Reconciling Eastern and Western Approaches to Growth
An issue that comes up frequently for the growth enthusiast is the vast number of approaches to self development and the seeming contradictions amongst them. For instance psychoanalysis, somatic psychology, and meditation are all forms of “therapy” that provide extremely different experiences and seem to be at odds regarding the goals and methods of self integration. Psychoanalysis will have you look at your thoughts, somatic therapy will have you disregard thoughts for feelings, and meditation will direct you to witness it all.
Thanks to the psycho-spiritual cartography of Ken Wilber, who has organized a spectrum of consciousness, these and other differing systems of self-growth can harmonize once seen in a larger framework of self identity. The key is that many differing forms of therapy are targeted to different levels of our consciousness, different levels at which we draw the boundary between “self” and “other.” This self-created and self-defining line ranges from the mystic’s identification with the entire universe to the fragmented personality of the mentally imbalanced. Our original and ultimate sense of identity is a unity with all experience (which admittedly I can’t tell you much about) but due to conditioning, trauma, and stress we learn to progressively limit our sense of self.
From the unity of unbound consciousness we narrow ourselves to an exclusive identity with our own organism, our individual body-mind. Seems reasonable, but it doesn’t stop there. Many of us continue to limit our identity, forsaking the felt oneness with our bodies and relegating them to mere instruments (like the miniature alien who sits in a skull from Men in Black). The identity is confined to the ego, a purely mental image of the self that has no substance outside the imagination. Our bodies are alienated, objectified, no longer “me” but “mine.” One may continue to confine one’s identity to the persona, a fragment of the personality that will define itself only as the positive aspects of the ego while denying (and projecting onto others) its less desirable qualities, often referred to as the “shadow.”
The more limited our identity becomes, the further we move away from the present, away from reality. The sense of self moves from the felt experience of being to a mental construct that can only exist in memories of the past or fantasies of the future–an illusion. So, the various forms of therapy can be seen as addressing the varying levels of self identity that one can abide in.
Psychoanalysis, for example, focuses on integrating the persona and the shadow, creating a healthy sense of self–the ego. The therapist will direct the client to free associate, allowing all thoughts to bubble up to the surface. Eventually the client may experience resistance to a particular thought, which seems foreign and unwanted. This indicates an aspect of the client’s shadow which, through analysis, eventually comes to be accepted. The client arrives at a healthy sense of self that includes all aspects of the personality, not just the pretty ones.
Techniques like bio-energetics and hatha yoga aim at integrating the mind with the body, expanding the self to rediscover its felt oneness with the body. The process of these techniques will call for attention not to thought processes, but to felt sensations in the body, moment by moment. Eventually the practitioner will discover certain areas of the feeling body (aka the subtle body) which are tight, unresponsive, or numb. These are evidence of past emotional traumas which at one time caused the mind to dissociate from the body. These blocks are healed through a combination of physical movement, emotional release, and talk therapy. Once the mind and body are reintegrated the self is no longer confined to an idea or to thoughts, but now rests in a moment by moment experience of being.
In almost all meditative techniques as well as some transpersonal therapy, the practitioner’s attention will be called to his own “I AMness,” the witness of all experiences– all thinking, feeling and perceiving–that is forever constant. While one’s appearance changes, one’s thoughts change, one’s feelings change, this center of the self is the unchanging Seer of it all. Pure awareness itself, which is ultimately found to transcend individual existence to merge with all that is. There is no more duality, no more split between the self and the world.
So, there is no need to see conflicts amongst varying approaches to growth, simply different focuses (see chart below). While it is of course true that with each successive level of consciousness there exists greater freedom and interconnection, the process of growth is not exactly linear. You do not “finish” with one stage to move onto the next. There have been plenty of accounts of Zen Masters advocating bloodshed and Gurus who take advantage of disciples– clearly their spiritual accomplishments were overshadowed by unresolved conflicts in the ego. It is important to know the whole territory. To know both your masks and your shadows, the oneness of mind and body, and the transcendent awareness that extends beyond your individual self.
So, take a peek at your shadow! If you know your ego inside out, try diving into your body! Discover a self, beyond yourself. Go explore!
Ken Wilber's Spectrum of Consciousness: different levels of consciousness paired with the therapies associated with those levels. The diagonal line represents the boundary between "self" and "not self" which expands with each level, ultimately disintegrating into a union of inside and outside.
For more on this topic, check out Ken WIlber’s book, No Boundary
I like the spirit of your article; it’s very well formulated and I agree to a great extent with what you say. I think there another parameter to consider though.
Beyond the phenomenical differences between Eastern and Western approaches you describe, based on the way one chooses to go about inner work, there is another difference, which I think is more fundamental: the purpose of this work.
For most Eastern mystic paths, as I understand them, the purpose of enlightenment is to dispel maya, escape samshara and attain nirvana. In plain words, to break the circle of reincarnation and never again be born on this planet. It is a very solitary and individualistic path, which aims at liberation of one’s own self. This is why the Hindus, for instance, developed mysticism to a great extent, but their civilisation remained mostly static from ancient times up until the British invasion.
The Western mystic paths, which have their foundation on ancient Greek work, are quite different: there the purpose is not to use enlightenment to escape this world, but to diffuse it on this reality using any means possible. This is why the Greeks utilised the ancient mysteries and the spiritual openings stemming from them to sort of ‘ground’ ideals like harmony, equality, beauty etc., creating the arts and sciences used today by everyone. The focus was not on the self, but on the whole self – and for me this is the vital difference.
What I write does not include all Western and Eastern paths that have existed in history, of course, but their resultant.
And of course there is only one self on this planet, the whole human, the base of Wilber’s spectrum. One needs to work to break the illusion of the ego to reach it fully, as you rightly say. But, in my humble opinion, the individualistic paths of the East fall short of that goal. You can reach great heights of evolution by following them, but not the complete union, which presupposes a union through a relationship with the other rather than a focus solely on one’s own self.
I’m not saying you argue for or against that, I’m just jolting down some ideas for open discussion…
You make a good point, especially since escapism is rampant in our world, making it that much easier to creep into one’s spiritual work. However, I think you are too quick to generalize about the differences in Eastern and Western mysticism. I have not studied Western mysticism much at all, but I can tell you that amongst the Eastern traditions there are a variety of paths. It is true that the ideals of some traditions are escapist, but there are plenty that equally advocate committing oneself to the freedom of all beings and a life fully lived. Mahayana Buddhism, for example idealizes the Bodhisattva, an enlightened being who remains in the world for the sake of others. Many Tantric schools also advocate establishing a connection with the divine, but also allowing that connection to permeate your worldly life, also proclaiming, sometimes radically, that absolutely everything is divine and can be part of one’s practice.
That said, there is clearly a difference between states of consciousness and how one uses those states. To come back to Wilber’s philosophy, it is the difference between states and stages. States refer to various experiences of consciousness, such as the ones I referred to in my post. Stages, on the other hand, are more akin to developmental psychology. A simple scheme of states would be the progression from egocentric to ethnocentric to worldcentric to kosmocentric (Wilber’s term) in a person’s development. States and Stages do not go hand in hand. For instance someone at an egocentric stage who experiences a transpersonal state might come to believe they (and they alone) are god incarnate.
So I think it is important to be developed in ones awareness of the self, but in the context of an understanding of the unity of all life.
By the way, I would love to hear more about Western forms of Mysticism. Perhaps you could explain some on your blog?
You’re giving me a hard task, yogibenji…
I don’t consider myself an expert on Western mysticism, just a few ideas here and there.. Lots of it has to do with Christianity of course, since it’s the main religion of the West for 2000 years. But there are individual differences based on the traditions of different countries, as in the East of course.
I agree that generalisations are dangerous. And I know that there are Eastern paths that focus on incarnation – as there are many Western paths that focus on retreatism as well. But I wanted to make a point about the overarching ideas that influence East and West, not on the exceptions.
That said, to each consecutive Buddha’s vow to remain here until all beings have been freed from illusion, I can only bow before…