> We know that the right hemisphere has entirely non-verbal modes of thought and generally sees the whole without breaking things into pieces--we don't have to put together some mystical oneness, but just tune into those aspects of our own being.
Agreed and not agreed.
I don't see any mysticism in practice of Zen for instance in particular, but there's something mystical about just being a self-aware being I guess. It's just so normalized, we take it for granted, and the practice can uncover that. If you take it purely as psychology (which it is to great extent), you still somewhat have this rooted in the "world of ideas" and not the "absolute reality" that you perceive in the moment (at least as how it's taught in Zen for instance). I.e. like scientist could try to find what the consciousness is, but even if we do get a scientific definition for that, I would argue it's more important to find out what consciousness is at individual observer level - something that could only be perceived/experienced and not described.
Also with the practice itself, any idea can become a baggage - whether it is neuroscience or some Buddhist teachings. Like understanding how the right brain hemisphere works is of no importance to the practice, if for instance Zen practice is a lot about full body awareness, external awareness and being rooted in hara. I know that it changes neurons in my brain but I can't perceive that in my brain, I perceive that in the spatial awareness (which is generated by the brain - but that's just an information, just an idea that I comes to me, that I perceive), but it's important understand that those practices were developed by people who probably didn't even know the role of the thing inside the skull.
I do use some of psychology / neuroscience to aid my practice though. At the basic level I understand that everything is a habit and gets automated away, including any advances in the practice. I take quite an athletic approach to it. I also discovered that understanding of Pavlov triggers can be of aid when trying to integrate the practice into the daily life. I think that new methods and technology could be developed that would make Zen practice easier for instance.
So I agree that we have tremendous advantage now and this can improve further as technology develops. The knowledge can be as much of use, as it can be an obstacle - it just depends on how it's used.
Agreed and not agreed.
I don't see any mysticism in practice of Zen for instance in particular, but there's something mystical about just being a self-aware being I guess. It's just so normalized, we take it for granted, and the practice can uncover that. If you take it purely as psychology (which it is to great extent), you still somewhat have this rooted in the "world of ideas" and not the "absolute reality" that you perceive in the moment (at least as how it's taught in Zen for instance). I.e. like scientist could try to find what the consciousness is, but even if we do get a scientific definition for that, I would argue it's more important to find out what consciousness is at individual observer level - something that could only be perceived/experienced and not described.
Also with the practice itself, any idea can become a baggage - whether it is neuroscience or some Buddhist teachings. Like understanding how the right brain hemisphere works is of no importance to the practice, if for instance Zen practice is a lot about full body awareness, external awareness and being rooted in hara. I know that it changes neurons in my brain but I can't perceive that in my brain, I perceive that in the spatial awareness (which is generated by the brain - but that's just an information, just an idea that I comes to me, that I perceive), but it's important understand that those practices were developed by people who probably didn't even know the role of the thing inside the skull.
I do use some of psychology / neuroscience to aid my practice though. At the basic level I understand that everything is a habit and gets automated away, including any advances in the practice. I take quite an athletic approach to it. I also discovered that understanding of Pavlov triggers can be of aid when trying to integrate the practice into the daily life. I think that new methods and technology could be developed that would make Zen practice easier for instance.
So I agree that we have tremendous advantage now and this can improve further as technology develops. The knowledge can be as much of use, as it can be an obstacle - it just depends on how it's used.
reply