What do you think?
Rate this book
One Taste: Daily Reflections on Integral Spirituality
Asone who has written extensively about the interior life, meditation, andpsychotherapy, Ken Wilber—the leading theorist in the field of integralpsychology—naturally arouses the curiosity of his numerous readers. Inresponse to this curiosity, this one-year diary not only offers anunprecedented entrée into his private world, but offers an introductionto his essential thought. "If there is a theme to this journal,"Wilber writes, "it is that body, mind, and the luminosities of thesoul—all are perfect expressions of the Radiant Spirit that alone inhabits theuniverse, sublime gestures of that Great Perfection that alone outshines theworld."
Wilber'spersonal writings include:
Detailsof his own spiritual practice Adviceto spiritual seekers Reflectionson his work and that of other prominent theorists in the field of integralpsychology Hisday-to-day personal experiences Dozensof his short theoretical essays on topics from art to feminism to spiritualityto psychotherapy369 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 1999
63 people are currently reading
582 people want to read
About the author
Ken Wilber
229 books1,252 followersKenneth Earl Wilber II is an American philosopher and writer on transpersonal psychology and his own integral theory, a systematic philosophy which suggests the synthesis of all human knowledge and experience.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 31 reviews
June 27, 2008
This review appeared in Parabola Magazine:
A half-century ago, Aldous Huxley described the domain of human consciousness as a vast and variegated province, "with regions in it exceedingly strange, regions which most of us, at most times don't penetrate at all." He lamented the sad state of psychology which, in his view, had only just begun to survey the terrain. While it had made some headway in mapping the realms of memory, fantasy, imagination and, in Jung's case, the symbols and archetypes that appear to be common to all human beings, it nevertheless ignored — even outright dismissed — the world of non-ordinary and transcendent consciousness. How could it be, Huxley wondered, that modern psychology has turned its back on metaphysical realities upon which entire contemplative traditions have been built?
In recent years, few thinkers and scholars have done as much to remedy that oversight — to bridge contemporary psychology and the mystic traditions of both East and West — as Ken Wilber. In a series of books written over the past two decades, Wilber has established himself as one of the most astute and comprehensive theorists of human consciousness, a penetrating thinker with a rare gift for absorbing, synthesizing, and categorizing ideas.
Almost completely self-educated, Wilber spends most of his time reading and writing at his home in Boulder, Colorado. His reluctance to teach, lecture, attend conferences, give interviews, or otherwise discuss his ideas in public, has led to considerable speculation about his personal life. While the mystique no doubt owes a thing or two to his publishers — for example, Random House got a lot of mileage out of the recent announcement that both Bill Clinton and Al Gore have been absorbed by his book, The Marriage of Sense and Soul — it seems only natural for readers to wonder about the man himself.
One Taste presents itself as a response to that interest. It's billed on the fly-leaf as "a diary of a year in the life of Ken Wilber" and an "unprecedented entree into his private world." What Wilber sets out to do, in effect, is offer a guided tour of his thoughts, ideas, and major works on the one hand, and to describe his day-to-day life on the other. The result is a curious melange — not quite a spiritual diary, not quite an annotated reader, not quite a philosophical journal, but something of all three.
The book works best as a series of trenchant reflections on American popular culture and, more broadly, our postmodern predicament at century's end. It also offers a unique angle on what Wilber sees as the emergence of an integral worldview or outlook in American society, one that revolves around the enduring truths of the perennial philosophy — that is, the transcendent unity at the core of the world's great wisdom traditions. Wilber estimates that as many as one percent of all Americans are now actively engaged in transformative spiritual practices, for example, and an even greater number are helping to define what he describes a new person-centered civil religion.
While these developments hold promise for the future, Wilber is disturbed by the "rampant anti-intellectualism" that prevails in many spiritual and countercultural circles today. He deplores the "regressive" impulse behind much of what passes for spirituality, especially the blossoming interest in nature mysticism, magic, ritual, and even mythology. Myths may have an important role to play in fostering an integral worldview, he says, but they are not transformative in the true sense of the word. As he puts it, we need to "stop confusing mythological stories with direct and immediate transpersonal awareness."
Wilber insists that we must always distinguish between the idea of transcendence and the actual experience of it. Much of the interest in spirituality today is based on symbols and ideas rather than actual practices. In his formulation, it promises "translation" — by redefining the world and conferring a sense of legitimacy — but not "transformation." Transformative spirituality is revolutionary, he asserts. "It does not legitimate the world, it breaks the world; it does not console the world, it shatters it. And it does not render the self content, it renders it undone."
While Wilber's philosophical and intellectual peregrinations are, almost without exception, provocative and illuminating, his accounts of his day-to-day life are less satisfying. We learn that he has a "sweet" and "adorable" girlfriend, but little about what gives the relationship depth or significance. We learn a thing or two about his daily routines (he typically gets up around 4 a.m., meditates for an hour, works non-stop until mid-afternoon, lifts weights, watches television, etc.) but little about the feelings and frustrations, the doubts and complications that give substance to his days. Friends and acquaintances come and go but rarely do we get any insight into how they are important to him. He discusses his meditations, his lucid dreams, his heightened moments of awareness, but always with a kind of uninspired matter-of-factness. If it's true that authentic transformation shatters the self and renders it undone, where is the evidence in his life?
Someone once observed that there are at bottom two kinds of writers, those who write what they know and those who write in order to know. Wilber clearly belongs to the former camp. His instincts are always explanatory rather than exploratory. His goal is always to reveal rather than discover. As such, his writing simply doesn't lend itself to compelling autobiography.
In fact, as a spiritual diary, the book has few of the qualities associated with the great works of the genre. Unlike Rousseau's Confessions or Montaigne's Essays, for example, it never reveals its author in undress. Unlike Baudelaire's Journaux Intimes, it offers no glimpses of obsession or brooding darkness. Unlike Krishnamurti's notebooks — and here the comparison is apt, for Wilber not only acknowledges a debt of gratitude to the great teacher but also aims in like fashion to bridge the worlds of philosophy and religion — there are no seamless transitions from the ordinary to the extraordinary, from the sight of birds or the sound to two lovers quarrelling to a spontaneous meditation on the human condition. In short, Wilber writes well about transcendence in the abstract, but not as a visceral reality.
Frithjof Schuon, another great expositor of the perennial philosophy, once remarked that "acuteness of intelligence is only a blessing when it is compensated by greatness and sweetness of the soul." While the acuteness of Ken Wilber's intelligence is evident on almost every page of One Taste, the book offers few if any insights into the quality of his soul. In view of his current stature as America's premier philosopher of consciousness, that is no minor shortcoming.
A half-century ago, Aldous Huxley described the domain of human consciousness as a vast and variegated province, "with regions in it exceedingly strange, regions which most of us, at most times don't penetrate at all." He lamented the sad state of psychology which, in his view, had only just begun to survey the terrain. While it had made some headway in mapping the realms of memory, fantasy, imagination and, in Jung's case, the symbols and archetypes that appear to be common to all human beings, it nevertheless ignored — even outright dismissed — the world of non-ordinary and transcendent consciousness. How could it be, Huxley wondered, that modern psychology has turned its back on metaphysical realities upon which entire contemplative traditions have been built?
In recent years, few thinkers and scholars have done as much to remedy that oversight — to bridge contemporary psychology and the mystic traditions of both East and West — as Ken Wilber. In a series of books written over the past two decades, Wilber has established himself as one of the most astute and comprehensive theorists of human consciousness, a penetrating thinker with a rare gift for absorbing, synthesizing, and categorizing ideas.
Almost completely self-educated, Wilber spends most of his time reading and writing at his home in Boulder, Colorado. His reluctance to teach, lecture, attend conferences, give interviews, or otherwise discuss his ideas in public, has led to considerable speculation about his personal life. While the mystique no doubt owes a thing or two to his publishers — for example, Random House got a lot of mileage out of the recent announcement that both Bill Clinton and Al Gore have been absorbed by his book, The Marriage of Sense and Soul — it seems only natural for readers to wonder about the man himself.
One Taste presents itself as a response to that interest. It's billed on the fly-leaf as "a diary of a year in the life of Ken Wilber" and an "unprecedented entree into his private world." What Wilber sets out to do, in effect, is offer a guided tour of his thoughts, ideas, and major works on the one hand, and to describe his day-to-day life on the other. The result is a curious melange — not quite a spiritual diary, not quite an annotated reader, not quite a philosophical journal, but something of all three.
The book works best as a series of trenchant reflections on American popular culture and, more broadly, our postmodern predicament at century's end. It also offers a unique angle on what Wilber sees as the emergence of an integral worldview or outlook in American society, one that revolves around the enduring truths of the perennial philosophy — that is, the transcendent unity at the core of the world's great wisdom traditions. Wilber estimates that as many as one percent of all Americans are now actively engaged in transformative spiritual practices, for example, and an even greater number are helping to define what he describes a new person-centered civil religion.
While these developments hold promise for the future, Wilber is disturbed by the "rampant anti-intellectualism" that prevails in many spiritual and countercultural circles today. He deplores the "regressive" impulse behind much of what passes for spirituality, especially the blossoming interest in nature mysticism, magic, ritual, and even mythology. Myths may have an important role to play in fostering an integral worldview, he says, but they are not transformative in the true sense of the word. As he puts it, we need to "stop confusing mythological stories with direct and immediate transpersonal awareness."
Wilber insists that we must always distinguish between the idea of transcendence and the actual experience of it. Much of the interest in spirituality today is based on symbols and ideas rather than actual practices. In his formulation, it promises "translation" — by redefining the world and conferring a sense of legitimacy — but not "transformation." Transformative spirituality is revolutionary, he asserts. "It does not legitimate the world, it breaks the world; it does not console the world, it shatters it. And it does not render the self content, it renders it undone."
While Wilber's philosophical and intellectual peregrinations are, almost without exception, provocative and illuminating, his accounts of his day-to-day life are less satisfying. We learn that he has a "sweet" and "adorable" girlfriend, but little about what gives the relationship depth or significance. We learn a thing or two about his daily routines (he typically gets up around 4 a.m., meditates for an hour, works non-stop until mid-afternoon, lifts weights, watches television, etc.) but little about the feelings and frustrations, the doubts and complications that give substance to his days. Friends and acquaintances come and go but rarely do we get any insight into how they are important to him. He discusses his meditations, his lucid dreams, his heightened moments of awareness, but always with a kind of uninspired matter-of-factness. If it's true that authentic transformation shatters the self and renders it undone, where is the evidence in his life?
Someone once observed that there are at bottom two kinds of writers, those who write what they know and those who write in order to know. Wilber clearly belongs to the former camp. His instincts are always explanatory rather than exploratory. His goal is always to reveal rather than discover. As such, his writing simply doesn't lend itself to compelling autobiography.
In fact, as a spiritual diary, the book has few of the qualities associated with the great works of the genre. Unlike Rousseau's Confessions or Montaigne's Essays, for example, it never reveals its author in undress. Unlike Baudelaire's Journaux Intimes, it offers no glimpses of obsession or brooding darkness. Unlike Krishnamurti's notebooks — and here the comparison is apt, for Wilber not only acknowledges a debt of gratitude to the great teacher but also aims in like fashion to bridge the worlds of philosophy and religion — there are no seamless transitions from the ordinary to the extraordinary, from the sight of birds or the sound to two lovers quarrelling to a spontaneous meditation on the human condition. In short, Wilber writes well about transcendence in the abstract, but not as a visceral reality.
Frithjof Schuon, another great expositor of the perennial philosophy, once remarked that "acuteness of intelligence is only a blessing when it is compensated by greatness and sweetness of the soul." While the acuteness of Ken Wilber's intelligence is evident on almost every page of One Taste, the book offers few if any insights into the quality of his soul. In view of his current stature as America's premier philosopher of consciousness, that is no minor shortcoming.
June 17, 2014
Its difficult to summarize a Wilber book. He’s definitely not for everyone.
He’s not for scientific materialists (He calls them ‘flatlanders’). But, He’s also definitely not for certain kinds of new-agers. (He thinks they’re regressive)
However, if you are interested in the integration of science, developmental-psychology, and Mysticism, Wilber might interest you. I think maybe people who enjoyed Fritjov Capra’s Tao of Physics, might enjoy a Wilber book. (Though Wilber is critical of Capra’s ideas) Also, perhaps people who enjoyed “The Monk and the Philospher” by Jean-Francois Revel and Matthieu Ricard, might enjoy Ken Wilber’s books.
One Taste is named for a metaphor for enlightenment. One Taste meaning, ‘awake’ to NonDuality. To use a Wilber quote “Flee the Many, find the One, Embrace the Many as the One.”
Just A few of Wilbers thought-provoking topics are:
1 The ‘pre/trans fallacy’ -- Wilber criticizes some new-agers for confusing self-esteem projects with spirituality. To Wilber getting ‘in touch with your feelings’ is not the same as ascending to spiritual-awareness. Wilber thinks new-agey, humanistic touchy-feely projects to improve the ‘self’ or self-esteem may be quite valuable, but they are not ‘trans-rational’ or transpersonal or spiritual. Instead they may be ‘pre-rational’. Authentic spirituality for Wilber is transcending feelings, through meditation, not getting in touch with feelings. Hence the pre/trans fallacy. Spirituality for Wilber is the destruction of the ‘self’ or ‘ego’ not the comforting of the ‘self’.
2. Wilber also sees reality as a ‘Great Chain of Being’. Or as he calls it a Great Nest of Being. He traces an ‘evolution’ of energy from ‘matter’ to ‘body’ to ‘mind’ to ‘soul’ to Nondual-spirit (One Taste). Humans, through consciousness can 'ascend' or 'descend' this ladder of complexity.
3 Wilber likes using the model of a ‘holarchy’. A ‘holon’ is both a ‘whole’ and a ‘part’ at the same time. Reality fits together in a ‘holarchy’. Atoms become Molecules, which become humans, etc. As each holon increases in complexity a ‘holarchy’ forms – each higher stage ‘transcending but including’ the lower stage. This ‘transcending but including’ notion can be found all through Wilber’s writing.
4 Wilber is interested in human development and one of his models describes the development from ‘egocentric’ (me, me, I, I) to, ‘ethnocentric’ (we, our tribe, our country, our race), to ‘worldcentric (all of us, all beings) to perhaps something beyond worldcentric.
5. Mysticism/Enlightenment/One Taste – Wilber describes what the experience of ‘One Taste’ or ‘enlightenment is like. He believes he has experienced this state directly as have many other wisdom-teachers throughout history. The experience can only be described using metaphors, obviously, and the book is full of those metaphors.
Basically Ken Wilber is a man who takes Mysticism and Science seriously. He’s also a man who likes to build models by either recognizing or creating connections between various schools of thought.
Wilber can be infuriating with his thoughts on politics and culture. He’s not particularly sensitive to ‘identity politics’ for example. He considers it ‘ethnocentric’ instead of ‘worldcentric’. Easy for a privileged white male to make such assertions :) I think he’s just a little bit too breezy in throwing terms like ‘victim mentality’ around.
If you are interested in Mysticism and Science and you take both seriously – Ken Wilber has to be invited to the conversation. I recommend One Taste as well as Grace and Grit, which was a more personal and poignant book by Wilber and his now-deceased wife Treya.
mark
He’s not for scientific materialists (He calls them ‘flatlanders’). But, He’s also definitely not for certain kinds of new-agers. (He thinks they’re regressive)
However, if you are interested in the integration of science, developmental-psychology, and Mysticism, Wilber might interest you. I think maybe people who enjoyed Fritjov Capra’s Tao of Physics, might enjoy a Wilber book. (Though Wilber is critical of Capra’s ideas) Also, perhaps people who enjoyed “The Monk and the Philospher” by Jean-Francois Revel and Matthieu Ricard, might enjoy Ken Wilber’s books.
One Taste is named for a metaphor for enlightenment. One Taste meaning, ‘awake’ to NonDuality. To use a Wilber quote “Flee the Many, find the One, Embrace the Many as the One.”
Just A few of Wilbers thought-provoking topics are:
1 The ‘pre/trans fallacy’ -- Wilber criticizes some new-agers for confusing self-esteem projects with spirituality. To Wilber getting ‘in touch with your feelings’ is not the same as ascending to spiritual-awareness. Wilber thinks new-agey, humanistic touchy-feely projects to improve the ‘self’ or self-esteem may be quite valuable, but they are not ‘trans-rational’ or transpersonal or spiritual. Instead they may be ‘pre-rational’. Authentic spirituality for Wilber is transcending feelings, through meditation, not getting in touch with feelings. Hence the pre/trans fallacy. Spirituality for Wilber is the destruction of the ‘self’ or ‘ego’ not the comforting of the ‘self’.
2. Wilber also sees reality as a ‘Great Chain of Being’. Or as he calls it a Great Nest of Being. He traces an ‘evolution’ of energy from ‘matter’ to ‘body’ to ‘mind’ to ‘soul’ to Nondual-spirit (One Taste). Humans, through consciousness can 'ascend' or 'descend' this ladder of complexity.
3 Wilber likes using the model of a ‘holarchy’. A ‘holon’ is both a ‘whole’ and a ‘part’ at the same time. Reality fits together in a ‘holarchy’. Atoms become Molecules, which become humans, etc. As each holon increases in complexity a ‘holarchy’ forms – each higher stage ‘transcending but including’ the lower stage. This ‘transcending but including’ notion can be found all through Wilber’s writing.
4 Wilber is interested in human development and one of his models describes the development from ‘egocentric’ (me, me, I, I) to, ‘ethnocentric’ (we, our tribe, our country, our race), to ‘worldcentric (all of us, all beings) to perhaps something beyond worldcentric.
5. Mysticism/Enlightenment/One Taste – Wilber describes what the experience of ‘One Taste’ or ‘enlightenment is like. He believes he has experienced this state directly as have many other wisdom-teachers throughout history. The experience can only be described using metaphors, obviously, and the book is full of those metaphors.
Basically Ken Wilber is a man who takes Mysticism and Science seriously. He’s also a man who likes to build models by either recognizing or creating connections between various schools of thought.
Wilber can be infuriating with his thoughts on politics and culture. He’s not particularly sensitive to ‘identity politics’ for example. He considers it ‘ethnocentric’ instead of ‘worldcentric’. Easy for a privileged white male to make such assertions :) I think he’s just a little bit too breezy in throwing terms like ‘victim mentality’ around.
If you are interested in Mysticism and Science and you take both seriously – Ken Wilber has to be invited to the conversation. I recommend One Taste as well as Grace and Grit, which was a more personal and poignant book by Wilber and his now-deceased wife Treya.
mark
October 30, 2011
Anyone familiar with recent literature on the spiritual life will have heard of Ken Wilber. The so-called "Einstein of consciousness" (the title ascribed to him, quite self-servingly, by his then literary agent), is one of the few people in his field who can actually make a living on book sales alone. With some two dozen tomes to his name--the first written at the tender age of twenty-four (and still in print)--he is pretty much the name in consciousness studies, maps of reality, and anything having to do with the so-called Perennial Philosophy. One Taste is his only book organized in a day-to-day, journal format.
Wilber says in the intro that "as someone who has written extensively about the interior life, it seemed appropriate...to share mine" (p. vii). But he goes on to say that the book's contents will be "a philosophical more than personal journal..." The text pretty much lives up to Wilber's billing: it's a mix of personal and philosophical reflections, perhaps one third the former and two-thirds the latter, organized by the passing months and days. The year covered is 1997, from January 2, until New Year's day of '98. And, as you would expect from a Ken Wilber book, it is nothing if not stimulating.
Wilber's essential thesis, not only for this book but characterizing his work in general, is found in a summary given on pages 14ff, originally written by Jack Crittenden in a forward to Wilber's The Eye of Spirit. Crittenden notes Wilber's attempt to discover "orienting generalizations"--truths that can be agreed upon as fundamental by multiple worldviews--and which Wilber then uses to build into a unified system, the goal being to incorporate as many of these "truths" as possible. The purpose of this system, this "integral vision" as KW would call it, is to describe the full spectrum of human spiritual and material consciousness.
It is a massively ambitious and bold undertaking, and for the newbie to Wilber's world, One Taste represents an excellent starting point. Following are a few of the subjects KW tackles, to varying depths, during the course of the book:
-Christopher Isherwood's role in introducing Eastern religion to Westerners;
-the journey to publication of his book The Marriage of Sense and Soul (1999);
-translative vs. transformational spirituality;
-the Great Chain of Being;
-feedback on his book Grace and Grit (1991);
-discussions on One Taste, enlightenment, cosmic consciousness, etc;
-the pre/trans fallacy;
-his four quadrant "theory of everything";
-the cultural and developmental rise of consciousness, from sensory motor to mystical "nondual";
-UFO abductions and astrology;
-sex and spirituality;
-the kitchen sink.
In other words, quite a lot!
You have to remember though that this is in no way an attempt at a systematic discussion of any of these subjects; Wilber might go on for five pages on a single topic, then veer off on something totally unrelated. Still, he almost always gives you enough to chew on so there's really no excuse for any reader to go away feeling unsatisfied (meaning unstimulated), though this is not to say anyone is going to agree with everything he says.
Nor is it to say that KW, for all his prolificness, is always the best of writers. At times I was tempted to choke or laugh outloud at his linguistic excesses. Consider the following:
"Let it start right here, right now, with us--with you and with me--and with our commitment to breathe into infinity until infinity alone is the only statement that the world will recognize. Let a radical [Wilber loves this word] realization shine from our faces, and roar from our hearts, and thunder from our brains--this simple fact, this obvious fact: that you, in the very immediateness of your present awareness, are in fact the entire world, in all its frost and fever, in all its glories and its grace, in all its triumphs and its tears. You do not see the sun, you are the sun; you do not hear the rain, you are the rain; you do not feel the earth, you are the earth..." (p. 35)
Like it? Want more?
"Even the smallest glimmer of One Taste and you will never be the same. You will inhale galaxies with every breath and sleep as the stars all night. Suns and moons nd glorious novas will rush and rumble through your veins, your heart will pulse and beat in time with the entire loving universe. And you will never move at all in this radiant display of your very own Self, for you will long ago have disappeared into the fullness of the night.
"Friday, December 12
"Tomorrow Marci gives her thesis presentation and defense. Then there is a big celebration for the graduates. This is the start of the party season" (p. 320).
Indeed.
Wilber's at times bombastic, magniloquent, ostentatious, aureate flights of rhetoric--for they are that, and full of ideological certainty--are (I suspect) symptomatic of an underlying narcissism, a narcisissism most painfully displayed in a letter to his friend, Huston Smith (pp. 22ff). This passage made me cringe. Here the great theorist was, writing a letter to a cancer-afflicted friend, and yet somehow the letter became more about KW than about his friend. Embarrassing!
What I'm trying to get at here is at the heart of the problem I have with Ken Wilber. It's not that I don't applaud his endeavor--his project is worth every minute he's poured into it--but ultimately a thought system can only be as good as its thinker. And when you are trying to describe the summum bonum of the spiritual quest, Enlightenment--well, you better be a pretty damn good thinker. You better know the terrain pretty well, and know it by experience. Wilber seems to think he does--he goes on at length about his meditation experiences, and yet there is no sense of how these have changed him as a human being. How have they made him better? His humanity is strangely absent from the book's pages; ideas abound, but what about the man himself? We don't get much that isn't self-advertising, even self-congratulatory.
There is also a criticism I have as regards his understanding of Buddhism, which is very definitely prejudiced in favor of the Mahayana and Vajrayana, and against the Theravada. But I do not get the sense he is acquainted with, much less understands, the Pali Suttas. He talks about the historical Buddha, but in Wilber's scheme the Theravadan teachings (the closest we can get to the Master himself) are identified with "formless mysticism," or the "causal" as KW refers to it. He even equates nirvana with nirvikalpa samadhi, a totally unjustifiable assessment, and a clear example of distorting the data to fit your theory--the classic fallacy of the pundit who has overreached himself. This is an issue I wish to take up in greater detail, but a book review is not the place for it.
In the end, I can only say that Ken Wilber--and One Taste--is an exuberant, even over-abundant offering of ideas. He/it is certainly worth the time and the frustration, the ah-hah moments and the gnashing of teeth. You will get your money's worth here, and certainly more.
Wilber says in the intro that "as someone who has written extensively about the interior life, it seemed appropriate...to share mine" (p. vii). But he goes on to say that the book's contents will be "a philosophical more than personal journal..." The text pretty much lives up to Wilber's billing: it's a mix of personal and philosophical reflections, perhaps one third the former and two-thirds the latter, organized by the passing months and days. The year covered is 1997, from January 2, until New Year's day of '98. And, as you would expect from a Ken Wilber book, it is nothing if not stimulating.
Wilber's essential thesis, not only for this book but characterizing his work in general, is found in a summary given on pages 14ff, originally written by Jack Crittenden in a forward to Wilber's The Eye of Spirit. Crittenden notes Wilber's attempt to discover "orienting generalizations"--truths that can be agreed upon as fundamental by multiple worldviews--and which Wilber then uses to build into a unified system, the goal being to incorporate as many of these "truths" as possible. The purpose of this system, this "integral vision" as KW would call it, is to describe the full spectrum of human spiritual and material consciousness.
It is a massively ambitious and bold undertaking, and for the newbie to Wilber's world, One Taste represents an excellent starting point. Following are a few of the subjects KW tackles, to varying depths, during the course of the book:
-Christopher Isherwood's role in introducing Eastern religion to Westerners;
-the journey to publication of his book The Marriage of Sense and Soul (1999);
-translative vs. transformational spirituality;
-the Great Chain of Being;
-feedback on his book Grace and Grit (1991);
-discussions on One Taste, enlightenment, cosmic consciousness, etc;
-the pre/trans fallacy;
-his four quadrant "theory of everything";
-the cultural and developmental rise of consciousness, from sensory motor to mystical "nondual";
-UFO abductions and astrology;
-sex and spirituality;
-the kitchen sink.
In other words, quite a lot!
You have to remember though that this is in no way an attempt at a systematic discussion of any of these subjects; Wilber might go on for five pages on a single topic, then veer off on something totally unrelated. Still, he almost always gives you enough to chew on so there's really no excuse for any reader to go away feeling unsatisfied (meaning unstimulated), though this is not to say anyone is going to agree with everything he says.
Nor is it to say that KW, for all his prolificness, is always the best of writers. At times I was tempted to choke or laugh outloud at his linguistic excesses. Consider the following:
"Let it start right here, right now, with us--with you and with me--and with our commitment to breathe into infinity until infinity alone is the only statement that the world will recognize. Let a radical [Wilber loves this word] realization shine from our faces, and roar from our hearts, and thunder from our brains--this simple fact, this obvious fact: that you, in the very immediateness of your present awareness, are in fact the entire world, in all its frost and fever, in all its glories and its grace, in all its triumphs and its tears. You do not see the sun, you are the sun; you do not hear the rain, you are the rain; you do not feel the earth, you are the earth..." (p. 35)
Like it? Want more?
"Even the smallest glimmer of One Taste and you will never be the same. You will inhale galaxies with every breath and sleep as the stars all night. Suns and moons nd glorious novas will rush and rumble through your veins, your heart will pulse and beat in time with the entire loving universe. And you will never move at all in this radiant display of your very own Self, for you will long ago have disappeared into the fullness of the night.
"Friday, December 12
"Tomorrow Marci gives her thesis presentation and defense. Then there is a big celebration for the graduates. This is the start of the party season" (p. 320).
Indeed.
Wilber's at times bombastic, magniloquent, ostentatious, aureate flights of rhetoric--for they are that, and full of ideological certainty--are (I suspect) symptomatic of an underlying narcissism, a narcisissism most painfully displayed in a letter to his friend, Huston Smith (pp. 22ff). This passage made me cringe. Here the great theorist was, writing a letter to a cancer-afflicted friend, and yet somehow the letter became more about KW than about his friend. Embarrassing!
What I'm trying to get at here is at the heart of the problem I have with Ken Wilber. It's not that I don't applaud his endeavor--his project is worth every minute he's poured into it--but ultimately a thought system can only be as good as its thinker. And when you are trying to describe the summum bonum of the spiritual quest, Enlightenment--well, you better be a pretty damn good thinker. You better know the terrain pretty well, and know it by experience. Wilber seems to think he does--he goes on at length about his meditation experiences, and yet there is no sense of how these have changed him as a human being. How have they made him better? His humanity is strangely absent from the book's pages; ideas abound, but what about the man himself? We don't get much that isn't self-advertising, even self-congratulatory.
There is also a criticism I have as regards his understanding of Buddhism, which is very definitely prejudiced in favor of the Mahayana and Vajrayana, and against the Theravada. But I do not get the sense he is acquainted with, much less understands, the Pali Suttas. He talks about the historical Buddha, but in Wilber's scheme the Theravadan teachings (the closest we can get to the Master himself) are identified with "formless mysticism," or the "causal" as KW refers to it. He even equates nirvana with nirvikalpa samadhi, a totally unjustifiable assessment, and a clear example of distorting the data to fit your theory--the classic fallacy of the pundit who has overreached himself. This is an issue I wish to take up in greater detail, but a book review is not the place for it.
In the end, I can only say that Ken Wilber--and One Taste--is an exuberant, even over-abundant offering of ideas. He/it is certainly worth the time and the frustration, the ah-hah moments and the gnashing of teeth. You will get your money's worth here, and certainly more.
May 26, 2018
Repetitive at times, boring at other times, sometimes over my head. And brilliant. Some real gems here, some of which I may only realize much further down the road.
May 10, 2018
This is the third Ken Wilber book I've read, and while Wilber's teachings have profoundly influenced my thinking and while I'll continue to study his work and apply his integral theory to my own teaching--that is to say, I admire the man greatly, I've finally put my finger on why I also intensely dislike him. He's an egotistical jerk. He himself is a great example of what he describes happening in the great wisdom traditions, which emphasize the cognitive and spiritual streams of consciousness while neglecting other streams like emotional, interpersonal, and relational. So he's human. I think of two trajectories in the spiritual life--one upward, through practice and personal growth toward unitive consciousness, and the other downward, into our bodies and relationships and the sin and grit of our humanity where love ultimately resides, at least in the created world. Wilber's great with the first; he fails at the second. But he's a genius at creating systems to understand the whole of development, evolutionary, individual, and communal, and for this I'll keep reading.
"Authentic transformation is not a matter of belief but of the death of the believer; not a matter of translating the world but of transforming the world; not a matter of finding solace but of finding infinity on the other side of death."
--Ken Wilber, One Taste 27
"Authentic transformation is not a matter of belief but of the death of the believer; not a matter of translating the world but of transforming the world; not a matter of finding solace but of finding infinity on the other side of death."
--Ken Wilber, One Taste 27
April 10, 2008
wilber is a bit of an egomaniac and a snob. it is totally engaging at certain moments, and to tumble some of his better philosphical nuggets about in one's brain is a pleasure and a great encouragement to those who cannot sit for 7 hours a day in meditation.
he writes in an utterly self conscious and preachy manner in these purported journals. but i don't know many people writing about integrating the various eastern and western consciousness studies into something whole and inclusive, so i'll let it slide.
he writes in an utterly self conscious and preachy manner in these purported journals. but i don't know many people writing about integrating the various eastern and western consciousness studies into something whole and inclusive, so i'll let it slide.
May 12, 2013
Поразительная книга, которая способна произвести переворот в сознании читателя в отношении того, ЧТО и КАК возможно делать со своей жизнью и КАКИМИ СМЫСЛАМИ её наполнять. Через эту книгу можно заглянуть в самое сердце интегральной теории и практики в лице её ведущего основателя Кена Уилбера, а также соприкоснуться с невероятно точным пониманием духовных состояний сознания, которое впоследствии будет служить путеводной картой на духовном пути.
March 2, 2009
I have heard of Wilber for so long I thought, o.k I'll try him out. But WOW he really is a bit of an ego maniac, all the while saying he's not. I'm super curious about his other writings because he does seem to be a bit brilliant, but don't know if I can handle the meism. I may finish this. I may not. currently I'm too bored to think about it.
May 9, 2024
My strange fascination with Ken Wilber continues. To date, I cannot say that I have particularly enjoyed reading much of his work, but I still find a number of his ideas interesting and even useful in thinking about the human condition in a holistic, syncretic way. I also admire (and perhaps even envy) the life he made for himself, writing about Big Ideas, holding intellectual salons with luminaries, and not having to work for The Man to make ends meet while doing it.
My main problem with Wilber himself is that he does not write as though he wants his core ideas to be understood. Reading page after page of his tortured phrasing, name dropping, and endless jargon is so fatiguing that I am left with the impression that he wants to overwhelm his reader into simply taking his word for it ... if the reader can make head or tail of what that word is. I hoped that the daily journal style of One Taste would find Wilber in a more reader-friendly form, and that is partly true, depending on what page you're on.
Wilber seems to have several distinct gears he shifts into as a writer. I would describe them as wilber-1, wilber-2, and so on, but the author himself has already adopted those terms to describe the development of his own work. At any rate, in what I am tempted to call his I'm just Ken gear, Wilber can be quite accessible when he is talking about his day-to-day life, various aspects of art and popular culture (although certainly not always), or is in conversation with another human being he isn't trying to lord over. The condensed interview from the Shambala Sun (published in September 1996 but included as the December 18, 1997, entry for some reason) is perhaps the single best example I have seen of Wilber expressing his ideas to someone clearly, with a minimum of his usual over-the-top flair, and it alone probably added at least half a star to my rating.
But Wilber sadly spends most of his time in other gears while writing. One of those is his purple prose gear, which he shifts into much of the time when he describes whatever enlightened state he's in:
Another favorite gear of his is what I'd call his academic philosophy gear, which mimics the intellectually masturbatory, magniloquent style of the single most tedious and inscrutable form of prose to read outside of patent applications. The odd thing is that Wilber himself hates encountering this in others' writing, as he mentions here without a hint of irony:
As other reviewers have pointed out, there is a great deal of repetition in the book. The same ideas come up over and over again, and it is unclear if Wilber is writing them in his journal for his own benefit or for an eventual intended audience. But they do land at least a little differently each time, and while that is not the same as getting an independent perspective on Wilber's ideas (such as in Lew Howard's Introducing Ken Wilber: Concepts for an Evolving World, to date my favorite treatment of Wilber's work), it is at least interesting to get a different take on them from Wilber himself, however slight the difference.
But Wilber has plenty that is genuinely interesting and insightful to say, if you can pan for the gold among the silt. For all the difficulty I've had connecting to his work, I am left with the feeling that he's definitely on to something. But that feeling is complicated by the deep sense that he is also partly full of shit. Interestingly, that touches at the heart of Wilber's syncretic approach, which holds that all of the world's great spiritual and intellectual traditions are on to something ... and they're also partly full of shit. If Wilber put in the work to try to make sense of it all, maybe the least I can do is check in on him from time to time to see what he came up with.
My main problem with Wilber himself is that he does not write as though he wants his core ideas to be understood. Reading page after page of his tortured phrasing, name dropping, and endless jargon is so fatiguing that I am left with the impression that he wants to overwhelm his reader into simply taking his word for it ... if the reader can make head or tail of what that word is. I hoped that the daily journal style of One Taste would find Wilber in a more reader-friendly form, and that is partly true, depending on what page you're on.
Wilber seems to have several distinct gears he shifts into as a writer. I would describe them as wilber-1, wilber-2, and so on, but the author himself has already adopted those terms to describe the development of his own work. At any rate, in what I am tempted to call his I'm just Ken gear, Wilber can be quite accessible when he is talking about his day-to-day life, various aspects of art and popular culture (although certainly not always), or is in conversation with another human being he isn't trying to lord over. The condensed interview from the Shambala Sun (published in September 1996 but included as the December 18, 1997, entry for some reason) is perhaps the single best example I have seen of Wilber expressing his ideas to someone clearly, with a minimum of his usual over-the-top flair, and it alone probably added at least half a star to my rating.
But Wilber sadly spends most of his time in other gears while writing. One of those is his purple prose gear, which he shifts into much of the time when he describes whatever enlightened state he's in:
The world arises quietly this morning, shimmering on a radiant sea of transparent Emptiness. There is only this, vast, open, empty, clear, nakedly luminous. All questions dissolve in this single Answer, all doubts resolve in this single Shout, all worries are a ripple on this Sea of equanimity.This is fine from time to time, but there is a lot of it throughout this book.
Another favorite gear of his is what I'd call his academic philosophy gear, which mimics the intellectually masturbatory, magniloquent style of the single most tedious and inscrutable form of prose to read outside of patent applications. The odd thing is that Wilber himself hates encountering this in others' writing, as he mentions here without a hint of irony:
[The] style is ponderously indecipherable; you can read entire chapters possessing not a single understandable sentence; the prose suffocates you with insignificance. The best it gets up to is a type of rancid torpor, where the prose drags its belly across the gray page, always on the verge of a near-life experience.Once Wilber picks a gear, he tends to stay in it for the remainder of that day's entry, which can make for exhausting reading when it stretches on for page after page.
As other reviewers have pointed out, there is a great deal of repetition in the book. The same ideas come up over and over again, and it is unclear if Wilber is writing them in his journal for his own benefit or for an eventual intended audience. But they do land at least a little differently each time, and while that is not the same as getting an independent perspective on Wilber's ideas (such as in Lew Howard's Introducing Ken Wilber: Concepts for an Evolving World, to date my favorite treatment of Wilber's work), it is at least interesting to get a different take on them from Wilber himself, however slight the difference.
But Wilber has plenty that is genuinely interesting and insightful to say, if you can pan for the gold among the silt. For all the difficulty I've had connecting to his work, I am left with the feeling that he's definitely on to something. But that feeling is complicated by the deep sense that he is also partly full of shit. Interestingly, that touches at the heart of Wilber's syncretic approach, which holds that all of the world's great spiritual and intellectual traditions are on to something ... and they're also partly full of shit. If Wilber put in the work to try to make sense of it all, maybe the least I can do is check in on him from time to time to see what he came up with.
February 28, 2023
I view "One Taste" as the best "intro to Ken Wilber" for those who never read any of his work. One Taste is lighter than his other work as it is written in the form of a daily journal. This gives you the added benefit of a window into the way Wilber and other writers think and put their thought together into a book (for the aspiring writer in you)
As a few already noted, Ken Wilber is not for everyone. He in fact admits that in his own writing. Moreover, true enlightenment (One Taste) is not for everyone and in his books Wilber likes to evaluate the percentage of the population who can theoretically achieve true form in the fraction of a percent of the population. Wilber was not the first to quantify this. In fact most of us know the Maslow theory reflected in his pyramid of needs. The tip of the pyramid is where Wilber stands along with very few truly enlightened folks (Think the Buddha, Krishnamurti, Jesus, etc.)
It took me almost 10 years to fully comprehend his Integral Theory. As fate goes, I was handed his first book randomly during a hike in Croatia. If you are looking for a quick fix, self help book, Wilber is not for you. As the zen saying goes "One must seek enlightenment like One whose hair is on fire seeks a pond" Wilber's Integral Theory takes years to practice and adopt. For those already on the path, Wilber's work functions as the evidence you always knew existed but didn't know how to put in words. Wilber eloquently puts it all into words with the best evidence in existence to support it. Evidence that he painstakingly collected from cultures all over the course of human history. This is the true power of Wilber. Like Alan Watts, he is a fountain of knowledge.
As a few already noted, Ken Wilber is not for everyone. He in fact admits that in his own writing. Moreover, true enlightenment (One Taste) is not for everyone and in his books Wilber likes to evaluate the percentage of the population who can theoretically achieve true form in the fraction of a percent of the population. Wilber was not the first to quantify this. In fact most of us know the Maslow theory reflected in his pyramid of needs. The tip of the pyramid is where Wilber stands along with very few truly enlightened folks (Think the Buddha, Krishnamurti, Jesus, etc.)
It took me almost 10 years to fully comprehend his Integral Theory. As fate goes, I was handed his first book randomly during a hike in Croatia. If you are looking for a quick fix, self help book, Wilber is not for you. As the zen saying goes "One must seek enlightenment like One whose hair is on fire seeks a pond" Wilber's Integral Theory takes years to practice and adopt. For those already on the path, Wilber's work functions as the evidence you always knew existed but didn't know how to put in words. Wilber eloquently puts it all into words with the best evidence in existence to support it. Evidence that he painstakingly collected from cultures all over the course of human history. This is the true power of Wilber. Like Alan Watts, he is a fountain of knowledge.
June 20, 2017
Excellent series of essays by Ken Wilbur, wherein he explains it all, with a personal twist.
September 4, 2017
Awakening can happen to anyone at anytime and that the persons awakening will reflect their growth up to that point.
Ken Wilber
Ken Wilber
February 16, 2024
Interesting of course, but had an egotistical flavor I didn't care for, unlike his other works. Perhaps it was just a phase. His intellect shines and astonishes in every one of his works, however.
November 27, 2007
I find Integral Studies quite fascinating, however I am not a
deep analytical type. I figured Ken's journal would be a painless way to understand more about this perspective and also learn what his daily reality looks like. If not absorbing his ideas
I'd at least have exposure to an alternate lifestyle.
Naturally his journal includes his thoughts and opinions as the days go by. Also included are interviews to help get the "normal" questions answered about Integral Studies.
deep analytical type. I figured Ken's journal would be a painless way to understand more about this perspective and also learn what his daily reality looks like. If not absorbing his ideas
I'd at least have exposure to an alternate lifestyle.
Naturally his journal includes his thoughts and opinions as the days go by. Also included are interviews to help get the "normal" questions answered about Integral Studies.
February 24, 2008
Ken Wilber kept a journal for a year and this is the result. Worth it just for his illuminating descriptions of his meditative experiences. During a 12 day period he maintained constant consiousness through the waking state, dream state and right into deep dreamless, formlessness and back again each 24 hours. Mind blowing, ever wondered what that's like then check this out. The desriptions of non-duality offered by many of todays so called modern neo-adviatist teachers pale in comparison.
November 10, 2014
I keep this book with me. While traveling or having retreated to my home - this book is seldom far from mind and never out of reach. Both informative and inspirational - entertaining and a guiding star - remembrance of that of me I know by heart and find I have forgotten again and again. Forgotten and so pleased to revisit and so to remember, if only to forget again. Treasures misplaced but not lost in the sense that to forget in part is not the same as to have ever completely forgotten.
March 27, 2016
I have no hesitation in saying that this is the most consequential book I've ever read. It's content is essential knowledge for anyone who wants an understanding of the Kosmos. Ken Wilber is a genius and without a doubt one the most consequential, if not the most consequential, writers/philosophers of the last two centuries. Read this book!
August 4, 2008
Ken Wilber is an incredible intellectual and author. He is a great source for those of us who enjoy exploring the crossroads between philosophy, science, and spirituality.
This book is a journal from a portion of WIlber's life. It gets into the practical application of integral living.
This book is a journal from a portion of WIlber's life. It gets into the practical application of integral living.
December 2, 2008
I liked this book even though it is essentially a year of journals. Insightful without being too drug out on certain points. Plus him talking of his girlfriend's nipple piercings as "towel racks" was rather amusing.
August 18, 2010
....when you contract the virus of living beautifully, truly, and consciously than you understand why Ken Wilber keeps on witting about integrity.....he presents how it is possible to live on this earth in peace with ourselves and with others.....not easy read but of great importance
August 10, 2016
Ja ir sanācis lasīt Ken Wilber darbus, tad šī grāmata var būt lielisks papildinājums. Būtībā tā ir Kena dienasgrāmata, kur viņš sniedz ieskatu gan savā ikdienā, gan arī caur intervijām, kritikām un cita veida iestarpinājumiem apraksta integrālas dzīves ideoloģiju.
July 29, 2008
a look into the private studies and private life of Ken Wilber, a fascinating modern intellectual.
December 18, 2008
A great insight into the personal and spiritual life of one Americas wisest people.
January 4, 2009
GOOD START TO UNDERSTANDING KEN WILBER'S WORK AND HIS UNDERSTANSING AND VISION OF THE TRANSPERSONAL
August 31, 2010
A look into the life a genius.
June 13, 2012
It's interested to see how Ken Wilber's theorietical framework is evident in his daily experience.
January 6, 2013
Wilber's personal experiences of the deeper states of meditation in particular are interesting to read
September 1, 2013
A great beginner book.
March 18, 2015
I think most books of Wilber is just like trash.
September 23, 2015
Wilber gets incredibly technical and jargon-y in some sections (which I chose to skip, generally) but overall I found the text to be educational, inspirational, and very positive.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 31 reviews