Take a moment to read that quote again. If, like Ken clearly suggests, all of his books—which means all of Integral theory—are a bunch of lies, then what the heck are we doing here? Why learn Integral theory? Why invest your time, money, and energy in this online course, if, in the end, all you're bound to learn is a pack of lies from the start.

Sit with this paradox for a moment. How does this land for you? Hold this inquiry close to your heart. What's arising?

Certainly there's another side to this story, right? Certainly a bunch of smart people like all of us wouldn't be wasting so much energy striving to make sense of everything if Emptiness alone is all that needs to be realized. We've started with this quote and this line of inquiry in general because above nearly everything else, learning the Integral approach is the practice of cultivating a heart/mind capacity for rejoicing in paradox. We're not talking about just an understanding paradox, nor about a capacity to simplify paradox. Rather, we're speaking about the capacity to stare paradox right in the eyes, and with an open heart and a clear mind, smile in the face of it's complexity, beholding it as the deepest expression of relative manifestation.

Ken just happens to be speaking about other side of the relative/Absolute duality. While it's true that the Mystery alone needs to be realized, it's also true that we should be taking this course and not just retreating to our meditative practices. But, it's also true that were always already enlightened; always, inescapably, existing with an Identify that's not separate from all that's arising. So, why meditate, right? Like we said, paradox.

Fortunately, we have a map of paradox. A pretty good map, in fact—and that's what were here to explore. The Integral or AQAL map (AQAL stands for all-quadrants, all-levels—two of the five elements of our map) is nothing short of a topographic map of the relative realm, detailing its most vexing paradoxes, its most pressing complexities, and its most poignant causes of suffering. We're often reminded that the map is not the territory—meaning, for example, that merely learning the map should never serve as a substitute for living and breathing and touching the territory of our real lives, which the map just happens to describe. But, let's take this a bit deeper.

What good is a map on a spiritual journey toward the always already recognition that, put like a Buddhist, relative and absolute are fundamentally not two. Well, like many of our teachers have often said: Even Buddhas have to eat. Meaning, even the most enlightened beings live each day in constant interface with the relative realm of bodily impulses, emotions, other people, suffering, global warming, debt ceilings, etc. Even enlightened beings have to eat—well, assuming, that is, they want to prolong their physical existence, thereby extending their ability to work compassionately to help others reach a similar awakening. So, if we're bound to interface with this relative mess, no matter how enlightened we are, and we're striving to serve from our highest selves, than why not bring along a map to help us navigate? If relative and absolute are not two, than why not embrace the relative to the fullest extent? Why not wrap our full hearts, full minds, and full souls around every aspect of this crazy existence? Why not strive to make sense of everything? This is what that common integral tagline means to me—and it's the place from which we invite you to launch this journey.

This is decidedly tantric in its orientation, but, it's not without parallels in mystical Christianity, Sufism, Judaism, to name just a few sympathetic traditions. Fully engage, fully understand, fully wrap your heart/mind around the relative realm so your recognition of Truth is more complete, more full, more compassionate, more skilled. Integral theory is indeed just a bunch of maps, lies perhaps, but important ones; ones that can better guide us through the territory of our own very real life experience. So why study Integral? Why engage this course? Perhaps so we can gracefully move forward; to explore the territory of our lives with a little guidance, a bit of help—so that as we go within, we can move beyond, not back.

"Integral theory sizzles with passion...and it's gentle as a fog and as quiet as tears; it holds the world as if it were a delicate infant, raw and open and vulnerable." That too, was once said by Ken, and we suggest you let it will guide your efforts here.

Here's a quick overview of the content covered by this study guide:

• Lesson(s): Lesson 1 (Introduction) and Lesson 2 (Quadrants)
• Topics: AQAL, Map vs. Territory, Quadrants, Big Three, Validity Claims, Judgments, Absolutism/Reductionism, Quadrivial Analysis, Quadrant Awareness
• # of Slides: 27 (Lesson 1) and 61 (Lesson 2)
• Activities: Quadrivial Analysis and Quadrant Awareness
• Length: 135 min
• Time to Complete: 2.5 to 3 hours

We suggest the following learning objectives for Lesson 1 and 2. These objectives are fairly universal, covering the most primary topics. As you go through the course, feel free to supplement this list with your own personal objectives.

• Understand and adequately recognize the various perspectives on/meanings of AQAL.
• Differentiate between the four quadrants, along with the two distinctions that give rise to them.
• Locate the quadrants as dimensions of your awareness and look through them as perspectives on an issue or problem.
• Distinguish between validity claims and judgments and work with them theoretically and practically.

Lesson 1: The Emergence of Integral

• Question text: Introductory remarks from Ken on a call with Core Integral Students
• Length: 21 min
• Faculty: Ken

Lesson 1: The Paradox of Service

• Question text: What about the balancing act/paradox between helping alleviate suffering, and the notion that suffering is an illusion from the perspective of the Absolute? What should I do in the world?
• Length: 13 min
• Faculty: Ali

Lesson 1: Learning Integral Theory

• Question text: Introduction to learning integral theory and how we might measure our progress (lecture)
• Length: 27 min
• Faculty: Clint

Lesson 1: Compartmentalization of Theory and Life

• Question text: How does one deal with having to compartmentalize learning integral theory, having to turn one’s self “off” at work?
• Length: 9 min
• Faculty: Clint

Lesson 1: Descriptive vs. Normative Uses of Integral

• Question text: Can you provide some examples of the use of integral in a normative and descriptive form?
• Length: 6 min
• Faculty: Clint

Lesson 1: Mainstreaming AQAL

• Question text: Do we need to provide more UR and LR verifications to make AQAL more mainstream? How does this relate to normative vs descriptive uses of integral.
• Length: 18 min
• Faculty: Ali & Clint

Lesson 2: LL vs. LR

• Question text: How do we distinguish between the LL and the LR?
• Length: 13 min
• Faculty: Clint

Lesson 2: Quadrants vs. Quadrivia

• Question text: I still struggle to differentiate between quadrants and quadrivias, is there a sheer criteria or method that could me understand the difference? and how important is it to differentiate between them?
• Length: 5 min
• Faculty: Ali & Clint

Lesson 2: Making Sense of the UL Quadrant

• Question text: Does the UL refer only to the first-person thoughts feelings and so on? Can you speak some more on how I can have a sense of someone else’s UL?
• Length: 9 min
• Faculty: Clint

Lesson 2: Why is the LR Quadrant So Difficult

• Question text: I am having trouble fully understanding the LR quadrant in an actionable way. While I am able to work through the other quadrants with good results, the LR doesn't generate much for me. So I am assuming that I am not fully understanding the content. Can you help provide more information on that quadrant?
• Length: 18 min
• Faculty: Clint

Lesson 2: The Role of History/Culture and Construction of Gender Roles

• Question text: The questioner mentions that in a recent encounter with an “integral” group, she is told that the history of gender roles does not matter in configuring the future of integral relationships.
• Length: 14 min
• Faculty: Clint

Lesson 2: Absolute Subjectivity vs. Tetra-arisal

• Question text: Isn't "quadrant absolutism" as concept not subject to the relativism of states? And verticality of levels? From a conventional/rational logic frame, all quadrants are equally fundamental and tetra-arise. In a post-postconventional frame however, or in a more mystically infused state of awareness, is it fair to say that UL is more equal among the 4 equals?! Said differently - "All matter is consciousness, but all consciousness is not matter."
• Length: 26 min
• Faculty: Ali

Lesson 2: Tetra-arisal and the Absolute

• Question text: Please talk a little about the relationship between the AQAL map with its four quadrants and the notion of Ultimate reality.
• Length: 21 min
• Faculty: Ali

The level and quality of discourse across the Integral community could be considered immature by most standards. This is not meant as a put down, but rather a call to action. In our view, the current state of affairs is a product of two things. First, the field is young—it's only been ten years that discourse-building efforts have been intentionally engaged, and having only recently started to coalesce over the last ten years. And second, due primarily to the accessible nature of Ken's writing (as compared to, for example, Habermas or Peirce or Kant) folks of non-

academic backgrounds play an active role. This is one of our greatest strengths, but it also accounts for a certain lack of rigor and messiness. Seeing how this is the first study guide in our series, we are going start off with an engaging and highly recommended practice.

Over the span of this study guide series, we will add more practices, which you can engage together with this one. The hope is that by changing the way in which you think about integral topics it will change the way in which you apply, write about, or otherwise use and engage these topics. In that sense, this is an experiment as much as it is a practice. But, to be fair, we are not just making these up. Rather, they are sourced from the heart of the most exciting conversations happening in this community—some of which are based on preliminary results of integral education research conducted with students in JFKU's Integral Masters program. Now, these won't be easy, and they aren't designed as such. But, what we are inviting you to do is simply engage them—not that you do so to some pre-defined standard.

This practice is based on this article by Core Integral mentor, Zak Stein. So, to get a deeper sense of this practice, go ahead and download the article.
To engage this practice, each time you use the term integral in posts and assignments, starting this week and going forward for the rest of our time together, I would like you to critically assess how it is that you are using the term.

In short, consider if you are using it in an descriptive or evaluative manner. If it's descriptive, what specifically, are you describing? If it's evaluative, what are the normative concerns underpinning your usage? And, what, if anything are you prescribing? Then, indicate this explicitly each time you use the term. Do so in whatever manner you see fit. Your goal here should be to inform your reader (after becoming clear yourself)—and not to appease or impress your faculty. I really don't have any standards in mind, beyond recommending that you work to engage this practice. The goal here is to avoid what Zak calls: "crypto-normative value-discourse avoidance." Use that as your standard to start. If this makes little sense, please read the article.

TIf you haven't had enough integral learning for one week, follow the link below to download some supplementary readings to deepen and extend your learning. Most of the reads are excerpts from Ken, but we've also included a few articles from other integral authors. If you've read some of this material before, we highly encourage you to read it again—you'll be surprised with how much more you can pull from these readings after you've completed the e-learning lessons.