Ep. 48 - Awakening from the Meaning Crisis - Corbin and the Divine Double

New videos released every Friday.
Podcast Links:
•Anchor: anchor.fm/john-vervaeke
•Google Podcasts: www.google.com/podcasts?feed=...
•Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/43gIWKV...
•Breaker: www.breaker.audio/awakening-f...
•Pocket Casts: pca.st/EYU4
•RadioPublic: radiopublic.com/awakening-fro...
Books in the Video:
-
Series Playlist: kzbin.info?list...
Facebook: / vervaeke.john
Twitter: / vervaeke_john
Forty-eighth episode of Dr. John Vervaeke's Awakening from the Meaning Crisis.

[@johnvervaeke]

There will be a live Q&A today at 1500 EST. You get get priority for your questions as a benefit for your support at patreon.com/johnvervaeke. Join me today!

[@buddhaofthebasin5600]

The axial age is nonsense. The center of the wheel is stillness. Shunyata. All begins and ends in the mystery of the Implicate Order. Ours is not a density of understanding. Suffering & disatisfaction as in a lack of sati comes from forgetfulness of our true identity. Truly we have no identity apart from the one infinite creator. All is God’s mind. God is thinking all. Om.

[@TheSurfingCat]

You could say that this series of lectures is itself a symbol for awakening. It's difficult to follow, requires deep thought, understanding, testing things against your own experiences and both learning new things and going back in history to study the evolution of thought and meaning. Just as you think maybe you understand, a new level of complexity is revealed and you're back to square one. It's hard going, but as things draw to a close several recurring themes are starting to crop up and the many seemingly divergent topics and concepts loop back around and touch on each other. We're all spiralling up towards a higher understanding of ourselves and our world. It's been a really wild ride. I've learned a lot, learned how to learn, but also learned that there is a lot more to learn. Something has been set in motion as a result of following this series that I suspect will continue long after it concludes. Thank you John, it's been amazing to share in this experience.

[@johnvervaeke]

Thank you Tim for your very gracious comment. It is much appreciated.

[@shamanverse]

The generosity and genius of this excellent teacher... muchas gracias.

[@mathewhill5556]

Well, now I have to put my mind back together. These lectures should come with a warning *"will* *make* *head* *explode."*

[@dalibofurnell]

Almost nearing the end of the series now, my goodness has been such a tremendous gift. You are an incredible person, setting a great example for many including myself. I still find it stunning, how you have gifted this course. You are generous and kind, you are caring, honest and thorough. This course is like an experience- more than just some course- it is a life changing and developing growth experience- it borders on having no words to describe it. John you have added so much to my life, I will never forget the profound impact you have. I think I could even write up a long essay of a tremendous testimony I have yet to tell, from this experience. You have had a significant Impact in so many ways- and it has been a healthy and positive and mind opening one- that has enriched my life and understanding . I could go on.This very course is enlightening. May you be blessed, Sir!

[@mavoca-frngrk]

The topic of aspiration discussed in this lecture evokes a quote by Anthony de Mello, a Jesuit priest, who said, "Meaning is only found when you go beyond meaning." The in-depth exploration of relevance realization in this lecture series is like embarking on a four-dimensional journey. I express my heartfelt gratitude for the dedicated commitment to this extensive lecture series. Each lecture seamlessly connected to the next, skillfully capturing the big picture in a powerful and cohesive manner. Thank you so much John!!

[@Beederda]

I appreciate YOUR Time JV ❤️🍄

[@ThePathOfEudaimonia]

It's one of my thrilling fantasies to imagine Spinoza being alive today exposed to all the modern scientific and philosophical insights, and playing a role in the discussion of these subjects. I can imagine he could have played a hugely interesting role, but we will never know.

[@badreddine.elfejer]

"Narrative gives us something to practice" 👍🏽👍🏽

[@jeffr4475]

These past episodes have made me realize that I have a lot of reading, concentration, and contemplation to do. Thank you, Professor Vervaeke!

[@realsushrey]

Its good that there is another series after this now, otherwise I would have been rather sad that I am nearing the end of this.

[@mdmh9999]

Thanks John and team. Looking forward to the book.

[@justinbirkholz7814]

I'm so glad you didn't shy away from bringing up the angel and the divine double. Most people may be turned off by that kind of terminology because they have really silly conceptions of things like angels and demons. I was thrilled. I had an idea that you might be building towards this concept throughout the series since you kept circling back to aspiration. The Holy Guardian Angel is central to occultism, and aspiring towards it the whole point of the Great Work.

[@conornagle9528]

So happy to hear you articulate the Corbin and Jung criticism of fundamentalism and literalism (while not throwing the baby out with the bath water).

[@stephenlaswell4341]

“What am I? Where have I come from? And to what end? This feeling that I am nothing without a ‘not I’ which is at the same time my own being, IS the religious feeling. What part of me is I, and what part ‘not I’?” - Feuerbach

[@kylefowler]

Love where this is going! Thanks for this incredible series Mr. Vervaeke.

[@danielfoliaco3873]

This is the ULTIMATE Nostalgia.

[@merlinx8703]

It is important to note that the Persian Sufis were always devout Muslims

[@johnmadany9829]

There was more inkling than understanding today.

[@5hydroxyT]

well, i feel better about the aimless meanderings of my first few years of university now...especially since i’m back at it over 20 years later!

[@simka321]

The opponent processing of accommodation/assimilation according to the Fourth Way: “A man meets his life most poignantly in moments of painful contraction and expansion. At those moments he senses the difference between being present and being taken. If he keeps himself open to the question, he will move in what he believes is a fruitful direction." ~ William Segal

[@andrewdempster9001]

Angels and the divine double bring the work of William Blake to mind

[@82472tclt]

Oh good!! I’ve been looking forward to this one!

[@danielsusser1]

well I don't know about everyone else but I definitely say the word 'affords' much more than I did when I started at episode 1

[@jmeelallen7635]

Incredible lecture. Thanks John.

[@hollycamara8007]

If anyone needs a transcript we've made them for this & all episodes here: www.meaningcrisis.co/ep-48-awakening-from-the-meaning-crisis-corbin-and-the-divine-double/

[@jcsm1951]

I am a patron. I am reading The Gospel of Thomas (from Nag Hammadi find) and he is referred to as the twin of Jesus. Implication is that we are all twins of Jesus. This seems in alignment with Corbin's thinking. You point to how all great thinkers seem to be arriving at similar ideas and this is just one more support. Would like to hear your thoughts on this. I have studied (and continue to study as these ideas are so radical my brain is spinning) Thomas and Mary Madeline. They are saying something very different than Mathew, Luke, John and Paul. Fascinating. Talk about walking around in awe and wonder!!!!!

[@talonward2494]

The gesturing at 38:54 entirely sums up my feelings about this lecture series.

[@psmitty6790]

Johnny Anagage is from Hamilton? I thought he seemed like a Ti-Cats fan! 😂 Prof. Vervaeke I love you.

[@janurbanek1127]

As all the lectures, I feel like I am learning a lot and I also feel how much I do not know 😅

[@ThinkBigAnimation]

Had to pause at episode 13. Now I can't wait to binge all of these!

[@dsuleyma]

No way! I hope you're planning to continue your animations of this series.

[@ThinkBigAnimation]

@@dsuleyma Thanks for saying so. I will be doing a couple more... but I think there just hasn't been enough engagement for me to keep going. I did really enjoy doing them and hope I could at least introduce a few people to John's work.

[@floriansebastianfitz2697]

I think we do have a deep implicit understanding about this even though most of us are not aware of it and I think this is most obvious in our language when we symbolically refer to somebody as an „angel“. Because what we mean when we say „he/she’s an angel“ is not that the person is some sort of imaginary mythical creature with wings on its back and all that but rather that he/she is living up to his/her divine double, let’s say. That the person - like the rose - is blossoming into a more an more „angelic“, divine, fully realized version of themselves. We recognize this in other people. At least implicitly. It‘s not merely that they are good, sweet, kind, just, moral and so on. It‘s way more than that. It‘s deeper than that.

[@marykochan8962]

I experience the rose as a gift and I experience that I can receive such a gift as a gift. It is always very hard (why am I getting teary as I say this?) to put into words how I experience the world, but surrounded by Angels works as well as any other words. And I don't mean the new agey kind either.

[@marykochan8962]

@Praxis Of Logos the world just always seems to be so alive to me. Unless I am in the middle of a big city.

[@marykochan8962]

@Praxis Of Logos okay, edited for clarity. Peace

[@marykochan8962]

@Praxis Of Logos click on the icon next to my name and you will go to my channel and you can see for yourself.

[@dorothydeyev9240]

Loved this. It's beginning to feel like it makes sense now. These CogSci concepts haven't been at all easy to grasp. I've had to sleep on most of these ideas to let them sink in on their own time, and then return to see how much I really understood. Those aha moments of actually comprehending a difficult ideas are pretty cool. Does feel sometimes like my head will explode. In truth maybe I'll have to review the first 20 lectures to see how much I retained. Awesome lecture series.😊👍⚘️

[@ghazalehfotoohi9209]

From my understanding of the concept of Angels (from a philosophy course) and a Class I went to in Iran that combined Buddhist thought and Sufism, angels are pure consciousness. There are many layers to being and angel is the mediatory layer between our consciousness and the divine consciousness and that is how humans are connected to God (divinity). So it’s not really literal, it is a higher consciousness that we all have

[@brendantannam499]

I’m puzzled at John’s criticism of Romanticism when his description of Corbin’s imagination is so similar to William Blake’s. Corbin, he says, places imagination between two worlds, the practical and the abstract. Blake poses imagination as the creative power to see the abstract world. He would place it between his worlds of Ulro and Eden, with Gogonooza as the City of Imagination where, through art, humans can learn to ‘open the Eternal Worlds, to open the immortal Eyes of Man Inwards into the Worlds of Thought; Into eternity, ever expanding In the Bosom of God, The Human Imagination’.

[@johnvervaeke]

Thanks Brendan. I am a big fan of Blake. I am deeply appreciative of the imagination as the faculty of the imaginal. It is not clear to me that this is shared by most of romanticism. I am also critical of the disconnection from rationality as a faculty for overcoming self deception.

[@brendantannam499]

Thanks John. I would suggest that Romanticism is a language, a psychotechnology as you might say, to attempt to bridge the gap between reality and the divine. These words are all, of course, open to interpretation. The language of the Buddha, of Christ, of angels and divine doubles is part of the same attempt. All of these efforts carry the risk of self-deception. If, as you say, ‘rationality is about using our intelligence best’, discernment can help us to avoid self-deception in Romanticism along with all the other psychotechnologies we humans use to reach what we hope is the person we aspire to be. Where the words of the language are concerned, I think the equivocation arises when we attribute validity to Corbin’s use of imagination but don’t extend it to Blake.

[@johnvervaeke]

Brendan Tannam I do think Blake’s use of it is excellent. Blake and Corbin are much more gnostic than romantic. Corbin explicitly and repeatedly uses their term gnosis. What I mean is that Blake uses the imaginal to wrestle very deeply with the mythos of Christianity in a very transgressive way as Corbin does with Sufism. Corbin does keep a tighter connection to reason as he continues to practice philosophy but Blake does write amazing poetry. Perhaps an integration of the two would best address my concern. I admit I am unfair at times to romanticism. When I am careful I pair it with empiricism and make it clear that I reject both together and their dichotomy of epistemology. I also sometimes am more careful and say decadent romanticism. I believe I am harder on romanticism because in some important ways it is trying to do what needs to be done, but that is where my concern comes in. I would say that if it is a psycho technology it is not clear to me what one does to practice romanticism. I would also say that as a replacement for religion it needs to be an ecology of psychotech practices. Perhaps poetry is the psychotech? But that is not specific to romanticism by any means. Perhaps a style of art in general but it is not clear what that means. I like your point about seeing the term as applying to the use of the imaginal to bridge between the worlds. In that sense it would overlap with my use of the term symbolism, and symbolism needs to be part of any ecology of practices. Thank you very much for provoking this interesting line of thought and discussion.

[@maudeeb]

Art is more in line with sophistry, a type of thought beyond the reach of formal intelligibility, conceived of, and appreciated, in the absence of self-consciousness and rationality. The sublime nature of Blake always lies beyond technical deconstruction, you might say it captures the cusp of awareness and revelation. I'm not sure the production of good art has practice or method, if anything, contrived means are the enemy of achieving such mystical qualities.

[@marykochan8962]

One thing you can say about John's Romanticism, it is never decadent!

[@michaeldunn4847]

Hi Mary: I found this lecture exciting, but I will be really interested to read/hear your thoughts: 'Romanticism' suggests you discern a problem ?

[@marykochan8962]

@@michaeldunn4847 no, I just noticed that every time that John says something that veers toward the romantic, he always makes it clear that he's not talking about decadent romanticism. What he is trying to say is that he is not coming from the Romantic perspective even if it sounds like that.

[@maudeeb]

@@marykochan8962 The science police are always watching.

[@Bartisim0]

I hear you point to resurrection in a very Neutral way.

[@alisaruddell3484]

John, I have tremendous respect for your practice of reading something BECAUSE it pushes your buttons, and you’re working through what that means. That’s brave. So glad to see you mention Jonathon Pageau! I was about to ask, “is Corbin’s imaginal akin to Pageau’s symbolic?” and then you said his name. :-) I’d love to hear you and Jonathon discuss Jung and Corbin.

[@mattspintosmith5285]

Heidegger's rose poem sounds very reminiscent of words of Emerson: “The roses under my window make no reference to former roses or better ones; they are what they are; they exist with God today. There is no time to them. There is simply the rose; it is perfect in every moment of its existence.” (this is bound to interest a Unitarian minister of course).

[@SOC-]

7:25 - 8:31 As John casually suggests that the premise of finding the answer to the meaning crisis is part of the meaning crisis. I see why this is titled "Awakening FTMC". The nihilistic perspective of the agent is transformed to the point where the question would not be fit to have a solution in the traditional sense. It requires a completely different frame Something else that stands out about this teaching - Many teachers I listen to - Sam Harris, Eckhart Tolle, Alan Watts (to name a few), are pointing to the illusionary nature of the self. With this term Imaginal, it sort of bridges this "abstract intelligible world" of the self with the sensible world. I remember John describing the self as a kind of psychotechnology. Not dismissing it, but almost working with it. To recycle your phrasing, instead of asking “should I believe it” ask “why did some many people in that era believe it, what was it doing?” Why is the self seemingly so central to western culture? Another question I have is what are the implications of declaring the self, and much of what acompanies it, such as ownership and control, illusions? The shift between having and being. Many people renounce the western way in favor or eastern wisdom traditions. I am curious where this divide is met, how do these perspectives integrate?

[@stephenlaswell4341]

“many times I have awaken to find myself away from the body. Believing myself then to be part of the higher realm. One with the divine. Rooted in it. Above all intelligible beings. But then going down from this position In the divine, from Noos, down to discursive reasoning, I’m puzzled, how I could even now descend. Im puzzled how my soul has come to be in the body” -Plotinus According to Neoplatonic tradition it is our Telos to realize the paradox of the dual self fully. It is the deification of the human being.

[@corruptcatalyst4141]

Lol I had the exact opposite reaction to what you were warning about the reaction to angels...I was like omg yes that's such a great way to put it...cuz that's how I think about this concept.

[@emilypearson5484]

This metaphor was probably stated explicitly somewhere in the series, but I’m struck how the concept of the translucent symbol presents itself to my mind’s eye as stained glass…

[@leedufour]

Thanks John.

[@johnvervaeke]

Thanks Lee.

[@MDSaunders]

It might be worthwhile to note that the rose is used in the Zohar as an amplification of the initial verses in Genesis.

[@emptyheads7989]

Here we go again!!..

[@traviswadezinn]

Very engaging - important clarifications, thank you; however, the Divine Double should be taken literally; I'm close to Stang on that - I articulate this in my book.

[@austinline2621]

I think it aught to be noted that only 3.5% of people made it this far.

[@stephen-torrence]

Shining / Withdrawing Arising / Passing Expansion / Contraction ... 🙏

[@davidfost5777]

I'm always looking for new interesting lectures on Psychology/Philosophy, please let me know if you guys have any recommendations, would be highly appreciated

[@forscherr2]

Have you seen Jordan Peterson's Maps of Meaning lecture series? It had a profound transformative effect on me.

[@davidfost5777]

@@forscherr2 Thanks for the reply. I have seen JP's stuff I think it's the best content out there for lectures. Let me know if you have found other good ones

[@martinmosna2732]

Is the divine double another way to say higher self as used by 12 step programs?

[@danandbarbhendricks2429]

You seem to be defining transcendence as duplex cognitio Deo: Voegelin’s metaxy of the soul in which transformation is a dynamic interplay of the pneumatic center and the noetic periphery -- the soul known of God and knowing itself in Him. As you suggested, wisdom is both a gifted and transformational coming to full selfhood and destiny. Again, two works by Bernard Lonergan, and are a must read.

[@Demosophist]

See the way C.S. Peirce views the symbolic versus the indexical versus the iconographical.

[@Demosophist]

Also see the "Symobilst" movement, as exemplified by Vorticists like Wyndham Lewis, Elliot, and Joyce. They were somewhat belated relative to Peirce.

[@Demosophist]

A library is a symbol and a symbol is a library. It is filled with indices and icons, and an icon can be transformed back up through the cycle of categories by concentration and focus on a part or facet to the exclusion of other parts or facets. A symbol is, by nature, triadic as threeness within the manifold.

[@gunterappoldt3037]

One correction might be in order: As far as I know the (hi)story of Persia/Iran, the genocide Dr. Vervaeke mentions, was set in deed by the Mongolians, the northern nomad-tribes, which under Temuchin (Dschingis Khan) united, and just from then on called themselves "Mongols" - and later, after the conquests (of Persia, India etc.) partially converted to Islam. They had an explicit terrorist idea about warfare, most propably stemming from their habits, resp. customs and traditions, to hunt and tame animals. Before the Mongolian assault, Teheran hosted one of the most advanced institutions of learning of that time (as far as known to us today). They preserved, among other things, the old Greek philosophical heritage, and cultivated mathematics (algebra etcl), greatly advanced medicine knowledge etc., while ooccidental Christians (for the most part at least) were (still) trappped in narrow (pseudo-)Christian narratives. I think that`s worth noting, if I´m correct, as I suppose. Why not give Islamic culture the credits where it seems appropriate ----- and be aware of the moorings of collective "doxae" (cf. "episteme") in our "dark consciousness" (i.e. pre-consciousness, sub-consciousness, body-circuits, etc.)?

[@gunterappoldt3037]

As regards Heidegger and mysticism (or religions), I imagine he intentionally tried to avoid the relapse into "enchantment" (Max Weber) of any kind - given the circumstances of the times, when not only in Germany "spiritism" was all around, strengthened and reinforced by WW I, the many tumults during the Weimarer Zeit, and later amalgamated to the strange mixture of Nazi-mysticism (about the Grale, the Arians etc.) In this respect, Heidegger was, i.m.o., surely no Nazi. I wohld call him, just now, in lack of a better term, a cultural- or post-protestant modernist, although originally he came from catholicism. He had a great inflluence on the "dialecical theology" of Karl Barth, Rudolf Bultmann, and others, as well as the "thomistic school" (Karl Rahner and others).

[@siarez]

@@gunterappoldt3037 He is talking about the genocide committed by Arabs when their were expanding their Islamic empire. The mongol genocide happened centuries later. Both were traumatic experiences: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_conquest_of_Persia en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_conquest_of_Khwarezmia

[@gunterappoldt3037]

@@siarez Even history is a complicsted matter. The fact, although, seems to be, that Teheran flourished before the Mongolian assault.

[@siarez]

@@gunterappoldt3037 I'm just saying your initial statement about John needing to make a correction is not right, since he was referring to the muslim invasion. Also as an Iranian, I can testify that John is also correct that Iranians today resent the muslim invasion much more than the mongol invasion even though the mongol invasion should me much more fresh in their collective memory.

[@gunterappoldt3037]

@@siarez Yes, history is complicated, indeed.

[@tonym6566]

25:00 Book recommendations; Lachman

[@buddhaofthebasin5600]

Buddha held up a rose.

[@chrysart7429]

It’s not pronounced “foozis” it’s pronounced “feesees” as in physis (nature) where the word physics comes from. In Greek Y and U are the same letter. In upper case it’s written as “Y” and in lower case it’s a “u”. The sound it makes is “ee” not “oo”. In Greek the “oo” sound is made by the “ou” combination. Apologies for this post but as a fluent Greek speaker, who also studied Ancient Greek in Greece it’s hard for me to hear such mispronunciations which are widely accepted by academics. However, this lecture and the whole series is absolutely amazing and I am very grateful that they are free to the public.

[@bernardbrandt]

Quibbling about pronunciation of Greek is rather beside the point. While I agree with you that in the range of Greek pronunciations from Koine through Byzantine up to modern demonic Greek, the word in question would be pronounced as "fee-sis", in at least one of the reconstructions of ancient Greek, the word is pronounced "foo-sis". In short, and in referring to the Gershwin song, it's just a case of "po-tay-to/po-tah-to".

[@H0R5H0E]

The problem I have here, and I'm very saddened to be in this state, is that nowhere is there a persuasion that this thing "the imaginal" exists. It is a tall order for an object to fulfill, being this mediator between multiple polarities, but I have no worldly sense that I have ever observed it or been subject to it. This part of the discussion is just a fantasy, to me. Perhaps the account is more motivated in the original?

[@H0R5H0E]

39:20 - We're not proposing that theoretical knowledge (and investigation) of symbolism is the wrong way to go entirely, yes? But just that manipulation of propositions about (our) symbols must be retired when we, again, return to really using the symbols for gnostic projects?

[@nihiladmirari7534]

Dear professor, How are you applying what you are teaching about RR, or other important concepts during your lectures? Are you in some kind of remembering of the Being mode while teaching? I hope you will find this question useful, Darko.

[@KRGruner]

Outstanding. Of course I'm biased, having come to similar conclusions (in my old age, and after much, much study and deliberation) about wisdom and rationality, and of course meaning (though that's a tougher one). So glad to see it put into a coherent, integrated whole philosophy by someone of Prof' Vervaeke' s caliber. Definitely watching this episode again soon.

[@philmessina476]

(c. 46:01) "First of all, notice how this is very interesting. Step aside from the mythos for a minute and think about the concep---notice how this is gnostic, not in the sense of gnosticism---well, a little bit in the sense of gnosticism 'cos there's this transgressive---it's trying to break grammar. It's trying to break the grammar of thinking of your true self as something you have---your identity is something you have, that you're born with it; it's something you have; it's in you. And what you have to do is express it authentically. And that grammar is being subverted and transgressed by the idea that your true self is beyond you. And you have to aspire to it. And you see there's a bit of a socratic element there. Right? "Your true self is something you aspire to, rather than something you have. "The true self is something realized through the being mode of self-transcendence, not through the having mode of inner possession. (c. 46:54) "So, the 'divine double' is pervasive. It's a pervasive mythos." ---end of notes---

[@waynelewis425]

Perhaps Im not understanding something here at about 11-13 minutes but life is teleological...things do not happen to organisms exclusively, organisms do things...they use constraint to do thermodynamic work in ways that are in service to the perpetuation of their very peculiar ( within the Newtonian frame ( see Robert Rosen for instance) far from equilibrium dynamical organization. Even all the way down to RR whether in humans or in bacteria what is relevant is defined by persistence of ( teleodynamic) process. So what Heidigger appears to be saying is simply erroneous...does it offer a useful mythopoetic understanding however? perhaps. I should be careful here to differentiate between intentionality and purpose...most of the telos in the biosphere (and perhaps the universe if whitehead is on the right track) is not conscious but in the being mode.

[@waynelewis425]

hmm...between 35-40 minutes starting to make more sense now...

[@danielfoliaco3873]

So we should've been wize from birth. 🙄 I can't know.

[@MrTTnTT]

Just from the first 15 minutes it sounds like you and Peterson are on exactly the same page, though your different use of language emphasizes different aspects of it. You just tied the having-mode to Peterson's normal story and the being-mode to Peterson's revolutionary story. Following that parallell, is your argument something like that we can't avoid the having-mode, but the being-mode should be prioritized?

[@mistermuskie]

Today's secret word is: "Exapt"

[@brendantannam499]

LOL. A lot of these words aren't in the dictionary. I usually try it first as you would. This time, it asked me did I mean expat. Luckily, I usually get a result if I just type the world into the address line.

[@mcnallyaar]

Do Fucking NOT EQUATE the Decadent with the Romantic, Dude.