A Quest to Understand Consciousness
Psychology and spirituality, prima facie, appear as two diverging fields. Psychology-based concepts rest on empirical observation and reasoning, and the concept of Ultimate Reality does not fit within that framework. In spirituality, by contrast, concepts do not seem to rest on reasoning and empirical observation; instead, they draw on internal, subjective, or mystical experiences. The concept of Ultimate Reality is central to spirituality. Despite these basic differences in psychology and spirituality, what binds them together, and what strong bond has carried the two disciplines together and grown even stronger in modern times after spirituality’s comeback in the West? This bond is of ‘mind and consciousness’. Both exist in reality, and both occupy a supreme position in psychology and spirituality. Within the domain of mind, there is also a concept of ‘the self’, which is central to psychology and spirituality and determines a person’s behavior. The concept of ‘the self’ predates psychology. Until the mid-nineteenth century, psychology did not exist as a discipline, and philosophy discussed concepts such as mind, consciousness, the self, human behavior, and ethics. But as new concepts and new experimental methods began to develop in the natural sciences, the empiricism of science outweighed the rationalism of philosophy, and with the efforts of the 3 Ws- Wilhelm Wundt, William James, and Watson- psychology came into existence just 150 years ago! Psychology treats ‘consciousness’ as a literary term, and ‘self-consciousness’ as a personality trait in which a person is excessively conscious of her/his looks, appearance, or manners, which, when escalated, can become a psychological problem. In a positive context, a person can be self-conscious about his weaknesses and try to overcome them by improving himself and, in turn, build self-confidence. Further details of ‘self-consciousness’ can be found in any psychology textbook.
Apart from the psychological usage of ‘self-consciousness’, ‘Self-consciousness’ also has a philosophical and spiritual meaning. It is the awareness that one exists as an individual being. From ‘self-consciousness’ derives the concept ‘the self’. It is a collection of one’s life experiences, learning, values, thinking, and everything stored in the subconscious mind, and it determines a person’s behavior. I have specifically underlined the meaning of ‘the self’ because many other religious and spiritual interpretations exist in literature. Since psychology emerged from philosophy, it is imperative to discuss Western philosophers’ thoughts on ‘mind, consciousness and the self’. The earliest concept of the ‘self’ appears in the aphorism ‘know thyself’, inscribed in the forecourt of the temple of Apollo at Delphi, Greece. The interpretation of this aphorism attributed to Socrates is as follows: ‘We should examine our life, as the unexamined life is not worth living’. Persian scholar and physician Ibn Sina (Avicenna) suggested that self-awareness (consciousness) is not sensory in nature, a view different from psychology and neuroscience, which treat consciousness as related only to the body’s sensory system. He devised a thought experiment to prove it. ‘A person floating in air and cut off from all sensory organs can still be aware of his self-existence’. Italian scholar, thinker and theologian Thomas Aquinas stated that ‘ for self-awareness, only the presence (existence) of mind is required and no sensory organs are needed’. Great mathematician and philosopher Rene Descartes said, ‘I think, and therefore I am’.
In Hinduism, the concepts of ‘the self, mind and consciousness’ have existed since prehistoric times. One of the most significant messages of the Bhagavad Gita (the most read Hindu scripture worldwide) is that ‘self-knowledge’ (Atma-Gyan, i.e. knowledge of ‘the self’) alone eradicates misery; self-knowledge alone is the means to the highest bliss, and that self-knowledge alone can lead to perfection in life. According to Advaita Vedanta, the mind is an internal sense organ (in Sanskrit, Antarindriya) which senses the presence and content of thoughts in a similar way it senses signals from the five sense organs. Every normal person can communicate with the external world and knows what thoughts are running in the mind. It sounds paradoxical that modern psychology does not recognize the mind as a sensory organ. As a scientist, my analysis is as follows: Thought is a phenomenon in the mind, and it is subjective. It is not possible empirically to measure a thought, i.e., to read a thought with specified accuracy, although its presence can be detected by its physiological effects. On the other hand, functions of five sensory organs can be verified empirically. For example, if N observers observe a flower, then all N observers will describe the flower in the same way with considerable accuracy. This is not true of thought because a single person observes it and describes it. His description cannot be verified. This is not a true empirical method of observation in natural science. Although the mind exists in reality and the thought process is a natural phenomenon, the natural sciences do not study the functioning of the mind, and it remains a philosophical issue.
For the last three decades, neuroscience has been playing the role of an objective science to study a subjective phenomenon, the mind and consciousness, in the hope of getting a treatment for mental disorders which appear to be consciousness-related, such as schizophrenia, with the help of brain imaging techniques such as functional MRI and PET scans. Neuroscientists are trying to understand consciousness in terms of neural activities induced by a train of Action Potentials, triggered by a stimulus through computer computation and modeling. Even if researchers record a valid pattern of neural activity and establish its relation to the stimulus through an algorithm, it remains unclear how that provides any clue about consciousness. Scientists do not even know consciousness’s causal status: Is it a ‘cause’ or an ‘effect’? Although many papers on consciousness are being published in scientific journals and many dedicated research institutes for the study of consciousness have emerged, scientists are still far from understanding consciousness. Some scientists are skeptical, while others, more optimistic, say it may take another 100 years to understand consciousness.
In my view, if a scientist is exploring the nature of consciousness, he should have first-hand experience of it; after all, it is so easily accessible. We are all in close touch with consciousness; yet scientists still rely heavily on technologies such as fMRI, PET scans, etc. Most neuroscientists are materialists who believe that consciousness emanates from matter, and their entire approach rests on this proposition. Whereas great scientists who were also spiritual held the opposite view. According to Max Planck, originator of quantum theory and founder of Modern Physics: I regard consciousness as fundamental; I regard matter as a derivative of consciousness …… Eugene Wigner, who laid the foundation for the theory of symmetry in quantum mechanics, stated, “It was not possible to formulate the laws of quantum theory in a fully consistent way without reference to consciousness.” An American neurosurgeon who experienced the Near Death Experience asserted that consciousness is non-material. Thinker E.F. Schumacher writes in his book Guide To The Perplexed for the Materialistic Scientists: There is a need for such scientists to take recourse to seeking self-knowledge of the inner world. In this context, spirituality can play a decisive role because consciousness is the central theme. The experiences of spiritual practitioners and neuroscientific experiments on them can reveal much about consciousness. By spiritual practitioner, I mean meditators who have attained extreme meditative states such as Samadhi, or who have fully awakened their Kundalini, because these meditators have full control over consciousness and can play with it. These meditators can also maintain a meditative state long enough for experimentation. This idea prompted me to pursue spirituality very seriously, and the views of Max Planck and Eugene Wigner about consciousness have greatly influenced and inspired my spiritual journey. Now, I find that ‘Mind and Body’ is a great laboratory to study consciousness. I remember that during my school days, I used to attend Satsangs with my father, and Guruji used to say: Whatever you are searching for in the outer world is present in the inner world, and you need to open the inner eye. At that time, I could not understand the hidden meaning of this teaching, but now I can understand it and experience its truth.
MY PERSPECTIVES OF SPIRITUALITY
At first, I found spirituality perplexing because many of its concepts seemed irrational, unrelated, and even contradictory, and out of tune with science. Soon, I realized that spirituality is an umbrella term encompassing various activities and concepts, which may be why it can never be defined uniquely. I treat spirituality as having many dimensions so that it can be studied systematically without perplexing anyone. These dimensions are as follows:
- Religious Dimension
- Tantric Dimension
- Intellectual Dimension
- Personality Dimension
- Philosophical Dimension
- And the latest, Adhyaatmic Dimension
The ontological description of spirituality is very useful for beginners to understand and develop interest in the subject. I will discuss these dimensions of spirituality in detail later in my posts on this blog; for now, I am giving only a brief account of each dimension.
Religious Dimension
Although spirituality has sprung from religion (by religion I mean institutionalized religions), the two are quite different. Religion has two aspects. The first deals with rituals, beliefs, prayer, and services, and most followers believe that by performing rituals, God will be pleased and offer his blessings. This is the most prevalent aspect of a religion. The second aspect involves preaching and improving quality of life by following the teachings. This second aspect of religion is related to spirituality, but rituals and beliefs greatly affect spiritual practices. For example, in India, many meditation schools teach concentration by chanting the names of deities or mantras. In ISKCON, devotees meditate on the ‘Hare Krishna’ Mantra. The consumption of alcohol and non-vegetarian food is strictly prohibited following the beliefs of the religion.
Tantric Dimension
This dimension of spirituality has its root in religion, but the focus is on attaining so-called spiritual powers ( and not peace of mind ) by using various bizarre techniques as support for meditation ( called Sadhana in this dimension ), such as Yantras (instruments), animal sacrifice, use of taboo substances such as alcohol, meat, cannabis, and maithuna (ritual sexual union). People who are involved in this type of sadhana live an ascetic and very disciplined life. Aghori Babas of India also practice similar spiritual techniques. They use human skulls and human bones as yantra. They meditate on cremation grounds and smear cremation ashes on their body and allegedly consume human flesh from parts of the body left unburnt. I also include in this dimension paranormal activities such as calling the spirit of the dead person and claiming to be treating some psychological disorders by tantric techniques. This dimension of spirituality is really mystical, and its techniques are esoteric. No rational or scientific explanation exists for its activities and concepts.
Intellectual Dimensions
The intellectual dimension is the most popular dimension of spirituality, which has developed into a billion-dollar industry in America. Spirituality is inherently experiential, but it is presented as an intellectual discipline mainly online, where one can find tons of blogs on spirituality discussing mysticism, esoteric techniques, awakening, enlightenment, non-attachment, and the Samadhi state of meditation without any experience. Bloggers use alluring text to impress and attract customers. They convince readers of meditation’s many benefits. They teach various meditation techniques with the aid of mobile Apps. But meditation is much more than concentration techniques. Meditation, or Dhyan, is the seventh of eight mandatory components of Yog as described in sutra 2.29 of Patanjali’s Yoga Sutra. It is clear that by practicing Dhyan directly and omitting the first six components, one cannot concentrate the mind with any technique. Dhyan is not possible without a spiritual mindset, which is missing from meditation practice, and most people practicing Meditation do not understand spirituality. In short, Meditation is an incomplete practice, and therefore it is not as effective as claimed. Many meditation brands with intellectual knowledge are available in the spirituality market. These brands are so powerful that they have made their entry into clinics and big hospitals in America despite the fact that the American Medical Association has not accepted the claimed efficacy of this type of meditation and has refused to recommend meditation for the treatment of mental disorders. As pointed out earlier, the commercial form of meditation is a mere practice of concentration, a mental exercise, and one should not expect the benefits or the results of an exercise to be equivalent to those of a treatment. For example, physical exercise may lower blood glucose levels but cannot cure diabetes. A 2013 study by scientists at Johns Hopkins University, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, confirms this.
Personality Dimension
The personality dimension of spirituality is personal. Spirituality resides in a person’s mind, not in literature. As I quoted earlier, most of the great philosophers and scientists whom I have read were inherently spiritual, which implies that persons are born spiritual. Not all great thinkers might have sat for meditation. They need not, either, because they are spiritual by nature, by their thoughts, and by their behaviors. All spiritual persons have almost the same personality traits. They are cool, reserved, calm, relaxed, stable, sober, serious, conscientious, imaginative, forthright, experimental, self-sufficient, self-disciplined, kind, and perseverant. These traits serve as markers on the spirituality scale, and studying them can assess a person’s level of spirituality. If I were asked to rank great thinkers on the spirituality scale, I would rank Max Planck at the top. Max Planck, the father of modern physics and the founder of Quantum theory, was deeply spiritual and saw spirituality and science as two sides of the same coin. His thoughts were instrumental in my transformation from an atheist to what I am today. You can understand the potential and importance of spirituality in life and science through excerpts from his book, Where Is Science Going? According to a famous quote by Planck: There can never be any real opposition between religion and science, for one is the complement of the other. Every serious and reflective person realizes, I think, that the religious element in his nature must be recognized and cultivated if all powers of the human soul are to act together in perfect balance and harmony; indeed, it was no accident that the greatest thinkers of all ages were deeply religious souls. He further writes about the complementary relation between spirituality and science: The one does not exclude the other; rather, they are complementary and mutually interacting. Man needs science as a tool of perception; he needs spirituality as a guide to action..
Philosophical Dimension
The philosophical dimension addresses the ethical aspects of spirituality and is crucial to progress on the spiritual path. Starting with Socrates, Aristotle, Stoic philosopher Epictetus, Kant, Rene Descartes, and Spinoza posited their ethical systems and resolved the questions of human morality by defining concepts such as ‘good and evil’, ‘right and wrong’, ‘Virtue and Vice’, ‘justice and Crime’. This is now an independent branch of philosophy known as Moral Philosophy and is related to Moral Psychology. The significance of moral Psychology in spirituality lies in the fact that when behavior and thoughts are ‘right’ (Positive), the mind wanders less, and it is easier to focus attention for longer because there are no worries about the consequences. In Hindu philosophy, the ethical system is called Dharma (not to be mistaken for institutionalized religion). It is a Sanskrit word meaning performing duty righteously. Dharma is an inseparable part of Indian spirituality and not an intellectual discipline as in the West. In India, Dharma was an essential part of the Vedic education system because ancient scholars (the Rishis) realized that spirituality, and hence meditation, was incomplete without the knowledge of Dharma. This may be why meditation reached such an advanced stage then. Dharma has no place in contemporary meditation, and that is why meditation today is far from the original form described in ancient scriptures. I will elaborate on ‘Dharma’ in a separate post entitled: Hindu Dharma vs Hindu Religion.
Adhyaatmic Dimension of Spirituality
The Adhyaatmic dimension of spirituality results from rigorous study of mind and consciousness through psychology, physics, neuroscience, and Advaita Vedanta, and through the practice of Yog. I am systematically advancing research on Yog to coalesce neuroscience, psychology, and spirituality into a novel discipline.
To understand the Adhyaatmic dimension of spirituality, you must know the true meaning of the word Adhyaatm. The word ‘Adhyaatmic’ should not be confused with ‘spiritual’. According to the English dictionary, the two words are equivalent, but in fact they are not. The Sanskrit word Adhyaatma is a compound of two words: ‘Adhya’ and ‘Atma’. The word ‘Adhya’ is derived from the Sanskrit word ‘Adhyayan ’, which is equivalent to the English word ‘study’ or ‘to study’. The word ‘Atma’ is translated into English as ‘the self’. Thus, ‘Adhyaatma’ means ‘to study the self’. In this way, ‘Adhyaatm’ is a discipline in which one studies the self through Yog to determine whether one’s thoughts and behavior align with Dharma. Adhyaatm is very near to science and not connected to any religion; hence, it is secular in nature. In contrast, the word spirituality is derived from ‘spirit,’ the soul, and has its roots in religion, so it is not secular; unlike Adhyaatm, it is poorly defined. In this way, the words ‘Adhyaatm’ and ‘Spirituality’ convey different meanings and therefore are not equivalent. I consider translating ‘Adhyaatm’ as ‘Spirituality’ in English a serious etymological mistake. Therefore, in order to preserve the meaning of Adhyaatm, I will continue to use this Sanskrit word as it is in the English text. The use of Sanskrit words in the English language is inspired by the tradition of adopting Latin and Greek words in English texts of science, and it is a homage to ancient Hindu scriptures- the Vedas and Upanishads, which are composed in Sanskrit and from which the present work is inspired. In fact, carefully studying the Vedic literature reveals that in ancient India Adhyaatm was a discipline in the education system, and Indian scriptures, the Vedas and Upanishads, were the ‘textbooks’ of the discipline Adhyaatm. The purpose of Adhyaatm was to study the thoughts and behavior of ‘the self’ in order to identify ‘Mental Distortions’ (known as Vikaras in Sanskrit) and to rectify them through Yog. According to Vedanta, there are five Vikaras of mind, which are the main obstacles in the spiritual and physical progress of human beings. These are: (1) Kama (lust), the wish to get things unethically, in the wrong way, (2) Krodha (anger, irritation), (3) Lobha (greed),(4) Moha (the attachment to worldly things; money, property, etc.),(5) Ahankar (the Ego), I am only right. During Yoga, you cannot concentrate without overcoming these vikaras. These five vikaras are components of a single word in Sanskrit, ‘Agyaan ’, the nescience, lack of knowledge, which is the cause of stress, anxiety, and human suffering. In short, Adhyaatm is a way to overcome our shortcomings, work to our full potential, and live a happy life. Adhyaatm aligns well with Humanistic Psychology. It teaches how to execute in practice the concept of a ‘fully functional person’ posited by psychologist Carl Rogers and the concept of ‘Self-actualization’ put forward by Abraham Maslow. Rogers and Maslow posited these concepts but could not explain how to apply them; now the Adhyaatmic dimension will complete this task. One of the founders of modern psychology, Wilhelm Wundt, introduced the concept of ‘introspection’ in psychology, which is also a concept in Adhyaatm.
The Adhyaatmic dimension of spirituality is a vast, multidisciplinary field encompassing psychology, neuroscience, technology, physics, electronics, the philosophy of Advaita Vedanta, and the study of religions. There is a complete theory of the Adhyaatmic dimension of spirituality, which can be called Adhyaatmic Vigyan, but I have chosen a simpler name: Yog Science. There will be measurable parameters to monitor the progress of the process of Yog, and the theory of Yog also defines a parameter, a quotient, and a mathematical expression that defines and quantifies the progress of Yog. A device specifically developed for this purpose can measure the approximate value of this quotient experimentally. The device records the breathing pattern during Yog and generates an output called EBG (Electro Breathing Graph), similar to the ECG used for Cardiac investigation. Software analyses the EBG and can assess long-term progress in Yog over a specified period. The device will be known as a breathograph, and it will be mandatory for all who opt to learn the Yog; for this reason, the device is made very cost-effective, costing less than an ordinary smartphone. The meditator’s mental state recorded in EBG will be stored in a smartphone’s memory and can be used later for comparison to assess progress in Yog. This theoretical, experimental, and technological development aims to present Yog as a discipline for academic learning and to provide an alternative system to the ancient and ultimate tradition of teaching Yog through Guru-Shishya Parampara, which is not feasible in the present context.
Adhyaatmic discipline is not only about the scientific transformation of Yog; it will also scrutinize earlier concepts and aspects of spirituality on a rational and scientific scale to present a true, clear, and easily understandable picture of spirituality. Unfortunately, there had been a tradition according to which earlier philosophers, spiritual gurus, and religious authorities have intentionally presented spirituality as a field of esoteric techniques, shrouded in secrecy; they made the explanation of its concepts mind-boggling and presented the path of spirituality as extremely difficult to follow and as meant for the privileged ones only, to prove themselves and present themselves as possessing supreme knowledge and supernatural powers. The scriptures on spirituality in India are also composed in verses with multiple meanings. No sincere, serious efforts have ever been made to teach Yoga in a simplified way to free humanity from stress, anxiety, and suffering and to foster love among human beings. Unfortunately, all self-proclaimed spiritual gurus of India who popularised and exported meditation to the West only cultivated their personality in the name of meditation and piled up wealth. They only preached meditation (Yog). Meditation should not be something to preach; it should be something to teach. This has been my sole motto and the driving force behind developing the science of Yog. Along with developing Adhyaatmic discipline, I am also constructing a Brain-Mind model to explain psychological and transcendental functions of mind. While building this model, I found psychology and spirituality converging into a path that may help us understand and explain Consciousness.
NOTE: I thank Sri H.S. Vora, my friend and colleague from my earlier organization, Raja Ramanna Center for Advanced Technology, Indore, who is collaborating with me on developing the technology and software for Breathograph. I am also looking for collaboration in experimental neuroscience to advance this work further.