In a twist of what Vedic philosophy might describe as destiny (involving a Kafka-esque turnaround in the Australian welfare system), I find myself now pursuing a Bachelor of Integrative Psychotherapy at IKON Institute, a dinky-di and very cute, progressive and holistic private university near the Valley in Brisvedas. (I was told by one person at Centrelink that the Bachelor was not supported by Austudy, and then, when I called again, I was told that it was.)
Integrative psychotherapy “is the process of making whole”, and the Canadian Institute for Integrative Psychotherapy describes it further:
Integrative Psychotherapy embraces an attitude towards the practice of psychotherapy that affirms the inherent value of each individual. It is a unifying psychotherapy that responds appropriately and effectively to the person at the affective, behavioral, cognitive, and physiological levels of functioning, and addresses as well the spiritual dimension of life.
The term “integrative” of Integrative Psychotherapy has a number of meanings. It refers to the process of integrating the personality: taking disowned, unaware, or unresolved aspects of the self and making them part of a cohesive personality, reducing the use of defense mechanisms that inhibit spontaneity and limit flexibility in problem solving, health maintenance, and relating to people, and re-engaging the world with full contact. It is the process of making whole. Through integration, it becomes possible for people to face each moment openly and freshly without the protection of a pre-formed opinion, position, attitude, or expectation.
This bachelor is the perfect coalescence of all that I’ve been wondering about for a very long time, and I feel extra-ordinarly fortunate and grateful that I have this opportunity to pursue my own wholeness so that I might be able to help others do the same.
Integrative psychotherapy is basically the entheotropic process, or the holosophic process ~ the process of realising wholeness through experiential wisdom of our being a part of the whole, as a water droplet is an integral part of the ocean.
In the Bhagavad-gita it is said that each living entity is qualitatively the same as Krsna (the Supreme Personality of the Godhead), and the only difference between the living entity and Krsna is a quantitative distinction, as the water droplet is qualitatively, but not quantitatively, the ocean.
What Osho described as oceanic consciousness may be the same as fully realised Krsna conscious … but I’m not sure. I’m not sure how I feel about the Gita just now, except that I enjoy how it’s giving me a broader context in which to place Buddhism, which was my go-to source of spiritual succour for nearly a decade. In this sense, Vedic philosophy is a container that is even more broad and encompassing than Buddhism or Christianity or Islam or Judaism or any of the other religions that might have grown from Vedic philosophy.
I have to stop here now, lest I enter a rabbit hole I cannot escape from. The only other thing I would add is I am excited to be learning that maybe Gautama was an avatar of Krsna, and that there is almost certainly a cultural link between the likes of Gautama and Jesus.
I know that’s a can of worms … but I’m a boy!, so I love eating worms 😀