stripping the gurus - Brahma Kumaris Info

522 STRIPPING THE GURUS
That contraction/unfoldment and subsequent dispersion/enfoldment,
with the particle being visible/explicated only when its
wave-energy is highly concentrated at the transition between those
two processes, is exactly the means by which the implicate order
manifests as the explicate order. The explicate order is thus a subset
of the implicate order. That is, the two orders are not mutually
exclusive, as Bohm himself confirmed:
[T]he explicate order itself may be obtainable from the implicate
order as a special and determinate sub-order [i.e., a subset]
that is contained within it (in Hiley and Peat, 1987).
Up till now we have contrasted implicate and explicate orders,
treating them as separate and distinct, but ... the explicate
order can be regarded as a particular or distinguished
case [i.e., a subset] of a more general set of implicate orders
from which latter it can be derived [italics added]. What distinguishes
the explicate order is that what is thus derived is
a set of recurrent and relatively stable elements that are outside
of each other (Bohm, 1980).
Wilber (1982), however, has offered a different, and incorrect,
understanding of what Bohm has so clearly stated above:
Some writers use the implicate order as a metaphor ... of
transcendence. That is, the implicate realm is used as a
metaphor of higher-order wholeness or unity, referring, presumably,
to such levels as the subtle or causal.... The difficulty
is that, as originally explained by Bohm for the realm
of physis, the explicate and implicate “entities” are mutually
exclusive [italics added]. The “ink-drop” particle is either unfolded
and manifest (explicate) or it is enfolded and unmanifest
(implicate). It cannot be both at the same time....
All of which is fine for the dimension of physis. But truly
higher levels are not mutually exclusive with lower ones—
the higher, as we said, transcend but include the lower.
Of course, “disproving the [ink-drop] analogy” would obviously
not necessarily say anything about the actual implicate and explicate
orders of quantum theory. Even aside from that, however, it is
not clear where the assertion that Bohm had “originally explained”
that the implicate and explicate entities (and thus orders) were
“mutually exclusive” could have come from, other than a disturbing