Sri Ramana Maharshi and time

[Guest guest]

But if genuine spirituality is not, as I maintain, a product of

the past (or of past archetypes), then what about the great spiritual

figures, East and West, who definitely existed in the past? What about the

Buddhas, the Christs, the Krishnas? Are they not expressing some past

capacity, some past archetypal wisdom that we have lost contact with? And

in contacting our own spirituality, aren't we contacting some past

potential that we have lost or denied or forgotten?

Lost, perhaps; but not from the past. Let me repeat what I said

above about the "true archetypes", the transcendental and transpersonal

structures, as a reminder: they cannot be explained as an inheritance from

the past; they are strange Attractors lying in our future, omega points

that have not been collectively manifested anywhere in the past, but are

nontheless available to each and every individual as structural potentials,

as future structures attempting to come down, not past structures

struggling to come up. The great and rare mystics of the past (from Buddha

to Christ, from al-Hallaj to Lady Tsogal, from Hui-neng to Hildegard) were,

in fact, ahead of their time, and are still ahead of ours.

In other words, they most definitely are not figures of the

past. They are figures of the future. In their spirituality, they did not

tap into yesterday, they tapped into tomorrow. In their profound awareness,

we do not see the setting sun, but the new dawn. They absolutely did not

inherit the past, they inherited the future.

from Sex, Ecology, Spirituality Ken Wilber

[Guest guest]

Cool!

 

is this in a book anywhere?

 

--janpa