IX Coach

States vs Stages of Consciousness: Wilber, Combs and O’Fallon

Why a powerful experience and a lasting change are different things, and how each one grows

What is the difference between states and stages of consciousness?

A state of consciousness is temporary — waking, dreaming and deep sleep, or a meditative, peak or flow experience that comes and goes. A stage is a relatively stable way of making meaning that shapes how you see things on an ordinary day. In the Wilber–Combs matrix, any state can occur at any stage, and the person interprets it through the stage they are at; Terri O’Fallon (2020) proposed that the two also drive each other, with a new state necessary but not sufficient for the next stage. Both are theoretical models, while meditation research separately asks which passing states leave lasting traits — and finds real but uneven effects.

People who meditate, pray, or have a moment of sudden clarity often ask the same question afterwards: did I change, or did I just visit somewhere? Integral theory answers with a distinction. A state is temporary: the everyday states of waking, dreaming and deep sleep, and altered ones such as meditative absorption, a peak experience or flow. A stage is a relatively stable structure of meaning-making — the way you sort right from wrong, self from other, and what matters, on an ordinary Tuesday. Older models stacked meditative states on top of psychological stages, as if you had to finish one ladder before climbing the other. Ken Wilber and Allan Combs each proposed instead a grid, often called the Wilber–Combs matrix or lattice: states run along one axis and stages along the other, so a person at any stage can have any state, and will make sense of it through the stage they are at. Terri O’Fallon (2020) went a step further and proposed that states and stages co-create each other. Contemplative traditions also map how meditative states deepen in sequence — the progress of insight, the ox-herding pictures, the lamrim, the jhanas — which integral writers call state-stages; those maps are a separate topic. The practices below are about telling a state from a stage in your own life, reading your experiences honestly, and what contemplative science shows about turning passing states into lasting traits.

Prácticas

Cómo se conectan estas prácticas

Every practice on this page rests on one distinction: a state is something you pass through, and a stage is the relatively stable structure through which you make sense of everything, including your states. Because any state can be met at any stage and read through it, a powerful experience by itself says little about lasting change; the evidence for change lives in the ordinary hours afterwards. The practices either separate the experience from the meaning you gave it, or track whether repeated states leave a trace — a trait or, more slowly, a new way of seeing.

How can I tell if a spiritual experience actually changed me or was just a passing state?

In integral theory a state is temporary — a meditative opening, a peak or flow experience — while a stage is a relatively stable way of making meaning that shows up even on a bad day. The practical test is persistence: a state depends on conditions such as rest, setting or recent practice, while a lasting shift appears when you are tired, rushed or challenged. Writing down the change in one sentence and looking for it in the hardest conditions over several weeks is more informative than how vivid the experience felt. Even a lasting change may come from new habits rather than a new developmental stage, and only a scored assessment estimates stage.

Can someone have a higher state of consciousness at any stage of development?

According to the Wilber–Combs matrix, yes. Ken Wilber and Allan Combs each proposed a grid with states on one axis and stages on the other, replacing an older model that stacked meditative states on top of psychological stages. In the grid, the great states are available at every stage, but each person interprets a state through the stage they are at, so the same open experience can be told as religious proof, personal achievement or universal connection. Terri O’Fallon reports that research so far shows little or no relationship between state attainment and developmental stage. The matrix is a theoretical model rather than a tested finding.

Does meditating every day actually change you, or only how you feel during it?

Contemplative science separates state effects, which happen during practice, from trait effects, which persist outside it, and finds some evidence for both. Long-term practitioners in one EEG study showed a pattern of fast brain activity that was higher than controls’ even before meditating, rose during meditation and stayed raised afterwards. An 8-week mindfulness course in a randomized trial reduced brain reactivity to positive but not negative pictures, and a meta-analysis of imaging studies found a medium difference in meditators’ brain structure while warning of publication bias. The honest summary is real but uneven trait effects, best judged by tracking everyday behavior over weeks rather than session quality.

Why do some people with deep spiritual experiences still behave immaturely?

One explanation comes from separating states from stages. A person can reach deep meditative or mystical states while still making meaning from an earlier, narrower stage, and will then interpret those states through it. Terri O’Fallon reports that practitioners with prominent state development score developmentally all over the map, and a large meta-analysis of meditation found that practice experience only partially tracked long-term impact. Deep states can matter a great deal to a person, but they are not evidence of how that person treats others, handles power or takes criticism, which are better judged directly.

What did Terri O’Fallon add to the Wilber–Combs matrix of states and stages?

In a 2020 Integral Review paper, O’Fallon described the Wilber–Combs matrix as a both/and model in which states and stages are independent and equally important, and proposed a next step she called interpenetration, in which each drives the other. Her four tenets are that a state is necessary but not sufficient for the next stage, that each stage carries a confusion that must resolve, that turning the new state’s view onto that confusion stabilizes it into a stage, and that turning a mature stage’s view back on the self opens the next state. She presents this as preliminary theory, supported but not verified by research in her own STAGES database.

¿Cómo elegir entre ellas?

If you are unsure whether a recent experience changed you, start with the state-or-stage check and then track the weeks after it. If the meaning of the experience feels huge or certain, separate the experience from the story you told about it, and compare how others describe similar states. If you meditate regularly and wonder whether it is working, train the state and judge it by an everyday marker. If someone’s experiences are being used as proof of their maturity, or yours, keep states separate from evidence about behavior. And if practice has made you calmer without changing how you see hard situations, run two tracks.

Lo que estos enfoques no resuelven

The state–stage distinction and the Wilber–Combs matrix are theoretical models, not empirical findings, and Wilber’s own account of how states and stages relate has shifted over time. O’Fallon’s interpenetration theory is, in her words, preliminary; its supporting studies come from her own STAGES database, are summarized rather than published in full, and she is a partner in a company built on the model. The claim that state attainment and stage are unrelated rests on her summary of research she does not detail. On the scientific side, meditation trait research is real but uneven: much of it compares long-term practitioners with non-practitioners cross-sectionally, randomized effects are narrower, and the main imaging meta-analysis flags publication bias. None of the practices here has been tested as an intervention.

Practica esto con IX Coach

Practica esto con IX Coach

Preguntas frecuentes

What is the difference between states and stages of consciousness?

A state of consciousness is temporary — waking, dreaming and deep sleep, or a meditative, peak or flow experience that comes and goes. A stage is a relatively stable way of making meaning that shapes how you see things on an ordinary day. In the Wilber–Combs matrix, any state can occur at any stage, and the person interprets it through the stage they are at; Terri O’Fallon (2020) proposed that the two also drive each other, with a new state necessary but not sufficient for the next stage. Both are theoretical models, while meditation research separately asks which passing states leave lasting traits — and finds real but uneven effects.

¿Cómo funciona «Ask of any shift: is this a state or a stage?»?

O’Fallon (2020) defines states as temporary vantage points or experiences and stages as successive, relatively stable perspectives, each transcending and including the last. The practical difference is persistence: a state depends on conditions such as rest, setting or practice and fades when they change, while a stage shows up even when you are tired, rushed or challenged. Checking a shift against those conditions turns a vague sense of "I’ve changed" into something you can actually observe.

¿Cómo funciona «Notice the story you told about the experience»?

The central claim of the Wilber–Combs matrix, as O’Fallon (2020) summarizes it, is that any state can arise at any stage, but it will be interpreted through the lens of the stage in which it arises. The same open, boundless moment can be told as proof that your group’s faith is true, as a personal achievement, as a sign that everyone is connected, or as a shift in perspective. Writing the raw experience and the story apart makes visible how much of the meaning you supplied.

¿Cómo funciona «Compare how different people describe the same kind of state»?

O’Fallon (2020) reports word studies of sentence completions — first 275,000 words, then 1.1 million — in which particular state words appeared consistently at particular stages: "focus" and "concentration" at one, "aware" at the next, "aware of aware" after that, and "timeless and boundless" at the latest. Whatever their final status, the observation that the language for states shifts with stage gives a reason to treat differing descriptions as different lenses rather than necessarily different experiences.

¿Cómo funciona «Train the state regularly and look for the trait»?

Contemplative science distinguishes state effects, which appear during practice, from trait effects, which persist outside it. In one study of long-term Buddhist practitioners, a pattern of fast EEG activity was already higher than controls’ in the resting baseline before meditation, rose sharply during meditation, and stayed above the starting baseline afterwards — the signature of a state leaving a trace. Repeated practice is the proposed route by which states become traits, and the research suggests the traces are real but uneven across measures.

¿Cómo funciona «Integrate an experience by tracking the weeks after it»?

If states become traits, the evidence lives in the "after" — the ordinary hours between practice sessions or after a retreat — rather than in the peak itself. Goleman and Davidson frame their book on meditation research around exactly this shift, with a chapter titled "The after is the before for the next during." Tying an experience to one recurring, specific situation gives it somewhere to land and gives you a way to see whether it has.

¿Cómo funciona «Don’t use states as proof of development»?

O’Fallon (2020) summarizes research in which people selected for their state attainment were given a developmental assessment, and reports that so far there seems to be little or no relationship: practitioners with prominent state development score all over the map. A broad meta-analysis of meditation found medium average effects, yet meditation experience only partially tracked long-term impact. Both point the same way: having deep states, or many hours of practice, does not by itself tell you how someone makes meaning in daily life.

¿Cómo funciona «Run two tracks: state training and stage work»?

O’Fallon’s first tenet is that a state is necessary but not sufficient to move from one stage to the next; her third is that the new state’s view has to be turned onto a specific confusion before it stabilizes into a stage. Read practically, calm or awareness from practice is raw material, and stage change asks for that capacity to be aimed at the places you habitually see narrowly. Running both tracks on purpose keeps one from being mistaken for the other.

How can I tell if a spiritual experience actually changed me or was just a passing state?

In integral theory a state is temporary — a meditative opening, a peak or flow experience — while a stage is a relatively stable way of making meaning that shows up even on a bad day. The practical test is persistence: a state depends on conditions such as rest, setting or recent practice, while a lasting shift appears when you are tired, rushed or challenged. Writing down the change in one sentence and looking for it in the hardest conditions over several weeks is more informative than how vivid the experience felt. Even a lasting change may come from new habits rather than a new developmental stage, and only a scored assessment estimates stage.

Can someone have a higher state of consciousness at any stage of development?

According to the Wilber–Combs matrix, yes. Ken Wilber and Allan Combs each proposed a grid with states on one axis and stages on the other, replacing an older model that stacked meditative states on top of psychological stages. In the grid, the great states are available at every stage, but each person interprets a state through the stage they are at, so the same open experience can be told as religious proof, personal achievement or universal connection. Terri O’Fallon reports that research so far shows little or no relationship between state attainment and developmental stage. The matrix is a theoretical model rather than a tested finding.

Does meditating every day actually change you, or only how you feel during it?

Contemplative science separates state effects, which happen during practice, from trait effects, which persist outside it, and finds some evidence for both. Long-term practitioners in one EEG study showed a pattern of fast brain activity that was higher than controls’ even before meditating, rose during meditation and stayed raised afterwards. An 8-week mindfulness course in a randomized trial reduced brain reactivity to positive but not negative pictures, and a meta-analysis of imaging studies found a medium difference in meditators’ brain structure while warning of publication bias. The honest summary is real but uneven trait effects, best judged by tracking everyday behavior over weeks rather than session quality.

Why do some people with deep spiritual experiences still behave immaturely?

One explanation comes from separating states from stages. A person can reach deep meditative or mystical states while still making meaning from an earlier, narrower stage, and will then interpret those states through it. Terri O’Fallon reports that practitioners with prominent state development score developmentally all over the map, and a large meta-analysis of meditation found that practice experience only partially tracked long-term impact. Deep states can matter a great deal to a person, but they are not evidence of how that person treats others, handles power or takes criticism, which are better judged directly.

What did Terri O’Fallon add to the Wilber–Combs matrix of states and stages?

In a 2020 Integral Review paper, O’Fallon described the Wilber–Combs matrix as a both/and model in which states and stages are independent and equally important, and proposed a next step she called interpenetration, in which each drives the other. Her four tenets are that a state is necessary but not sufficient for the next stage, that each stage carries a confusion that must resolve, that turning the new state’s view onto that confusion stabilizes it into a stage, and that turning a mature stage’s view back on the self opens the next state. She presents this as preliminary theory, supported but not verified by research in her own STAGES database.

Investigación

Conceptos relacionados