| Zero Point Radio Show |
Crises of Humanity |
Critiques of 'New Think' |
New
World DisOrder |
Truth
Media & Resources |
Zero Point: Institute for
Mystical
&
Spiritual Science
Kars, Ontario K0A 2E0, (613)
558-2966,
489-3187
christopherholmes@rogers.com
2004
|
1. The Science and Pseudo-Science of PsychologyTable of Contents: 2. The Head Doctrine of Modern Psychology and Science 3. The Diagnosis of Modern Psychology 4. The Heart Doctrine of Mystical and Spiritual Psychology and Science 5. Applications and Implications of Mystical and Spiritual Science Bibliography |
|
Psychologists assume
a purely materialist approach to the nature of the brain, the mind and
the self. There is no “I” or self apart from the sum of the person’s
psychological functions (of thinking, feeling, sensation, and so
on)–all
of which are the end products of processes within the physical body and
brain. Isaac Asimov, a materialist scientist and philosopher, explains
the implications of this view:
“The molecules of my body, after my conception, added other molecules and arranged the whole into more and more complex form, and in a unique fashion, not quite like the arrangement in any other living thing that ever lived. In the process, I developed, little by little, into a conscious something I call “I” that exists only as the arrangement. When the arrangement is lost forever, as it will be when I die, the 'I' will be lost forever, too.” - Isaac Asimov, 1981 - The vast majority of
psychologists, philosophers
and scientists accept such a viewpoint, at least as a working
assumption.
There is no ghost in the machine, and no one seems to understand the
importance
of deeper ideas and teachings. A strict behaviorist influence, which
banished
even mind and consciousness from psychology for sixty years, has
finally
waned to some extent, and more modern theoretical approaches have come
to emphasize the significance of mental and cognitive processes.
However,
mainstream psychology has yet to reconsider the possibility of a
science
of the soul. Accordingly, human beings are essentially nothing but
biological
organisms–higher primates–pursuing pleasure and avoiding pain, trying
to reproduce their genes, searching for meaning and selfhood within
complex
material and social environments, all between the poles of
existence–birth
and death. When the arrangement of molecules is lost, the “I” is
believed
to disappear.
Of course,
psychological
theorists and modern thinkers do explore the significance of such
distinctly
human attributes as the capacities for abstract thought and cognition,
the use of language, altruism and subtle emotions, intuitions and
inspirations.
Nevertheless, the mainstream of modern, so-called exact psychology and
science rejects humans’ spiritual nature, psychic possibilities, and
existence beyond death. Further, modern psychologists ignore the
spiritual
psychologies of the yogic and Vedic tradition, Tibetan Buddhism,
Sufism,
Theosophy, the Fourth Way, esoteric Christianity, Kabbalah, and the
teachings
of innumerable other mystics, saints and seers through the ages–who
have
supposedly gained insights into the further reaches of human
consciousness,
and into the deep grounds of being. All religions have a basis in
mystical
psychology, although these teachings are not known or are misunderstood
by most religious believers. Even more shocking perhaps is the manner
in
which scientists manage to ignore, or close their eyes to, the
innumerable
data, scientific and anecdotal, which establish the reality of
paranormal
phenomena and experiences. Although the study of such psychical
phenomena
is quite distinct from mystical/spiritual teachings, they do provide
concrete
evidences which clearly demonstrate that materialist conceptions of the
human psyche are grossly inadequate.
|
|
2. The Head Doctrine of Modern Psychology and Science What is the origin and nature of human consciousness? Psychologists, neuro-scientists and philosophers use this term in a hundred and one ways–with a thousand and one meanings and interpretations. Within the scientific and popular literature, as well as in common discussion, there is widespread confusion and misunderstanding regarding the issues of consciousness. Further, people do not generally question the nature of consciousness within themselves, or even have a language in which to talk about such things. The phrase “the
head doctrine”
is the label that I use to refer to the most prominent
and commonly accepted western scientific and psychological model of
consciousness.
The central belief of this perspective is that neurological processes
within
the material brain generate consciousness. “The head doctrine” is
illustrated
in a Scientific American article on “The quest to find
consciousness”
(Roth)–published
in a special issue on MIND (2004) This picture is an
artist’s
depiction of “the mysterious brain activity involved in
consciousness.”
The basic concept is that somehow the brain in the head produces
consciousness.
However, when one goes into the article, it seems that the phenomena of consciousness is not so easily solved at all. In fact, the most certain comments offered by author G. Roth regarding consciousness are that “a true understanding of the phenomenon remains elusive,” and further, that “For now, no definitive explanations exist ....” In a small table in Roth’s article appears the title “FAST FACTS: The Rise of Awareness,” wherein Roth makes three points:
Of course, there is not a
‘single fact’
in the table, but only questions or assumptions. It is not proven that
consciousness emerges “from the physical information processing”
in
the brain, nor from “the neural correlates.” Nor is the term
consciousness even defined. Really Roth’s three points are only
questions
and assumptions–although they are presented as ‘fast facts.’
Under the title of “The Seat of
Consciousness.”
Roth offers a picture of the cerebral cortex showing its various lobes,
responsible for varied mental functions. Roth maintains that:
“Individuals
consciously perceive only that information processed in the associative
regions of the cerebral cortex. But many regions that operate on a
subconscious
level participate in the various states of consciousness.” (2004,
p. 35) Roth does admit that there is “no consensus” as to how
consciousness
arises, nor of what it consist, but all the while he assumes it is
simply
figuring out which of the brain’s interactive processes produce it.
Roth
ends on a promissory note:
This assumptive belief system
of the
head scientists is accepted in modern psychology and science, and
almost
never questioned. Unfortunately, the details have yet to be worked out.
When it comes to discussing
‘states
of consciousness,’ Roth offers a pretty limited scheme of consideration:“Any
effort to understand consciousness must begin by noting that it
comprises
various states. ... At one end of the spectrum is the so-called
alertness
(or vigilance) state. States of lower consciousness include drowsiness,
dozing, deep sleep and on down to coma.” (p. 34) A normal
state
of ‘alertness’ is put at one end of the continuum, as if this is the
highest possible state of consciousness a human being can experience.
All
the other levels are below it–down into coma and the extinction of
consciousness.
It is assumed that there are no states of consciousness beyond basic
vigilance–hence
no ‘Self consciousness,’ cosmic consciousness or God consciousness.
David Chalmers, of the
philosophy department
at the University of Arizona, is another prominent mainstream
consciousness
theorist. Chalmers suggests that the search for the neural correlates
of
consciousness (or NCCs) is “the cornerstone in the recent
resurgence
of the science of consciousness.” (2000, p.1) He defines a neural
correlate of consciousness as a neural state that directly correlates
with
a conscious state, or which directly generates consciousness. In a
paper
on NCC’s, Chalmers lists a number of proposal which have been forwarded
to explain the nature and location of consciousness. These include:
All of these suggestions or
hypotheses
are variants of the head doctrine and localize consciousness within one
or more areas of the brain. Each is derived from research investigating
the neurological basis of particular mental processes, and none really
deal with the issue of the substance of consciousness, or with its
subjective
nature. Although many researchers recognize the enigmas and mysteries
of
consciousness, the possibility that consciousness might exist outside
of,
or apart from, the neurological activity of the head brain is never
given
consideration. The head doctrine is the basic assumption underlying
most
modern consciousness research and speculation.
A third contemporary theorist,
John Searle
(2003) writes about “The Problem of Consciousness” at his
website,
www.ecs.soton.ac.uk;
and his comments again illustrate the
assumptive basis of the head
doctrine:
Searles’ comments illustrate
the assumptive
basis of the head doctrine; and how assumptions end up being taken as
‘facts.’
At one point, Searle admits that we have no idea how neurobiological
processes
produce consciousness, but a moment earlier, he has just stated: “...
we simply know as a matter of fact that brain processes cause conscious
states.” The facts seem to have disappeared from Searle’s account,
and it is instead plagued with assumptions. Searle has “promissory
science”
to offer us–promising in the future to fill in the gaps in the
mysteries
of consciousness–and he certainly has no need for any metaphysical
considerations.
A fourth perspective on the nature of “the head doctrine,” is provided by science journalist John Horgan, in The Undiscovered Mind (1999). Horgan gives an honest assessment of what neuro-science really understands about consciousness. He writes: “Mind-scientists and philosophers cannot even agree on what consciousness is, let alone how it should be explained.” (p. 228) Another interesting illustration of “the head doctrine” can be drawn from Horgan’s more recent book, Rational Mysticism: Dispatches from the Border Between Science and Spirituality. The book’s cover depicts the head brain from above as illuminated through modern imaging techniques, which monitor blood flow. John Horgan carries the basic assumption of‘the head doctrine even into his explorations of mysticism and spirituality, assuming that such experiences must occur somewhere within the brain, in the head. This is a ‘rational’ or intellectual mysticism of some sort. This assumption, that the brain produces consciousness, “the head doctrine,” seems most reasonable and few scientists question it–despite the fact that they are completely unable to establish how or where the brain produces consciousness, or what exactly this consciousness is. Nevertheless, putting aside these uncertainties, most researchers and theorists share the views of Roger Sperry, a prominent neurologist, who remarked: “I don’t see any way for consciousness to emerge or be generated apart from a functioning brain.” The theorists then give us “a promissory note” that they are on the verge of solving these elusive mysteries. Current scientific thinking
also tends
to regard consciousness as being non-substantive–that is, as
being
nothing
in itself. According to this conception, there is no way for
consciousness
to exist separately from or beyond the mind and the body, because
consciousness
has literally no substance in itself–it is no thing. It is only
produced by biological and neurological activity in the brain.
To end on a cryptic note:
Horgan quotes
Harvard psychologist, Howard Gardner, who suggests that someone may
find
“deep
and fruitful commonalities between Western views of the mind and those
incorporated into the philosophy and religion of the Far East.”
Gardner
suggests that a fundamentally new insight is necessary, although
unfortunately,
“we
can’t anticipate the extraordinary mind because it comes from a funny
place that puts things together in a funny kind of way.” (p. 260)
These comments are somewhat ironic, as indeed, there is a fundamental
difference
between western views of the mind and the head doctrine, and the
Eastern
spiritual traditions with its emphasis upon the heart as the true
centre
of Self. . Understanding this difference between the head doctrine
and the heart doctrine will certainly provide a novel
perspective
on the issues of consciousness–and put things together in a “funny
kind of way.”
|
In a Psychology Today
interview (1976), Guru Bawa, an eastern
wise man, made these rather startling comments about western psychology
and the common misunderstanding of Self. According to the guru,
psychologists
are quite deluded about the origin of the mind (or consciousness):
“I studied psychology once, and I became crazy,” Bawa responded in a playful tone. “I lost all my powers. ... Psychologists don’t know where the mind is. Some think it is in the brain. Others think it is in the genitals. Others think it is in the ass. But the mind is in the heart, and that is what psychologists do not know. Unless the heart opens, you will be driven crazy by the monkeys of the mind.” (April, 1976) This is a telling diagnosis of
modern
psychology and science. Certainly scientists are in a sad predicament
if
they do not know where the mind is, or where consciousness originates!
Yet, from a mystical and spiritual perspective, this is precisely the
case:
There are fundamental errors in modern scientific approaches to
understanding
of the origin and nature of human consciousness.
Guru Bawa describes some
psychologists
as thinking that the mind is in the brain–as in the modern head
doctrine.
Others relate it to the genitals–in reference to Freudian psychology,
with its focus on human sexuality; or, in the ass–in reference to
kundalini
energy, a primordial instinctual energy described by yogis as locked
within
the root chakra. However, Bawa insists: “The mind is in the heart.”
This is the deepest, most essential Self and Mind--beyond what the
yogis
refer to as the “monkeys of the mind” of the material brain.
In this viewpoint, mainstream psychology, philosophy and science alike,
are fundamentally mistaken about the nature of consciousness, mind and
self. They have grounded their approach to these essential questions on
a set of erroneous assumptions and illusory ideas. They are not ‘Knowers
of Self,’ as described in the mystical literature.
Sri Chinmoy, another
contemporary spiritual
teacher, stresses the heart doctrine and also diagnoses human beings’
common
ignorance as to the true nature of self:
Human beings lack true
self-knowledge and are asleep to their deep
nature as spiritual beings. According to the mystics, we live in
ignorance–identifying
the Self with the thoughts, feelings, desires and sensations which make
up the contents of the mind and the personal daily life dramas. All the
while, we do not know Self, or the “real I”–related to the subtle
mystical dimensions of the heart.
Ramana Maharshi, an Indian sage and mystic, similarly described the Self as being related to the mysterious Heart Centre–deeper than the personal or ego level of the mind centred in the head:
Ramana Maharshi makes a number
of important
points concerning consciousness and self. Firstly, real “I” or “Self”
is identified most intimately with the spiritual and soul dimensions of
the heart, and is connected therein to God. Secondly, the goal of yoga
is the dissolution of the mind into its source–within the heart lotus
or centre. Thirdly, the Self is “self-luminous” and “shining”–having
a inherent light nature.
Fourthly, the self-luminous Self is “consciousness itself.” Consciousness is the light of Self. “‘I’ is within the heart.” If scientists and psychologists
are unable
to locate consciousness, the soul and spirit in the material realm,
perhaps
they are looking for it in the wrong place: firstly, in the head,
rather
than in the heart, and secondly, in the materiality of the physical
world
rather than in the subtle matters of the metaphysical dimensions which
underlie and sustain the physical dimensions.
In The Heart’s Code,
psychologist
Paul Pearsall (1998) maintains that, energetically speaking, the
heart–rather
than the brain–is clearly the centre of the psychological universe.
Indeed:
The profound significance of
these facts
leads Gary Schwartz and Linda Russe, in the forward of Pearsall’s book,
to comment:
The
heart is the largest source of biophysical energy in the body and
within
our psychological life. In Pearsall’s view, the heart involves energy
and information that comprises the essence or soul of who we are.
The
idea, that the heart is the centre of the psychology of the individual,
instead of the brain, would indeed revolutionize our understanding of
normal
and supernormal psychology. Adopting this view would be analogous to
the
Copernican revolution, wherein scientists realized that the Earth,
rather
than being the centre of the universe, travelled around the sun within
the solar system. The egocentric attitude of humans was shattered.
Likewise,
the acceptance of a deeper conceptualization of the heart,
consciousness
and the nature of Self would constitute a revolutionary development in
modern psychology, philosophy and the life sciences.
Modern psychology has had no
heart or
soul! There are no courses offered on the psychology of the heart,
because
the head scientists think that the heart is only an organ having no
inner
sentience or consciousness. Modern psychologists instead think that the
primary emotional centres are mid-brain structures, and the limbic
system.
When psychologists go home, do they seriously tell their sweet hearts,
I love you with all my limbic system? Although references to the heart
abound in literature, culture, music, and life, psychologists do not
consider
that there could be a ‘psychology to the heart,’ as they imagine
instead,
that everything occurs somewhere up in the brain, although they haven’t
quite yet figured out where.
I have personally used a
teaching exercise
to demonstrate how we intuitively experience our centre within the
heart
region, and not within the head. In this exercise, the audience is
asked
to first point to two or three objects in the environment, then to
their
left foot, or their right ear, and then finally, to your self. Having
conducted
this experiment with thousands of subjects, I have found very few who
point
to their heads, as if their self was in their brain. Instead, the huge
majority of people point towards their hearts. In the language of the
deaf,
the word ‘I’ is similarly indicated by pointing towards the heart
centre.
To begin, the term
consciousness can
be taken generally to refer to the inner awareness of being,
which
each of us has or is within our lives. Although we might see
another
persons’ physical being, we cannot examine their inner world of
consciousness
or their experience of being. Yet, in a very real sense, it is
within
this inner world that each of us has our existence. Hence, in order to
understand consciousness, we must make an effort to understand it within
ourselves–through direct inner awareness and experience. This
approach
is necessary to supplement other scientific approaches as
external
observers, and it is the method of the mystics, yogis and masters of
the
esoteric traditions who study consciousness within themselves.
Unfortunately,
modern psychologists do not consider self-study and efforts to develop
consciousness as part of their approach to understanding it. If we
think
a lot about consciousness, we end up thinking that its in the head.
Mystical teachings elaborate a far different model of consciousness dynamics than considered in western psychology. Although the Self, and the origin of consciousness, are related to the Heart, consciousness is also described as distributed through the whole organism in complex ways, from this centre. This involves distribution through subtle channels and centres, and it is related to ‘blood flow’ and the oxygenation of the body. Consciousness is not simply limited to the brain, and the head scientists have confused consciousness with other cognitive and mental functions, and made many other mistakes in their approaches to the mysteries of consciousness. The Dali Lama describes consciousness as emerging from an ‘indestructible drop’ within the heart. Do the head scientists really know more than the Dali Lama? |
 4. The Heart
Doctrine of
Mystical and Spiritual
Psychology and
Science
I am the
Self, O conqueror of sleep,seated in the hearts of all creatures.
I am the beginning, the middle
and the end of all beings. (10,
20)
Bhagavad Gita
This
Self, who understands all, who knows all, and whose glory
is
manifest in the universe, lives within the lotus of the heart,
the
bright throne of Brahman. Self-luminous is that Being, and formless.
He
dwells within all and without all. ... By the pure of heart is he known.
The
Self exists in man, within the lotus of the heart, and is the master of
his lifeand
of his body. ... The knot of the heart, which is ignorance,
is
loosed, all doubts are dissolved .... Mundaka Upanishad
According to
the heart
doctrine, a divine or spiritual spark, is the essential zero
point
source of individual light consciousness and of the life force. This is
a “quantum Self,” or real “I,” established as the centre within
a human being. Rooted into hidden metaphysical dimensions, this ‘God
spark’ or hidden Self manifests within the physical plane as the life
principle which animates the heart through electromagnetic forces, and
as the light principle of consciousness. The Self initiates the heart
beat
and diffuses the light of consciousness and life energies through the
blood
and subtle matters to various levels of the body and psyche. The
presence
of the Self, as a ‘self-illuminating element,’ the Sun of the body,
serves to illuminate the psychological and psychic processes, allowing
awareness and life within the inner world.
The
influences from
a spiritual dimension emerge through the electrodynamics of the
material
heart, and are distributed through the dynamics of the breath and the
circulation
of the blood throughout the body. In this view, there is an inner
circulation
of light, vitality and electromagnetic influences which emerge
within-without
from a point source established within the higher dimensional Space of
the Heart! This is an absolutely profound conceptualization of the
origins
of human consciousness, suggested by the wisdom teachings of eastern
and
western mystical doctrines. Mystical and esoteric teachings can enable
an individual to overcome the illusions, conditioning and limitations
of pseudo-I--the
sense of I associated with the personality and mind centred within the
head brain, and realize the deeper dimensions of “I” within the heart.
The realization of Self within the Heart is the basis for the mystical
declaration “I AM.”
These themes are evident in an
aboriginal
tale about creation and the gods:
This mysterious Self has inner
connections
to the universe, to spiritual realities and even to God. Such states
are
certainly on a broader “spectrum of states of consciousness” than
that defined by Roth (2004) as ranging from ‘vigilance’ to coma.
Certainly there are profound
possibilities
for higher states of awakened consciousness, enlightenment and
illumination,
which provide an alternative viewpoint to those offered by so-called
“exact
science” –with its denial of spirit, soul and any transcendental or
religious principle. If we speak off the tops of our heads, we can
simply
assume that consciousness and mind are produced by the head brain; but
if we penetrate to the heart of being, to the Heart of ourselves, we
may
indeed become “knowers of Self.”
The mystic poet Gibran, in The
Prophet,
responds to the question about the nature of “self knowledge,”
stating, “Your hearts know in silence the secrets of the days and
nights. But your ears thirst for the sound of your heart’s knowledge.”
Similarly, H. P. Blavatsky, a prominent occult scholar, notes,“Learn
above all to separate Head-learning from Soul-Wisdom.” (1877) and
quotes the ancient Stanzas of Dyzan: “The Sons expand and contract
through their own Selves and Hearts ... each a part of the web”
(the
web as woven between spirit and matter).
From a mystical and spiritual
perspective,
modern psychology and philosophy are filled with head knowledge but
lack
the secret wisdom of the Self within the Heart. Further, consciousness
and Self are substantive and should not simply be used as generic terms
to identify the flow of thoughts, feelings and sensations that occur
within
subjective experience generated by the brain. There is something far
deeper
happening within a human being–as concerns the origins of consciousness.
Consciousness has an inherent
light nature
and is rooted into hyper-space dimensions and the mystical void/plenum.
The Self emerges as an element or quantum of consciousness, at a zero
point
centre. The luminous Self originates from within the subtle and
mystical
dimensions of the heart, and manifests through the dynamics of the
spiritual
heart and the material heart, as well as through the blood. The zero
point
Self is the origin of the life, light and awareness within a human
being,
as this descends through higher dimensions from within/without.. “I AM”
within the mystical Heart Space, and this is what the head scientists
do
not know.
Ramana Maharshi elaborates upon
the mysteries
of the heart. He explains how the Self emerges as a point source of
light
and consciousness, associated with the true Heart centre, and its
influences
circulate as light throughout the interior dimensions of a human being.
The Self seemingly becomes tied up in the knots of the heart,
and
so, humans forget their true nature:
Consciousness and self have
metaphysical
origins–but have influences within the physical realm. The Self is
connected
to the physical body of human beings through the life of the heart, the
blood and the breath, and through seven life centres, or chakras, in
the
subtle anatomy. The Self exists in relationship to a hierarchy of
interpenetrating
world orders, spiritual, divine and metaphysical dimensions of being,
which
underlie and sustain the realms of gross matter. These dynamics allow
for
afterlife existence and for complex relationships of the individual to
the Sun, to the larger Universe, and most importantly to spiritual and
divine realities.
These seemingly preposterous
claims about
humans’ miraculous possibilities simply can not be weighed properly
without
a detailed examination of exactly what mystical and spiritual teachings
say about these invisible worlds and hidden realities. These teachings
present a complex physics and metaphysics of consciousness, the heart
and
the universe. Unfortunately, modern science lacks the wisdom of the
heart
and soul, and fails to acknowledge the inner light and divine life.
Further,
we do not realize the Creator manifesting in all things, and assume
blindly
that the world is simply what it appears to be to us in our conditioned
states of vigilance or awareness–dominated by ten thousand and one
worries,
anxieties, life interests and habits.
The nature and origin of human
consciousness
are very deep mysteries, which can only be understood through the
awakening
of consciousness within one self, and a psycho-spiritual and alchemical
transformation of the heart. There are many useful ideas and practices
within the mystical and spiritual literature that guide us in this
inner
approach to consciousness, and to direct experiences of inner
realities.
Mystical and spiritual teachings provide systematic theoretical models
of consciousness, as well as methods and disciplines to develop
self-awareness
and to experience states of deeper and more expansive awareness. In
fact,
mystical sources of teachings also provide detailed metaphysical
expositions
of the subtle dimensions that underlie existence–which are congruent
with ideas and evidences emerging within science itself.
|
|
5. Applications and Implications of Mystical and
Spiritual
Science
It is impossible to convey in a simple manner the complexity of the esoteric mystical and spiritual psychologies, and how these could be considered within every department of the social and natural sciences. I have attempted to portray an alternative view of the origin and nature of human consciousness, contrasting the head doctrine of modern science, within the Heart doctrine of spiritual and mystical teachings. Especially when it comes to issues of consciousness, spirit and soul, psychic and paranormal experiences, we need a new model of reality in order to assimilate the innumerable evidences for such phenomena. Consciousness has deep roots in higher dimensions, and is not
simply
a product of the material brain at all. This is what the head
scientists
do not know, and this is what the sages, swamis, mystics and Sufis
claim.
Esoteric psychologies elaborate profoundly valuable and alternative
perspectives
on this fundamental enigma in modern science. (Book I of the Within-Without
from Zero Point series, entitled The Heart Doctrine, deals
extensively
with these questions.) Www.zeropoint.ca
In Scientific American,
Roth (2004)
describes ‘vigilance’ as at one end of his consciousness continuum,
and death at the other, but there is nothing suggested beyond this
state
of vigilance, or death. By contrast, mystical and spiritual
psychologies
suggest that of course there are further states of consciousness
possible
to experience or attain. Self-realization itself is the
dissolution
of the false mind into the lotus of the Heart. Beyond this are other
possible
states of objective or cosmic awareness, states of samadhi and of
formless
realms, of Divine and God consciousness. Further, there is a
continuation
of consciousness into afterlife worlds, as the evolution of the
individual
continues in other forms and lives. Consciousness was never produced by
the brain, and it never will be. Instead, it emerges within-without
from
higher dimensional space, pervades the body as the light and life
principle,
and it eventually withdraws, without-within back to the heart centre.
Mystical and spiritual
psychologies are
also immensely practical, in a manner that modern psychology is not, as
the latter lacks any effort towards ‘self-study.’ Scientists think
that they can study consciousness by thinking about it, or by observing
evidence of it in the outer world, as in the monitoring of brain
activity.
However, the mystic includes him or herself in the equation, and
approaches
the study of consciousness within themselves, aiming to ‘awaken’ from
the semi-sleep state of the masses of humankind, and to actually be
more
consciousness. There can be more consciousness, or less consciousness,
and we might experience more or less of this light of consciousness.
The
mystic studies consciousness and gains understanding through self study
and inner work, and spiritual practices, which approaches are
completely
lacking in cognitive and behavioural philosophies–what I would call
‘mickey
mouse psychology.’
Mystical and spiritual science
and ideas
have applications in innumerable applied areas, such as in my own
approach
to “The Awakening of Consciousness and the Heart in Criminal
Offenders,”
an alternative approach to correctional psychology, Whereas the
cognitive-behavioural
programs now used conceive of inmates as having a dual mind and body,
they
fail to consider the psychology of the heart and soul. Healing, change
and transformation, all involve dynamics of the heart, and other
centres.
Psychology as a discipline has lacked a spiritual perspective for
almost
a century, while ignoring the deep teachings of the esoteric traditions.
Mystical and spiritual
perspectives can
also be applied within other areas of science, and higher education.
The
mystical teachings bear profound relationships to emerging ideas and
theories
in physics and cosmology, and provide an alternative interpretation of
many of the facts and theories of science itself. (Book II of the
Within-Without
from Zero Point series, is entitled: Microcosm-Macrocosm:
Scientific
and Mystical Views of the Origin of the Universe, the Nature of Matter
& Human Consciousness, and it elaborates extensively upon such
a comparative study.) They also represent a whole deeper dimension to
the
studies of religion, philosophy, history and evolutionary theory. It is
remarkable that the secret teachings of all ages, have remained so
secret,
while the sorry head scientists puzzle over the deep mysteries of human
consciousness.
|
Asimov,
I. The Subtlest Difference. In Abell,G. & Singer,B. eds. Science
and the Paranormal. Scribner's Sons, New York, 1981.
Bawa.
G. The Mind is in the Heart. Psychology Today. Interview, April
1977.
Bhikshu,
K. Sri Ramana Gita (Dialogues of Maharshi). Tiruvannamalai,
India,
1966.
Blavatsky,
H. The Voice of the Silence. Theosophical University Press,
Pasadena,
California, Chalmers, D. The Puzzle of Conscious Experience. Scientific
American. Dec.1995.
__________.
What is a Neural Correlate of Consciousness? Www.u.arizona.edu.
2000.
Currie,
I. You Cannot Die: The incredible findings of a century of research
on death. Methuen, Toronto, 1978.
Chinmoy. G. Yoga and the
Spiritual
Life. Tower Publications, New York, 1970.
Gibran, K. The Prophet.
Alfred
Knopf, New York, 1968.
Holmes, C. Within-Without
from Zero
Points: Book I: The Heart Doctrine: Mystical views of the
origin
and nature of human consciousness. Zero Point Publications, Kars,
ON,
2004.
______. Within-Without from
Zero Points:
Book II: Microcosm-Macrocosm: Scientific and Mystical Views of the
Origin
of the Universe, the Nature of Matter & Human Consciousness.
Zero
Point Publications, Kars, ON, 2004.
Horgan, J. The Undiscovered
Mind:
How the human brain defies replication, medication, and explanation.
Touchstone Books, New York, 1999.
________, Rational
Mysticism: Dispatches
from the border between science and spirituality.Houghton Mifflin
Co.,
New York, 2003.
Mills, W. Tone
Magazine. Ottawa,
Ontario, April, 1999.
Pearsall, P. The Heart’s
Code: Tapping
the wisdom and power of our heart energy. Broadway Books, New York,
1998.
Prabhavananda,
S. & Manchester, F. (Eds.) The Upanishads: Breath of the eternal.
New American Library, New York, 1957.
Prabhupada,
A. Bhagavad-gita: As it is. Bhaktivedanta Book Trust, Los
Angeles,
Ca., 1972.
_________.
Consciousness:
The Missing Link. Bhaktivedanta Book Trust, Los Angeles, Ca., 1980.
Ramana Maharshi. The Sage
of Arunacala.
By Mahadevan. Allen & Unwin, London, 1977.
Roth, G. The Quest to find
Consciousness.
Scientific American, Special Edition, MIND. 2004.
Searle, J. The Problem of Consciousness. Www.eco.soton.ac.uk. |