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

Brad Reynolds did graduate work at the California Institute of Integral Studies (CIIS) before leaving to study under Ken Wilber for a decade, and published two books reviewing Wilber's work: Embracing Reality: The Integral Vision of Ken Wilber (Tarcher, 2004), Where's Wilber At?: Ken Wilber's Integral Vision in the New Millennium (Paragon House, 2006) and God's Great Tradition of Global Wisdom: Guru Yoga-Satsang in the Integral Age (Bright Alliance, 2021). Visit: http://integralartandstudies.com

Enlightenment, What Is It?

A Response to Frank Visser

Brad Reynolds

This is a response to Frank Visser's recent (and misleading) Chat post called, “Satori and Universal Insights: The Eye of Spirit and its Discontents,” however, with a different set of questions. As I have said, I encourage each and every person to go discover the truth of reality for yourself. Listen to the Great Global Wisdom Tradition of humankind. Listen to the Great Adepts, not philosophers like me or Visser or even Wilber. Listen to the Wise. Study to know the Truth. Do the Yoga. Awaken your heart beyond mind and SEE for yourself. That is the Only Way to Know Truth!

Me to ChatGPT:

• Is Enlightenment (satori) or God-Realization real? Does it give a person information about their True Self or about Reality or both?
• Is the Enlightenment experience of Ultimate Reality universal, like the Perennial Philosophy says?
• Does a person have to do the practice of Yoga or a set of disciplines, such as meditation, in order to have a satori or enlightenment experience?
• Is it possible for the rational mind or thinking about philosophy to have an enlightenment or satori experience?
• Please provide a list of philosophical methods that can be used as spiritual or contemplative practices.
• What is the evidence that psychedelic experiences and natural entheogens have helped initiate an Enlightenment experience or higher mystical states?
• Is there a difference between Enlightenment or Ultimate Awakening and the other mystical states a person can have? Has Ken Wilber's integral theory taken this into account?

Is Enlightenment (satori) or God-Realization real? Does it give a person information about their True Self or about Reality or both?

This is a profound and nuanced question that bridges spiritual experience, metaphysics, and epistemology. Let's explore it step-by-step, acknowledging multiple perspectives:

1. Is Enlightenment or God-Realization “real”?

Yes—but it depends on what “real” means in the context.

Most traditions agree that something deeply transformative and non-ordinary occurs, often reported as more real than ordinary waking life. The reality of the experience itself is not in serious doubt—it happens, and it profoundly changes people.

However, what the experience means varies:

In Buddhist terms (e.g., Zen satori or Theravada nibbana): Enlightenment is a direct realization of the emptiness of self and phenomena, leading to liberation from suffering.

In Advaita Vedanta and some mystical Christian or Sufi traditions: God-Realization is the direct recognition that one's true nature is identical with the Absolute (e.g., Brahman, God, or the Ground of Being).

From a psychological or neuroscientific view: These may be peak states of consciousness with neurological correlates, possibly beneficial but not necessarily revealing metaphysical truths.

So: Real? Yes, as experience. Metaphysically or ontologically true? That depends on your framework.

2. Does it give a person information about their True Self or about Reality—or both?

A. True Self

Most traditions affirm that such realization does reveal the nature of the "True Self," but with very different interpretations:

Buddhism (especially Mahayana and Zen): The True Self is no-self (anatman), an open, interdependent field with no permanent, unchanging identity.

Advaita Vedanta: The True Self is the formless, witnessing awareness (Atman), identical with Brahman—pure being-consciousness-bliss.

Christian mysticism (e.g., Meister Eckhart): The True Self is the divine spark or imago Dei, known in union with God.

So yes, these realizations are often experienced as revealing one's deepest identity—but what that identity is varies across traditions.

B. Reality

Many reports of enlightenment experiences describe a shift in perception that is seen as revealing ultimate reality—not just one's self, but the nature of the cosmos:

Unity consciousness: The sense that all things are interconnected or identical in some deeper way.

Timelessness / spacelessness: The dissolution of subject-object distinctions and the collapse of ordinary temporal frameworks.

Emptiness / Suchness / God's presence: Depending on context, the experience may feel like meeting the divine, or like seeing things "just as they are" without illusion.

So, yes, enlightenment often claims to disclose the nature of reality itself—but again, interpretations differ depending on whether you're working within Buddhist, Hindu, mystical Christian, or naturalistic frameworks.

3. Ken Wilber's Integral View (as a synthesis)

Since you're familiar with Wilber, here's how his model might frame this:

Enlightenment is real as a state-stage of consciousness, accessible in meditative and mystical practice.

It provides direct access to non-dual awareness, which Wilber considers the deepest "view" of both the True Self and Reality.

However, interpretation of that state depends on one's cognitive and interpretive developmental level (e.g., mythic, rational, pluralistic, integral).

Therefore, while enlightenment discloses Reality and Self in a profound way, it is always interpreted through the lens of one's developmental worldview—making the "truth" it reveals both direct and partial.

Summary

BRAD'S RESPONSE: This response is mostly accurate, but in some serious ways, it is not correct. Such as, “Metaphysically or ontologically true? That depends on your framework,” is only based on rational reflections, because once a person has had the revelation of Enlightenment or re-discovering (or awakening to) the true nature of reality, then it is obvious it is ontologically true since it is Reality that is revealed, not just subjective interpretations. The mind cannot grasp this, which is what makes it totally different from any other type of human possibility, and why science will NEVER be able to quantify or prove it via objective measurements.

AI is incapable of knowing what is being hinted at with Enlightenment, since it transcends even subjective experience and words, let alone objective, written data banks on the Internet (or even in books). This makes sense because Enlightenment reveals Ultimate Reality, not relative reality, other than it shows that relative reality ARISES WITHIN Ultimate Reality. Ultimate Reality transcends the hardware as well as the software, so to speak. The rational mind (such as with Frank Visser's analysis) is incapable of understanding these facts, these truths, without first having the experience of no-experience. Therefore, as Wittgenstein and other Enlightened Adepts have pointed out: “Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent.”

Frank Visser has failed to comprehend these profound truths since he looks at Enlightenment as an observer, as a separate self, yet Enlightenment dissolves the boundaries between the separate self and the real truth of reality as a whole. Visser knows not of what he speaks or criticizes. If you don't know, you don't know.

Is the Enlightenment experience of Ultimate Reality universal, like the Perennial Philosophy says?

Great follow-up—and this question strikes at the heart of a long-standing and heated debate in philosophy, comparative religion, and consciousness studies.

Short Answer:

There is strong evidence for commonalities in enlightenment experiences across traditions—but whether these point to a universal “Ultimate Reality” (as the Perennial Philosophy claims) is still very much debated.

BRAD'S RESPONSE: Notice ChatGPT says, “enlightenment experiences,” as if there is a plurality of experiences, but this is not true! There is only ONE experience when Ultimate Reality is revealed—and it is universal (even beyond human, such as with subtle or extra-dimensional beings). However, there are endless interpretations or expressions via each individual and culture (that is inevitable since it happens via a born body-mind). This is why there are endless pages written by countless people, because Enlightenment can NEVER be accurately spoken about. It occurs in silence; it is transcendental and transpersonal; the rational mind can NEVER understand it, though the rational mind, once it knows its truth, can support Enlightenment through debate and pointing.

Let's break it down.

1. The Perennial Philosophy: What It Claims

The Perennial Philosophy (from Aldous Huxley, Huston Smith, Frithjof Schuon, etc.) says that:

At the core of all major religious traditions is a shared metaphysical insight—a direct realization of Ultimate Reality, the Divine, or the Ground of Being.

This realization is usually achieved through contemplative or mystical practices and leads to union with that Reality.

The various traditions are culturally conditioned interpretations of this same underlying experience.

So, enlightenment is universal in its core content, and differences are secondary.

2. Critiques of the Perennial View

Scholars like Steven Katz, Robert Sharf, and Donald Lopez argue the opposite: that mystical experiences are not universal [BRAD: note, these are scholars, NOT Enlightened Adepts], because:

All experiences are theory-laden—they are shaped by the language, expectations, and cultural frameworks of the practitioner [BRAD: only a scholar would assert this; it is a lesser view].

A Zen monk, a Christian mystic, and a Sufi may describe their experiences differently because they experienced different things [BRAD: true enough, but the description is NOT the experience].

There's no neutral, content-less experience—even mystical states are infused with prior beliefs and conceptual structures [BRAD: True only about MYSTICAL STATES since there are a wide variety of mystical STATES (coming from various stages of life and development) that are NOT Enlightenment. In fact, paradoxically, Enlightenment is NOT a state experience; it is an awareness of the Ground of all states, since it transcends yet includes the states of waking, dreaming, deep sleep, or altered states].

This leads to the constructivist position: mystical experiences are real but constructed by the mind and its conditioning [BRAD: Pure postmodernism critique and, therefore, is inaccurate, according to the Enlightened Sages. Enlightenment transcends mind; it is not a construction of mind., Lesser mystical STATES do fall under this critique, so it is true but partial.]

3. Middle Way: Wilber's Integral View

Ken Wilber offers a mediating position between the Perennialists and the Constructivists:

There are shared structures and stages of spiritual development (e.g., gross, subtle, causal, non-dual).

These deep structures may give rise to phenomenologically similar states across cultures.

However, the interpretation of those states is filtered through cognitive development, culture, and language.

So: the experience may be universal, but its interpretation is relative.

This is often called the "Wilber-Combs lattice"—where both state and stage interact to shape mystical insight.

4. Do Enlightened People Describe the Same Reality?

Similarities across traditions:

Transcendence of ego

Sense of oneness or unity

Timelessness or eternity

Peace, love, or bliss

Direct knowing or gnosis

Differences across traditions:

No-self vs. divine union (e.g., Buddhist vs. Christian mysticism)

Emptiness vs. fullness (e.g., Zen vs. Sufi)

Non-dual awareness vs. personal relationship with God

Some say these are different interpretations of the same Reality; others say they are different realities altogether.

Conclusion

So: Is there a universal experience of Ultimate Reality?

Possibly yes—but what that experience means is always shaped by the mind interpreting it.

BRAD'S RESPONSE: Again, AI (or Artificial Intelligence) is somewhat confused since it is not a sentient being who knows Enlightenment from actual experience. Naturally, it brings up the perennial confusion about the Enlightened State: it confuses the states of Mysticism with Enlightenment or the Nondual Awareness of Ultimate Reality, which is NOT conditioned by cultures, although its expression is often “interpreted differently depending on developmental and cultural context,” and via the personal dynamics and karma of each individual. Only Awakened Adepts are truly qualified to speak about these matters with any genuine authenticity.

Also. I notice that ChatGPT does not mention that what is revealed is that our very consciousness itself is, in fact, the ultimate Reality—not our personal subjectivity (that's the ego) —but Awareness itself (called “the Witness”) is the ultimate source and matrix of all reality. In other words, we ARE God, you are God—“Tat Tvam Asi” or “You Are That”!

Does a person have to do the practice of Yoga or a set of disciplines, such as meditation, in order to have a satori or enlightenment experience?

No, a person does not have to do yoga or formal disciplines to have a satori or enlightenment experience—but doing so dramatically increases the likelihood, depth, and integration of such experiences.

BRAD'S RESPONSE: This is a distorted answer, but it is technically correct. A better way to state it is: Yes, a person has to do yoga and meditation, take up self-transcending practices, in order to be available for the fully Enlightened State to arise. Mystical states, less than Enlightenment, are more easily experienced without practice (via) Grace, but even those are rare. Without a relationship to an authentic Spiritual Master or an Awakened Adept, and without the previous disciplines of mind and body, it is next to impossible to have a genuine Enlightenment Awakening.

Let's explore this in three parts:

1. Spontaneous Enlightenment or Satori Happens

Throughout history, people [BRAD: this is EXTREMELY RARE] have had sudden, uninvited, and profound experiences of what might be called enlightenment, satori, or union with God, without prior spiritual practice [BRAD: this is a distorted answer and is mostly untrue, although the actual experience is not based on conditions or any one practice]:

Eckhart Tolle describes his awakening as occurring during a deep existential crisis [BRAD: but Tolle had already been a long-time meditator].

Ramana Maharshi had a sudden realization of the Self as a teenager facing a fear of death [BRAD: Ramana had good karma so he did his practice in previous lifetimes. However, after that experience, he went to the sacred hill Arunachala and lived a life of renunciation and serious disciplines before that Enlightened state was stabilized and before he could teach and transmit].

Many people report “accidental” mystical experiences during trauma, extreme beauty, childbirth, psychedelics, or even while walking in nature.

These suggest that the capacity for enlightenment is innate, not reserved for disciplined yogis.

BRAD'S RESPONSE: Only partially correct: the vast, vast majority of us will NEVER have mystical experiences, let alone ultimate Enlightenment, WITHOUT serious engagement of instruction, practice, and transmission from a Spiritual Master. AI is not able to know—it is promoting the lazy man's guide to Enlightenment and overlooks the profound study and commitment necessary for genuine Awakening and self-transformation. But what do we expect? It is only a computer, after all… not an awakened practitioner.

2. But Practice Makes it More Likely, Stable, and Integrated

While spontaneous experiences happen, practices like meditation, self-inquiry, yoga, and contemplation serve three critical functions:

A. Preparation

They purify the mind and egoic structures, making the psyche more permeable to non-ordinary states.

B. Stabilization

They help stabilize awakening into a sustained realization rather than a passing state (satori vs. kensho vs. full awakening in Zen terms).

C. Integration

Practices give a framework for interpreting and living from the realization, not just having an "experience."

As Zen says:

“Before enlightenment, chop wood, carry water. After enlightenment, chop wood, carry water.”

3. The Pathless Path vs. The Path

There are two main spiritual orientations:

Both are valid—and in practice, most people benefit from combining both: a realization of innate freedom and a disciplined path to embody it.

Conclusion

No, a person doesn't have to do yoga or meditation to have an enlightenment experience.

Yes, practices significantly increase the likelihood, clarity, and embodiment of such realization.

Many traditions describe both sudden and gradual paths, but even sudden insights are often followed by long integration.

BRAD'S RESPONSE: Fairly accurate, although it is EXTREMELY rare for Enlightenment to happen without practice first—Enlightenment is always sudden, an act of Grace—but it must be cultivated, both before and after Enlightenment. That is true for 99% of the cases, so it is a distortion to even mention spontaneous occurrences. (Personally, it took me over 10 years of serious seeking and practice before my first real breakthrough, and now 50 years of gradual cultivation—this is NOT EASY, though nothing is greater, more profound, or more true).

Is it possible for the rational mind or thinking about philosophy to have an enlightenment or satori experience?

Yes—it is possible for the rational mind and philosophical contemplation to catalyze a satori or enlightenment experience, though it's relatively rare and often incomplete without deeper inner work.

BRAD'S RESPONSE: This is not really true, since Enlightenment transcends the mind. Yet, paradoxically, it is also somewhat true since it is the “mind” that is Enlightened. In this case, the mind discover it is subservient to the Heart, which is the source of Consciousness Itself. Enlightenment is a WHOLE BODY “EXPERIENCE” and cannot be categorized or described by the mind. What is true is that Nondual Enlightenment is often incomplete without previous and post-Enlightenment practices. Hence, it is a very rare condition and impossible for the self itself to achieve since the self is what is transcended: you cannot get There from Here!

Here's the fuller picture:

1. Direct Insight through Philosophy: A Historical Reality

Certain philosophers and mystics have clearly had satori-like experiences through deep rational inquiry:

Socrates and Plato used dialectical reasoning to arrive at anamnesis—direct recollection of truth, sometimes seen as awakening to the Forms or ultimate realities.

Plotinus, through Neoplatonic reasoning, entered ecstatic states of union with the One.

Descartes, through radical doubt, touched a kind of cogito-based gnosis.

Spinoza experienced intellectual love of God (amor Dei intellectualis) as a form of rational-mystical union.

Ramana Maharshi used self-inquiry—a deceptively simple but profoundly rational process: “Who am I?”

This suggests that the mind, when purified and focused, can become a gateway to transcendence—not just an obstacle.

2. The Limits of Conceptual Thinking

However, most traditions caution that conceptual thought alone cannot bring full enlightenment:

In Zen, satori comes when the rational mind breaks—often triggered by a koan that logic cannot solve.

Advaita Vedanta says the intellect (buddhi) is useful for discrimination (viveka), but realization is beyond thought (nirvikalpa).

Mystical Christianity speaks of the “cloud of unknowing” where God is known not by knowledge but by love and surrender.

So while thinking can prepare the ground, awakening comes when the mind surrenders, falls silent, or sees through itself.

3. Philosophical Practice as a Doorway (Not a Destination)

In Ken Wilber's Integral terms:

Rational mind (vision-logic) is a necessary developmental stage.

But awakening (non-dual realization) requires transcending and including the rational—not being stuck in it.

Deep philosophical contemplation can deconstruct the ego, the false self, or the dualistic map, allowing glimpses of unity.

This is why process philosophy, non-dual metaphysics, and deep phenomenology can act like modern koans.

Conclusion

So: Yes, philosophy can open the door—but the final step is not thought, but a kind of radical seeing or being.

BRAD'S RESPONSE: This is generally correct. However, the point is that the injunctions or Yoga must be done as daily practice, since Yoga is defined (by Patanjali) as the quieting of the fluctuations of thought (chitta vrtti nirodha). In other words, Enlightenment goes beyond the mind, whereas philosophy is technically an exercise of the mind. Philosophy can support Enlightenment; it cannot generate it.

Please provide a list of philosophical methods that can be used as spiritual or contemplative practices.

Great—here's a list of philosophical methods that can function as spiritual or contemplative practices, often leading toward insight, ego-deconstruction, or even satori-like breakthroughs when engaged deeply and existentially (not just academically):

Philosophical Methods as Contemplative Practices

1. Socratic Dialectic (Elenchus)

Method: Persistent questioning to uncover contradictions in one's beliefs and strip away false knowledge.

Spiritual function: Dissolves ego-attachments to opinion; can lead to existential humility and a direct intuition of deeper truths.

Quote: “I know that I know nothing.”

2. Self-Inquiry (“Who am I?”)—Ramana Maharshi / Advaita Vedanta

Method: Repeatedly tracing the sense of “I” back to its source.

Spiritual function: Deconstructs the false self and reveals pure awareness (Atman).

Modern parallel: A focused form of phenomenological bracketing or ontological reduction.

3. Phenomenological Reduction (Epoché)—Husserl / Merleau-Ponty

Method: Suspend assumptions about the external world and attend to experience as it appears.

Spiritual function: Shifts perception from object-based to field-based awareness; can open into non-dual seeing.

In practice: Similar to mindfulness or Dzogchen-style “awareness of awareness.”

4. Deconstructive Inquiry—Derrida / Nagarjuna

Method: Reveal the instability of binary logic and fixed categories (self/other, being/non-being).

Spiritual function: Undermines conceptual certainty, creating space for insight into emptiness or groundlessness.

In Buddhism: Nagarjuna's Madhyamaka is a formal, rational road to sunyata (emptiness).

5. Process Thinking—Whitehead / Heraclitus

Method: View reality as becoming rather than being; dissolve fixed substances into flowing relations.

Spiritual function: Undermines ego's grasp on identity; opens the mind to radical impermanence and interconnection.

Experiential echo: Similar to insights in Zen or Vipassana practice.

6. Non-Dual Contemplation—Spinoza / Plotinus / Kashmir Shaivism

Method: Think the All as One; see the self and God as modes of a single Substance or Consciousness.

Spiritual function: Can trigger moments of unitive consciousness (e.g., “intellectual love of God” in Spinoza).

Practice form: Deep meditative reading or lectio divina on metaphysical texts.

7. Aporia / Paradox—Zen Koans / Wittgenstein

Method: Encounter logical dead-ends or self-defeating statements.

Spiritual function: Breaks the mind out of habitual logic and opens direct seeing beyond concepts.

Classic example: “What is the sound of one hand clapping?”

8. Heidegger's Questioning of Being

Method: Ask what it means to be, prior to any answer or thing.

Spiritual function: Can destabilize ego's grasp on reality and open awareness to the “clearing” (Lichtung).

In practice: A form of negative theology or apophatic meditation.

Tips for Using These Philosophically

Slow down. Let the question itself reshape your attention—don't rush to an answer.

Feel into the edges. Where your mind gets uncomfortable or confused is fertile ground.

Return repeatedly. Like meditation, these are practices, not one-time thought experiments.

Balance with silence. Insight often comes not during the thinking, but in the stillness after.

What is the evidence that psychedelic experiences and natural entheogens have helped initiate an Enlightenment experience or higher mystical states?

There is a growing body of evidence—both historical and modern scientific—that psychedelics and natural entheogens can initiate or catalyze mystical experiences, including states that closely resemble (or in some cases are interpreted as) enlightenment experiences. However, there are important distinctions between temporary states and stable traits, which we'll address.

1. Scientific Evidence from Modern Studies

Johns Hopkins & Roland Griffiths' Landmark Studies

2006 study: Psilocybin (in a controlled setting) triggered “mystical-type” experiences in over 60% of participants.

Characteristics of these experiences:

Unity or oneness

Transcendence of time and space

Ineffability

Deep sense of sacredness and insight

Many participants ranked the experience among the most meaningful of their lives, comparable to childbirth or death of a parent.

Quote from the Griffiths study:

“The psilocybin-induced mystical experience produced sustained positive changes in attitudes, mood, and behavior…”

Long-Term Trait Changes

Follow-up studies show lasting reductions in depression and anxiety, increased life satisfaction, and greater spiritual openness—all traits associated with long-term contemplative practice and awakening.

fMRI and EEG studies show reduced Default Mode Network activity (associated with ego and narrative self), increased connectivity, and brain patterns similar to advanced meditators.

2. Historical and Indigenous Use of Entheogens

Indigenous Traditions

Ayahuasca (Amazon), peyote (Native American Church), psilocybin mushrooms (Mazatec), and iboga (Bwiti) have been used ritually for centuries to catalyze:

Visionary revelation

Ego-death

Encounter with divine beings or ancestors

Insights into one's life, death, and moral responsibility

These traditions often treat entheogens as sacraments, not drugs—guides to the sacred or divine.

3. Reports from Mystics and Contemplatives

Some modern teachers and seekers describe psychedelic experiences as their first doorway to deeper spiritual realization:

Ram Dass (Richard Alpert): LSD opened him to dimensions of consciousness that led him to India and eventually to Neem Karoli Baba.

Aldous Huxley: Wrote The Doors of Perception after a mescaline experience; considered it a genuine mystical insight.

Terence McKenna: While controversial, argued that plant medicines revealed archetypal and transpersonal dimensions akin to religious revelation.

However, many advanced teachers (e.g., the Dalai Lama, various Zen masters) warn against mistaking these temporary insights for full realization, emphasizing integration and ethics.

4. Distinctions: State vs. Stage

Ken Wilber and others in the Integral community offer a helpful distinction:

So: Yes, psychedelics can induce states similar to enlightenment—but lasting transformation requires inner work beyond the trip itself.

Summary

Is there a difference between Enlightenment or Ultimate Awakening and the other mystical states a person can have? Has Ken Wilber's integral theory taken this into account?

Yes—there is a crucial difference between Ultimate Enlightenment (or Awakening) and other mystical states, and Ken Wilber's Integral Theory has gone to great lengths to clarify and systematize this distinction.

Let's explore the difference and how Integral Theory maps it.

1. What's the Difference Between Mystical States and Enlightenment?

Mystical States (Temporary, Peak Experiences)

Examples: Unity with nature, bliss, ego-dissolution, visions of divine beings, kundalini arousals, cosmic love, etc.

Qualities:

Often induced by meditation, trauma, psychedelics, or grace

Temporary (last minutes to hours)

May be deeply transformative but fade over time

Interpreted differently depending on the person's developmental level and cultural background

Think of these as glimpses or states of consciousness—real, profound, but not yet stabilized.

Enlightenment / Ultimate Awakening (Permanent, Stage Realization)

Definition (non-dual traditions): Ongoing realization that the self and all phenomena are expressions of a single, undivided Reality (e.g., Brahman, Dharmakaya, Suchness).

Qualities:

Permanent stage-shift, not just an altered state

Involves the falling away of the sense of a separate self

Results in non-dual awareness as the person's baseline perception

Typically accompanied by deep equanimity, compassion, and clarity

Requires integration, not just insight

So: mystical states are like weather; enlightenment is like a climate change.

2. How Ken Wilber's Integral Theory Accounts for This

Wilber makes this distinction central to his model, especially through the Wilber-Combs Matrix, which charts:

State Experiences x Stage Development

Key Wilber insights:

Mystical states are available to everyone, regardless of their developmental stage.

Example: A 10-year-old or fundamentalist may experience divine union—but interpret it literally.

How you interpret a state depends on your developmental level (e.g., magic, mythic, rational, integral).

Enlightenment is not just a state—it's a stabilized realization of non-duality integrated across the self-system.

Integration is Key

Wilber emphasizes the difference between:

State access (easy; even psychedelics can trigger it)

Stage realization (hard; requires long-term growth)

Shadow integration (resolving unconscious patterns that distort awakening)

A person can have a non-dual awakening and still act unethically or narcissistically if their ego and shadow haven't been integrated—something Wilber discusses in Integral Spirituality and The Religion of Tomorrow.

3. Why This Distinction Matters

Without understanding the difference:

People may chase peak states endlessly without transforming.

Mystical experiences may reinforce the ego if misinterpreted (spiritual bypassing).

Teachers may have genuine insights but remain psychologically immature or even abusive (Wilber has called this the “boomeritis” problem).

Summary

So: Yes, there's a major difference—and Integral Theory not only accounts for it but makes it central to understanding healthy spiritual development.

Here's a visual-friendly summary chart of Ken Wilber's State-Stage Matrix, followed by a checklist you can use to reflect on where someone (yourself or others) might be on the path of awakening and integration.

Wilber-Combs Lattice (Simplified)

This matrix shows how states of consciousness (rows) interact with stages of ego development (columns):

Notes:

Any person at any stage can have a state experience (e.g., a fundamentalist may have a deep mystical state, but interpret it mythically).

Full enlightenment = non-dual state + non-dual stage realization + ego and shadow integration.

Checklist for Tracking Awakening and Integration

Use this to assess where someone is on the spiritual development spectrum, not to judge, but to guide further growth:

Mystical State Awareness (Temporary Access)

Have you ever experienced ego-dissolution or deep unity?

Have you had a spontaneous sense of timelessness or sacred presence?

Have you experienced deep silence or “I am” beyond thought?

These suggest state access to subtle, causal, or non-dual awareness.

Shadow and Ego Integration

Are you aware of and actively working with unconscious psychological patterns?

Do spiritual insights show up in your relationships, ethics, and behavior?

Do you avoid spiritual bypassing, superiority, or using awakening as identity?

These suggest integrated development, beyond the “stuck mystic” or “half-awakened teacher.”

Stage Realization (Stable Grounding)

Do you experience non-dual awareness as your baseline, not just in meditation?

Are all phenomena (thoughts, emotions, sensations) seen as expressions of the same ground?

Is there a deep equanimity that persists through life's ups and downs?

These suggest stage embodiment of awakening—not just peak states.

BRAD'S RESPONSE: What do I know? I might be wrong. That's always a possibility. Maybe Enlightenment is a subjective illusion, like Frank Visser wants to suggest. However, for thousands of years, the world's greatest minds and individuals, women and men alike, say God-Realization and Enlightenment is very real and true. I do know when I read their works, the sacred scriptures of the world, at least the Nondual Enlightened texts (not like the Bible or Qur'an), I find they speak most accurately about what I have experienced and felt. And Ken Wilber comes close, at times, although not as much as a truly Enlightened Master. Therefore, I tend to agree with his nondual integral philosophy (in most cases), even if he gets some of the science incorrect or speaks about it inaccurately. But what do I know? Everybody has an opinion, just as everyone has an asshole; thus, every asshole has an opinion. I don't know. YOU FIGURE IT OUT. The Way of Enlightenment is for YOU to discover. Good luck, be blessed, brothers and sisters.