousness. The theme refers to the way the Atman (the real self ) has evolved and must continue to evolve.

This is how Wilber's career began, as a sort of intermediary between the dharma traditions as the source of great new knowledge for the West on the one hand and the Western disciplines of psychology and cognitive sciences on the other.

This Part 2 of the book explains the Wilberization of Sri Aurobindo studies, pointing out how Indian discoveries of the Atman have been hijacked by the Predator Ego (a deluded self ) of Ken Wilber. His The Atman Project has in effect become a Predator Ego project.

Wilber might have read some of Sri Aurobindo's works, but much of his knowledge came indirectly filtered by way of others' summaries and interpretations, such as the writings by Haridas Chaudhuri and other individuals like Robert McDermott. Wilber lacks the Sanskrit knowledge to access the original sources and did not study under a learned guru. As a result, his knowledge of Indian philosophy was flawed right from the very beginning.

He started out by equating all Indian traditions with perennialism, a superficial construct over the past century developed largely by Western followers of Swami Vivekananda. Perennialism diluted Indian thought into a common denominator of generic mysticism for Western consumption in three ways:

• Disembodiment: It removed the embodied 'this-worldly' emphasis found in the purusartha-s, yoga, Tantra, dance, music, socio-political karma, and anything that might compete against Western approaches to worldly activities and social theories.
• Other-worldliness: The false stereotyping of Indian traditions as other-worldly mystical escapism served as a justification for the Predator Ego to take over.
• Museumization: Many diverse Indian traditions have been desacralized, and collapsed into a single homogeneous approach and turned into generic substitutes. This approach of showing all traditions as inter-changeable paves the way for Indian traditions to be placed into museums, because their usefulness as living traditions can be replaced with Western substitutes.

In an effort to demonstrate that Indian traditions are flawed and that he is the doctor offering cures, Wilber sometimes sprinkles his later writings with innuendos of abuses and 'primitiveness' in India based on unreliable secondary and tertiary sources. However, he does not cite Sri Aurobindo's writings which contradict his thesis. In sharp contrast, he superficially mentions the much larger archive of abuses by the West. He quickly moves on without exposing his Western icons. For instance, he heavily relies upon Hegel without examining how and why he had endorsed genocide, slavery, and colonialism.

The chapters ahead explore in detail Ken Wilber's series of appropriations from Indian civilization to bolster Western civilization, a project in which he serves as the intermediary that selects, filters, censors, recontextualizes, interprets, and reframes. The current chapter summarizes some of the key issues discussed in detail in subsequent ones.

In many instances, Wilber credits the West with traditions it did not have, or if it did, they were not developed in the manner and for the purpose he claims they were; he does this even where Indian sources are far more explicit and well developed. He connects the dots of various Western traditions, filling in the huge gaps in Indian appropriations without attribution. He is silent on the fact that many of his Western sources obtained their core ideas by studying Indian thought. A few examples illustrate this:

• He respects Carl Jung who was known to be anti-Semitic. He fails to examine Jung's view that yoga is dangerous for Westerners—a radical claim that ought to be examined in light of the huge success of yoga in the West.
• He builds his system using the notion of Panentheism which is credited as a development to the American philosopher, Charles Hartshorne. However, he fails to point out that Hartshorne had studied and relied upon Sri Ramanujacarya (tenth century Indian thinker) as well as the subsequent philosophies of Jiva Goswami (sixteenth century Vaisnava philosopher), which he learnt through his Indian Ph.D. student at the University of Chicago.
• He collaborates with Christian theologians such as Father Thomas Keating, the American Catholic monk who U-Turned from Maharishi Mahesh Yogi's Transcendental Meditation (TM), and reformulated it into Christian Centering Prayer.
• He collaborates with Western cognitive scientists and neuroscientists, many of whose claims of 'originality' are based on unacknowledged appropriations from Indian traditions.

This drift towards self-assertion made Wilber patronizing and disrespectful towards the Indian sources of his inspirations and revelations. It led him to many mistaken conclusions and corrupted his original intention of creating a system in which Western and Eastern paradigms would converge with mutual respect. Instead, he built yet another Western paradigm with the borrowed ideas from original Indian thought. This project has brought him considerable financial sponsorship and clout and hence deserves our independent scrutiny.

Wilber's extensive writings since the early 1970s have evolved through several stages, which he has named Wilber-I, Wilber-II, WilberIII, Wilber-IV, Wilber-V, and so forth.

We will begin with a critical analysis of his major theories and ideas in the chronological sequence of his books: The Spectrum of Consciousness; No Boundary: Eastern and Western Approaches to Personal Growth; The Atman Project: A Transpersonal View of Human Development; Up from Eden: A Transpersonal View of Human Evolution; A Sociable God: Toward a New Understanding of Religion; Eye to Eye: The Quest for a New Paradigm; Transformations of Consciousness: Conventional and Contemplative Perspectives on Development; Sex, Ecology, Spirituality: The Spirit of Evolution; A Brief History of Everything; The Eye of Spirit: An Integral Vision for a World Gone Slightly Mad; The Marriage of Sense and Soul: Integrating Science and Religion; One Taste: Daily Reflections on Integral Spirituality; Integral Psychology: Consciousness, Spirit, Psychology, Therapy; and Integral Spirituality.

We will briefly summarize the highlights of Wilber's career in terms of where he started and how he morphed at various stages. The later chapters detail the changes and errors in his assumptions and conclusions at each stage.

Key Ideas in Each Phase of Ken Wilber's Career Wilber-I (1977-9)

Ken Wilber's first phase of writing comprises ideas published in his 1977 book, The Spectrum of Consciousness. The central tenet of this work was similar to English writer and philosopher Aldous Huxley's idea of philosophia perennis i.e. 'perennial philosophy', that there exists a psychologia perennis, a 'perennial psychology'. Wilber's 'insight' in this book is that, similar to the spectrum of electromagnetic radiation observed in physics, a human being is also a 'multi-leveled manifestation of a single Consciousness'. Wilber considers major levels of this spectrum, including that of the mind and the ego. The spectrum of consciousness is borrowed from the levels described in various Indian and Eastern traditions that Wilber has acknowledged here.

He attributes the existence of the levels to maya and dualism. He refers to several Mahayana Buddhism-based works in this book while considering the parallel with Western therapeutic methods. Social therapies, psychoanalysis, Jungian analysis, and Gestalt therapy (a kind of psychotherapy founded by the German psychiatrist Fritz Perls) are all considered in terms of their fundamental belief, i.e. 'that pathology results from some sort of breakdown in communication between the conscious and the unconscious processes of the psyche, from a split between the persona and the shadow, however the latter may be conceived'.[1]

Each level of the spectrum is associated with a particular school of thought. For example, Wilber associates Jungian psychology with the 'Transpersonal Band' of his spectrum and Gestalt therapy with the 'Existential Band'. As a person moves across the spectrum, he moves from personality to ego to the entire cosmos in an expansion of identity. He sees parallels between his spectrum and Abraham Maslow's (American psychologist) hierarchical needs.

At this initial phase, Wilber describes himself as a Romantic Jungian and suffers the typical Western confusion which he rectifies in Wilber-II i.e. the pre-trans fallacy.

In this first book, he creates a place for himself as a librarian and curator, bringing together ideas that he sees as complementary from the East and the West. However, he perpetuates the idea that the East was only concerned with the levels of the mind and not how pathologies played out in the human being and the larger collective, a presumption that is manifestly untrue:

..the overriding concern of the Eastern explorers of consciousness has always been with the Level of Mind, and thus they gave little, if any, attention to the pathologies that could develop on the other levels. This is understandable, for the perennial psychology maintains that all pathology stems from ignorance (avidya) of Mind. Thus, although they were perfectly aware of the various levels of the Spectrum, and although they mapped them in detail, they felt that 'curing' a pathology on any of these levels was not much more than a waste of time, for the root ignorance of the subject-object dualism would still remain.[2]

Wilber-II (1980-3)

The Atman Project is Wilber's third major book, and this phase is characterized by his work on the ideas of involution-evolution, the evolution of consciousness from sub to self to superconsciousness, and resolving the pre-trans fallacy among others further discussed. This fallacy goes as follows: Most Western interpretations of Eastern philosophy misunderstand and misrepresent the highest state of spirituality as one where the seeker returns to a childlike state seen during infancy. Nirvana and transcendence of the East are thus presented as a return to a primitive state of consciousness. This is rooted in the Western outlook of seeing human life as suffering a fall from the primordial spirit and Godhead and spiritual fulfillment as a return to this primitive state. Wilber recognized this misunderstanding in Western works, including that of Jung, and called out the difference between transpersonal states, where the seeker transcends the individual ego, and the pre-personal states of an infant. The pre- and trans-states may show superficial similarities, but they are different. Wilber called this the pre-trans fallacy.

The Atman Project further established Wilber as a compiler, with him admitting that his entire book was based on phenomenological and direct evidence of hundreds of people across Eastern and Western traditions. He extensively appropriates without acknowledgment concepts from Sri Aurobindo's work in this stage and uses it to create a thirteen-stage development model for consciousness.

Wilber-III (1983-7)

Wilber continues with his development theory and introduces the ideas of distinguishing between lines of development and stages of development, as well as between enduring and transitional structures. These lines of development are to show that a human being can develop his different faculties at different paces, i.e. a person may be more emotionally developed than mentally or vice versa. Wilber appropriated both these sets of ideas from Sri Aurobindo; however, he wrote quite categorically that Sri Aurobindo did not make the distinctions that he was making. While appropriating Sri Aurobindo's ideas in Wilber-II, he fails to acknowledge the sage. But, when he realizes the errors of his limited understanding in Wilber-III, he conveniently attributes his misunderstanding of the appropriated ideas to the sage. He further claims to supersede Sri Aurobindo by using his corrected understanding as the solution to the issues in the previous stage of his work, while continuing to project limitations onto Sri Aurobindo's ideas. It is astonishing that at every stage of his own work, he borrows ideas from Sri Aurobindo's writings to correct his models, while attributing his initial mistaken understanding to the sage's work!

Wilber-IV (1987-2001)

After a hiatus of a few years, Wilber published Sex, Ecology, Spirituality (1995), that marks the beginning of his new phase. Other key works in this stage include The Eye of Spirit (1997), Integral Psychology (2000), and A Theory of Everything (2000). During this stage, Wilber begins to associate the term Integral entirely with his own work and no longer refers to Sri Aurobindo.

The most significant aspect of Wilber-IV is the creation of his four-quadrant model that seeks to bring together in a single framework individual and collective aspects of the development of consciousness. Inner individual and inner socio-cultural aspects of the development of consciousness comprise the upper and lower left quadrants, respectively, of his model. The upper right quadrant expresses the individual development externally through behavioral aspects. The lower right quadrant refers to collective social systems that express external development. Plato, Karl Popper (AustrianBritish philosopher), Immanuel Kant, and Jürgen Habermas (German philosopher) are all located across the quadrants, while Wilber limits Vedanta and other dharmic systems into the upper left quadrant, that of the interior 'I' only.

He thus continues to perpetuate this fundamental falsity that Eastern traditions had systems only for inner development while Western systems champion all other external transformations. This characterization is especially problematic, considering the fundamental work done by Sri Aurobindo which focuses on the significance of external and collective systems.

Wilber adds to the All Quadrants All Levels (AQAL) model from this phase, incorporating dimensions to the states of consciousness to include more complexity. He uses Arthur Lovejoy's work on the Great Chain of Being in a new way, referring to his model as the Great Nest of Being. He continues to use Koestler's holons as the primary terminology, with each holon described through each of the four quadrants for its complete understanding. Consciousness is thus distributed across these four quadrants. Each quadrant though, uses its own language, validity claims, and domains to characterize itself.

In trying to bring together concepts such as science, arts, spirituality, individual, collective, and their respective dominant schools of thought, Wilber also places Sri Aurobindo and the Buddha, whose works stem from a place of deep and highly complex experiences, on the same plane as Jung, Jean Piaget and Freud. This is deeply problematic, for Wilber creates an artifice that has no integral unity but synthetically brings together a mishmash of ideas and people. He critiques postmodern thinking but ends up creating a scheme that is itself a classic example of the erroneous use of postmodern thinking.

Wilber-V (2001-current)

Wilber now completely rejects all metaphysics, calling it unnecessary. The resultant post-metaphysical AQAL model is called the Integral PostMetaphysical model. He introduces methodological perspectives for each of the quadrants and brings in Rupert Sheldrake's (spiritual-biologist) morphogenetic fields and Don Edward Beck's Spiral Dynamics.

This phase sees Wilber working on several off shoots like Integral Mathematics, and Integral Buddhism, the latter especially being very surprising, for he began his entire premise borrowing heavily from the dharmic systems and now claims to add to them new material.

The following table is a small subset of the new offshoots from the application of AQAL and Integral Methodological Pluralism (IMP) to diverse domains. Each of the perspectives associated with the four quadrants of AQAL can be studied through two major methodological families, i.e. from a first- or a third-person perspective. This results in eight distinct zones of human inquiry and comprises what Wilber calls Integral Methodological Pluralism.

The following sample indicates the extent to which Wilber's system has propagated and the need to acknowledge and highlight the primary issues with it, even as it expands to more horizons.

The key ideas from each of the phases of Wilber's work are summarized in the following table, showing how he went from being a scholar acknowledging Sri Aurobindo to airbrushing him out of any credit due.

Each of these phases of Wilber's works uncovers layers of appropriations, distortions and misrepresentations of Sri Aurobindo's key concepts and insights as well as those from the larger Indic knowledge systems. Below, we summarize some of the key issues that will be discussed in detail in later chapters.

Summary of Wilber's Distortions

1. Wilber uses perennialism from the beginning of Wilber-I to dilute all Indian thought into a superficial framework of generic mysticism, and positions it for Western consumption through disembodiment, other-worldliness, and museumization.

2. Wilber charges that Eastern explorers were only concerned with the mind and the levels beyond it, which is false. He assumes dualism is responsible for all pathologies of the mind, which in the first place, shows his limited understanding of dualism.

3. In Wilber-III, he borrows from, and then distorts, Sri Aurobindo's model of evolution and consciousness involuted into various forms of existence. Wilber did not comprehend that Indian tradition did not follow a linear model of development and requires a far more complex understanding of it.

4. In Wilber-II, he conflates Veda with Vedanta, Vedanta with Advaita Vedanta, and simply ignores everything else in Indian traditions. He then uses Sri Aurobindo's critique of other-worldly aspects of Advaita Vedanta and Buddhism and applies it to the entire Indian tradition. Wilber uses Sri Aurobindo's work to supersede the model of Charles Alexander but claims to supersede all Indian traditions as well.

5. Wilber-III charges that Sri Aurobindo's model does not have a separate development line for spirituality. His confusion stems from not having understood the Vedic ideas of immanence completely, and he slips back to his monotheistic background. In the Vedic system, it is not only the transcendent that is being sought but also a positive relationship with the immanent. He fails to understand that all 'developmental lines' are involuted in matter and life and mind. Further, we show how Wilber's 'lines of development' were derived from Sri Aurobindo's work.

6. In Wilber-IV, he creates AQAL and contains and localizes Eastern traditions only in the upper left quadrant, which deals with individual, and interior. This is problematic not only from a dharmic perspective but also specifically because Sri Aurobindo has focused his yoga on work done in the world and on social systems of the collective. He categorizes Sri Aurobindo into the same group as Jung, Piaget, and Freud, which is a gross misrepresentation of a yogi who embodied integrality in his entire approach.

7. Wilber attributes typical conflicts seen in Western systems such as science versus spirituality and empiricism versus embodied knowledge, to all systems. Thus, he downgrades the more developed dharmic model into a sub-category of Western systems.

8. Wilber's model may seem to be an integration of modernity and postmodernity, but in reality is a replication of modernity. Despite heavily critiquing reductionism on various occasions, he is blind to the fact that he has built an expanded version of the very same thing he has critiqued, i.e. reducing the understanding of the epistemological, ontological and metaphysical underpinnings of our cosmos and existence into an interaction of four quadrants.

Summary of Wilber's Appropriations

1. In Wilber-II, he borrows from Eastern thought to fix a Western fallacy, but turns back and boxes Eastern traditions into the same category as those originally with the problem.

2. Wilber's entire involution-evolution is appropriated from Sri Aurobindo's and Swami Vivekananda's work. He uses this to reinterpret the West's fall from spirit as the spirit evolving in the human being through involution and evolution.

3. He uses Sri Aurobindo's detailed model and creates a thirteen-stage development schema for consciousness, but attributes insights to Westerners like Jung and Sheldrake. In Wilber-III, he professes to give a new definition of spirituality by reframing Sri Aurobindo's concept of the psychic being as his own.

4. During this phase, he attributes the lines of development to Gardner, whereas decades ago Sri Aurobindo used the exact same phrase as well in the context of evolutionary development having various vertical and horizontal hierarchies.

5. He casts his evolutionary model of consciousness as borrowed from Koestler's holonic paradigm, while Koestler's work itself can be traced to ancient dharmic texts. His tenets on holons are borrowed almost verbatim from Sri Aurobindo.

6. In Wilber-IV, he refers to generic theories of consciousness while postulating that higher stages of growth are possible. But none, save the loosely termed 'Eastern and Other Contemplative Tradition', contain any postulates, assumptions, mechanisms, or results that consider the evolution of man and envisioning future paths. Thus, Wilber attributes certain claims to Western knowledge systems that they do not make. Sri Aurobindo's Integral Yoga explicitly calls man a transitional being, with a 'Superman' being the next stage for human evolution. Wilber does not even mention, let alone credit, the idea to Sri Aurobindo.

7. In Wilber-IV, he mines Arthur Lovejoy's work on the Great Chain of Being in a different way from his previous phases. He uses Lovejoy's accounts of how transcendence and immanence were viewed in the West since the time of the Greeks and positions himself as the one bringing an innovative model by using Sri Aurobindo's core ideas.

8. In Wilber-V, he uses terms that are native to the dharmic traditions while stripping them of their comprehensive framework, and plucking out the portions he wants as isolated ideas. Karma is an example, where Wilber explains the term through holons and credits Whitehead, Sheldrake, Peirce, the German philosopher Martin Heidegger and the Swiss philosopher Jean Gebser for reference. However, he repeatedly ignores what Sri Aurobindo wrote extensively on the concept of karma and rebirth and its relation to Integral Yoga.

9. Wilber maintains that only shamans and sages can know the outcomes of an event. Without a word on the yogic traditions of India Wilber credits Alfred Whitehead: 'This “transcend-andinclude” relationship, grounded in Whiteheadian prehension, is the basis, on the feeling-side, of the gentle tilt of the Kosmos towards greater and greater complexity and depth, a tilt that by any other name is Eros'.[8]

Summary of Wilber's Misunderstandings

1. Wilber misunderstands even the basic definition of Integral found in Sri Aurobindo's work. In Sri Aurobindo's model, subjective and objective (or interior and exterior) arise out of the concepts of involution-evolution of the Absolute Consciousness, which includes unity and multiplicity. In Wilber's model, because he rejects metaphysics, these concepts are not the result of a process but selected/imposed lenses with no basis. Evolution in Wilber's model refers to a mechanical process with no explainable cause or agency.

2 In dharmic perspectives, direct experience is a fundamental process of yoga, and the witness perspective is a consequence. Wilber simply presumes this without the accompanying cosmological framework.

3. With his use of purely intellectual models without any grounding in the subjective experience of yoga and his rejection of all metaphysics, Wilber begins with non-dualism and introduces a fundamental flaw in his AQAL: There is no agency within the quadrants. Evolution without involution cannot generate causality and hence, agency. The only solution to this is Sri Aurobindo's involution-evolution model. Wilber misses the central point by mixing up two different frameworks: In dharmic systems, consciousness is not the product of evolution; rather, evolution, along with its twin process of involution, manifests Absolute Consciousness, which exists independent of the processes themselves.

4. There is no gradation of consciousness at all in the choice of the holon, i.e. an atom is placed at the same level as a cell. The 'depth' that Wilber attributes to the various levels of the same quadrant again has no causality. There is no explanation for what actually produces the higher states of consciousness. This demonstrates his lack of understanding of the levels of Sri Aurobindo's model of consciousness—Matter, Life, and Mind—with each representing a leap.

Wilber's work on Kosmic karma also exposes his flawed understanding of science, and he merely borrows vocabulary to prop up his assertions while ignoring the underlying concepts and their relevance. He conveniently creates a safety net for himself by claiming similarity and synthesis with modern science. Furthermore, he drops names of renowned thinkers of the past to leverage them as support for his model by extrapolating beyond their work.

NOTES

Please check the bibliography for detailed references.

[1] (Wilber 1975, 115)

[2] (Wilber 1975, 129-30)

[3] See: AgileDC. 24 October 2016. Integral Agile: Deliver More Effectively Using This Powerful Lens and Awareness, confengine.com; Aqal Integral Investing. You cannot not invest, aqalgroup.com. Accessed 31 March 2024.

[4] See: (Esbjörn-Hargens & Zimmerman 2011, xv)

[5] See: (Bohac 2018)

[6] See: (McGuigan & Popp 2016); (Micholson & Fisher 2014)

[7] (Wilber 2018)

[8] (Wilber 2021, 25)

Table of Contents

• PREFACE BY RAJIV MALHOTRA
• PREFACE BY THE CO-AUTHORS
• INTRODUCTION
• PART ONE: THE ‘NAVEL-GAZING AUROBINDONIANS’
  • CHAPTER 1: THE IMPORTANCE OF CHALLENGING WILBERISM
  • CHAPTER 2: LOBBYING THE AUROBINDONIANS
  • CHAPTER 3: AN INITIAL HOME TEAM EMERGES
  • CHAPTER 4: RECLAIMING INTEGRAL PSYCHOLOGY
  • CHAPTER 5: THE DEBATE BECOMES GLOBAL
  • CHAPTER 6: BETRAYAL BY THE CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF INTEGRAL STUDIES
• PART TWO: RECLAIMING THE INTEGRAL MOVEMENT
  • CHAPTER 7: PREDATOR PROJECT TO HIJACK SRI AUROBINDO’S WORK
  • CHAPTER 8: WILBER-I: THE MINING EXPEDITION BEGINS
  • CHAPTER 9: WILBER-II: APPROPRIATING SRI AUROBINDO’S THEORY OF EVOLUTION
  • CHAPTER 10: WILBER-III: APPROPRIATING LINES OF DEVELOPMENT AND PSYCHIC BEING
  • CHAPTER 11: WILBER-IV: PREMODERN-POSTMODERN AND APPROPRIATION OF IMMANENCE-TRANSCENDENCE
  • CHAPTER 12: THE INDIAN INFLUENCES ON ARTHUR KOESTLER’S HOLONS AND THEIR IMPACT ON WILBER-IV
  • CHAPTER 13: WILBER-IV: ALL QUADRANTS ALL LEVELS
  • CHAPTER 14: WILBER-V: INTEGRAL POST-METAPHYSICS COMPARED WITH SRI AUROBINDO’S INTEGRAL YOGA
• APPENDIX: INTEGRAL YOGA AND TRANSFORMATION
• SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY
• ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
• INDEX