change your mind: neuroplasticity & buddhist transformation

Washington University in St. LouisWashington University Open Scholarship

All Theses and Dissertations (ETDs)

1-1-2010

Change Your Mind: Neuroplasticity & BuddhistTransformationLaura Vollmer

Follow this and additional works at: https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/etd

This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by Washington University Open Scholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in All Theses andDissertations (ETDs) by an authorized administrator of Washington University Open Scholarship. For more information, please [email protected].

Recommended CitationVollmer, Laura, "Change Your Mind: Neuroplasticity & Buddhist Transformation" (2010). All Theses and Dissertations (ETDs). 928.https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/etd/928

https://openscholarship.wustl.edu?utm_source=openscholarship.wustl.edu%2Fetd%2F928&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/etd?utm_source=openscholarship.wustl.edu%2Fetd%2F928&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/etd?utm_source=openscholarship.wustl.edu%2Fetd%2F928&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/etd/928?utm_source=openscholarship.wustl.edu%2Fetd%2F928&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

mailto:[email protected]

WASHINGTONUNIVERSITY

DepartmentofEastAsianStudies

CHANGEYOURMIND:

NEUROPLASTICITY&BUDDHISTTRANSFORMATION

by

LauraJeanVollmer

Athesispresentedtothe

GraduateSchoolofArtsandSciencesofWashingtonUniversityinpartialfulfillmentoftherequirementsforthe

degreeofMasterofArts

May2010

SaintLouis,Missouri

copyright©by

LauraJeanVollmer

2010

ii

Acknowledgments

MyheartfeltthanksgoestoDr.RobertE.Hegelwhohasbeenmyadvisorand

friendsincemyfirstdayatWashingtonUniversity.Youhavebeensopatientand

encouraginginsynthesizingmymanyinterestsandIsincerelycouldnothave

completedthisworkwithoutyou.ThankyouDr.PaulineC.Leeforeverything,from

laughtertoliterature,youhavegivenmerichesandIamexceedinglygratefulforall

theopportunitiesyouhaveprovidedmewith.MythankstoDr.BeataGrantaswell,

forsupplyingthetitle“ChangeYourMind”andforofferingmanyhelpfulsuggestions

tomakethisworkmoreeffective.ThankyouDr.CarlF.Craverfortakingthetimeto

discussmyworkandforprovidinginputonimportantquestionsinphilosophyof

mind.IwouldalsoliketothankDr.FrankK.Flinnforinvitingmetospeakonmy

research.Youhavebeensupportiveandinspiring.Thankyoutoallmyprofessors;

everybitofknowledgegainedfromyourexpertisehasbeenacontribution.

iii

Dedication

Tothebeautyofnoveltiesthatinvokechildlikewonder,

Andtothemysteriousdepthsofhumankind’spower.

Tothemeetingofdarkcosmosandtheilluminatingmind,

AndthemusicofNature’ssongthroughtime,

ResonatinginthatwhichIs,soitmayberevealedandknown.

CONTENTS

1.Introduction 1

NeuroplasticityandtheMind

Method

ModernBuddhismandthe‘Buddhism’ofBuddhismandScience

TheBuddhistPerspective:MutabilityandContemplativeTechniques

2.TheScience 18

MentalFacultiesConducivetoNeuroplasticity

MeditationandNeuroscience

MindfulnessMeditationandNeuroscience

CompassionMeditationandNeuroscience

3.PhilosophicalImplicationsofResearch 30

TheMiddleWaybetweenPhysicalismandDualism

TheNeuroplasticMind,Two‐WayCausation,andtheProblemofSelf

TheSelf

TheMind‐BodyProblem

RealityasWeExperienceIt:Perception

Consciousness,Neurophysiology,andMind‐BodyCausation

4.Conclusion 54

ScientificStudyoftheMind

ScienceandtheEthicalGoalsofBuddhism

WORKS CITED 62

1

1 INTRODUCTION

NeuroplasticityandtheMind

Inthelasttwentyyears,revolutionsinthefieldofneurosciencehaveraisedmany

openquestionsforscientistsandphilosophersofmindalike,asprimary

assumptionsinthefieldregardingtheimmutabilityofneuralandmentalstateshave

proventobeincorrect.Previously,thefieldpostulatedthattheadultbrainwasfixed

intworespects:inthatnonewneuronsarebornandthefunctionsofbrain

structureswerethoughttobedeterminate.1Recentstudieshaveshownthatbothof

thesenotionsaremistaken,aswillbediscussed.Anotheroverturnedassumptionin

thefieldhasbeenthediscoverythatthebrainnotonlychangesthroughoutone’s

life,ratherthanceasingwithchildhood,butthatinadditionanindividualcan

consciouslyparticipateinthatchangebycultivatingvariousmentalstates.2The

brain’spotentialformodificationisreferredtoasneuroplasticity.3Theideaof

1Thecreationofnewneuronsisexpressedbythetermneurogenesis.Thepresenceofneurogenesis

inadultshasalsochallengedthenotionthatthehumanbrainiscomparabletoasophisticatedcomputer,as“itisdifficulttoaccepttheideathatnewcellscouldcomeintoacomplicatedcircuitandbecomepartofitinawaythatwouldnotonlynotbedisruptivebutmightbebeneficial,”FredGage,aneuroscientistattheSalkInstituteinLaJolla,California,remarkedtotheDalaiLamaatthetwelfthMindandLifeconference.SeeSharonBegley,TrainYourMind,ChangeYourBrain:HowaNewScienceRevealsOurExtraordinaryPotentialtoTransformOurselves(NewYork:RandomHouse,2007),52and6.

2Ibid.,xii.

3Plasticityrefersto“inanindividualorpopulation,thecapacityforadaptation:a)throughgenechanges(geneticplasticity)orb)throughinternalphysiologicalmodificationsinresponsetochangesinenvironment(physiologicalplasticity).”SeeJamesN.ParkerandPhilipM.Parker,eds.Brain:AMedicalDictionary,Bibliography,andAnnotatedResearchGuidetoInternetReferences(IconGroupInternationalInc.,2004),429.Brainsystemsareshapedbyexperiencethroughoutlife,althoughsomebrainsystemsaremoreplasticthanothers.SeeBegley,75.

2

neuroplasticityisrevolutionary;thefactthatthemindcanalterboththeprocesses

andtheverystructureofthebraincallsintoquestionthepredominantphysicalist

interpretationofmindcommoninthefieldofneuroscience.Physicalismholdsthat

themindisreducibletoafixedbrainandmentalprocessesarenothingotherthan

neuralprocesses.4However,suchareductionistviewofmindisdifficulttoreconcile

withcurrentresearchandtheworkingsofvolitionalneuroplasticity,leavingcurrent

modelsofmindinneedofrevisionoroutrightrejection.

Asresearchregardingthebrain’scapacitytochangecontinuestogrow,there

hasbeenincreasinginterestinthecapabilitiesofmeditationinalteringthebrain,as

meditationoffersasortofdemonstrationfortheloftierabilitiesofneuroplasticity.5

ExperiencedcontemplativesintheBuddhisttraditionfindthemselvesincreasingly

inWesternlaboratories,whereinnovativeresearchisbeingconductedtolearn

aboutthevoluntaryabilityofusingmentalapparatustochangethefunctioningof

thebrainandtheprocessesofthemind.Advancedcontemplativeshave

demonstratedextrememalleabilityofmindandtheproductionofphysical

manifestationsofsuchmentalpractice,makingtheminvaluableforstudy.Often

scholarsconvenientlydismissthepossibilitythatreligionandsciencecouldhave

anymeaningfulexchange,yettheresearchthatwillbediscussedhereillustrates

4Physicalismactuallyreferstoamuchbroaderworldviewandholdsthatthenatureofrealityis

physicalorsupervenesonorisnecessitatedbythephysical.SeetheStanfordEncyclopediaofPhilosophy,http://plato.stanford.edu,under“Physicalism”athttp://plato.stanford.edu/entries/physicalism.Insomediscussiononphilosophyofmind,physicalismisusedtorefertoidentitytheory,suggestingmentalstatesandpropertiesareneurologicalstatesandproperties.Thisishowthetermwillbeusedinthisstudy.However,thephysicalismargumentpredominantintheneurosciencescomestobemodified,aswillbediscussed.

5Forasurveyofscientificresearchonneuroplasticityandrelatedresearchonmeditation,seeBegley.

3

howthisdogmaisquicklybeingmovedtothepileofoutmodedhistorical“givens”in

intellectualthought.WhileBuddhismandneurosciencecontinuetoconverseina

varietyofsubfields,“ofalltheconceptsinmodernneuroscience,itisneuroplasticity

thathasthegreatestpotentialformeaningfulinteractionwithBuddhism,”Richard

Davidson,thedirectoroftheLaboratoryforAffectiveNeurosciencebasedatthe

UniversityofWisconsin‐Madison,remarkedtotheDalaiLamaononeoccasion.6

TheproductionofmeaningfulexchangewithBuddhismregarding

neuroplasticityprimarilyoccursinoneoftwodomains.Oneisinthescientific

researchitself,asexperiencedcontemplativesactasthesubjectsofresearch

involvingsuchthingsastheroleofattentionforneuroplasticefficacy.Thesecond

domainisinphilosophyofmindandtheself.Contemporarywesternphilosophyof

mindhasanumberoftheoriesregardingthenatureofmentalitythatcanbe

categorizedunderthemoregeneraldivisionsofmonism,includingphysicalism

mentionedabovethatarguestherearenofundamentaldivisionsbetweenthe

mentalandthephysical,anddualismthatassertstheexistentialindependenceof

mindandmatter.7Inregardstothephilosophicalimplicationsofneuroplasticity,

suchastheontologicalimplicationthatmindexists,themetaphysicalpossibilityof

6Ibid.,11.7Dualismhasreferredtoavarietyofpositionsinthehistoryofthought,howeverheredualism

referstothedoctrineregardingphilosophyofmindthatcontrastsmindandbody.DualistthinkersincludePlato,Aristotle,RenéDescartes,andKarlPopper.Formsofdualismincludepsychophysicalparallelism,occasionalism,andpropertydualism.Seehttp://plato.stanford.edu/entries/dualism.Monismincludesnotonlytheidentitytheoryasnotedabove,butalsothetheoriesofbehaviorism,upheldbyLudwigWittgenstein,andfunctionalism,developedbyHilaryPutnamandJerryFodor.Seehttp://plato.stanford.edu/entries/behaviorismandhttp://plato.stanford.edu/entries/functionalism.Themostcommonformofmonismincontemporarywesternphilosophyisidentity‐theoryphysicalism.ImportantthinkersincludeJohnSmartandUllinPlace.

4

top‐downcausality(i.e.mind‐to‐bodycausality),andtheepistemological

consequencesregardingobservation/experienceandknowledgeofreality,these

theorieshaveanumberofopenquestionsthatreducestheirexplanatorypower,

howeverpliancyofmindisafundamentalassumptioninBuddhistphilosophy,

givingrisetothecontemplativetradition.8Assuch,Buddhistshavelongbeen

utilizingmentalpotentialitythroughthedevelopmentofmanydifferenttechniques,

generalizedasmeditation.Surroundingpracticeisaphilosophyofmindor

consciousnessandtherelatedphilosophyofselfthatinmanywaysreflectcurrent

neuroscientificresearchandindoingso,providesatheoreticalmodelofwhichto

understandneuroplasticityanditsimplications,addressingalacunainWestern

theoriesofmind.9

AccordingtotheBuddhistperspective,theimplicationsofneuroplasticityfor

philosophyofmindandtheselfarevastandanswerarangeofopenquestionsinthe

West,including:Whatcharacterizesmentality?Whatistheself?Whatisthe

relationshipbetweenmindandbody?Howcanexperiencebeaccountedfor?What

aretheprocessesandmechanismsofmentalstates?Andhowcanthemindbe

8Throughoutthiswork,Irefervariouslytotop‐downcausation,two‐waycausation,andmind‐bodycausation.Somescientistsusetheterm‘top‐down’toreferto‘higher’biologicalprocessesaffecting‘lower’processes.Thisisnothowthetermisusedinthisstudy,rather‘top‐down’isonetermthatrefersto‘mindtobody’causationasitiscommonlyreferredtointhesciences.Alltheabovetermsareusedtoconveymentalandphysicalinteractionorcausationinitiatedfromoneortheotherimpactingtheotherorboth.9Itisimportanttobeawareofthelinguisticlimitations.JustasinEnglish,Buddhistsalsousemany

termsthatrefertothementalincludingtheTibetantermssem(cittainSanskrit),translatedas“mind;”namshe(vijnanainSanskrit),“consciousness;”andyi(Sanskrit,manas),“mentality”or“mentalstates.”TheTibetanwordnamshe,referringtoconsciousnesshasmuchbroaderapplicabilitythantheEnglishterm,coveringallconsciousexperiencesinadditiontowhatmaybecategorizedas“unconscious”inWesternpsychologicalandpsychoanalytictheories.Also,theTibetanwordfor“mind,”semreferstothoughtinadditiontoemotion.Theterm“mind”asusedinthisstudyreferstothewholerangeofmentalevents.

5

studiedscientifically?Thesequestionsarethemainobjectofthisstudyandthe

answers,thecontribution.

Method

Inthepasttwentyyearsorso,theworksofmanyamateurs,specialistsfroma

varietyofdisciplines,andenthusiastsofallsortshaveexploredvariousaspectsof

BuddhismandScience.Thereareatleastfivecommonapproaches.Thefirstisthe

studyofBuddhismandScienceundertakenbythoseinthehumanitiesandsocial

sciencesandincludestheanalysisofsuchscholarsasDonaldS.LopezJr.,B.Alan

Wallace,andDavidL.McMahan.Thesecondapproachisthescientificormedical

studyofBuddhistpractice,suchasmeditation.Variousscientistsanddoctors,

includingStephenLaBerge,RichardDavidson,andJonKabat‐Zinn,haveundertaken

researchinthisfield.ThethirdapproachisasynthesisofBuddhism(variously

defined)andscientificfindings(variouslyenumerated)toproducescientific

theories.Thosewhohavetakenthisapproachincludethereligious,thesecular,and

thescientific,inbothpopularandscholarlyworkswithperspectivesrangingfrom

apologiststocritics.OneexamplefromthemanyavailableisTheQuantumandthe

Lotus,byMatthieuRicardandTrinhXuanThuan,whichexploresparallelsbetween

physicsandBuddhistthought.Somewithinthisdomainevenproducecooperative

worksbetweencontemplativesandscientists,suchastheMindandLifeInstitute

publications.10ThefourthapproachinvolvestheworksofmodernBuddhistssuch

astheDalaiLama,whopresentBuddhismandScienceintermsofthereown

10ForalistofpublicationsfromtheMindandLifeInstitute,see

http://mindandlife.org/books.pubs_section.html.

6

understandingoftheevolvinglivingtradition.WhiletheDalaiLamaconsciously

reinterpretsphilosophyandpracticetoappropriateBuddhismtothemodern

context,othercontemplativesandscholarshavetakenthisapproachaswell,yet

perhapswithlittleawarenessofhowtheyarecontributingtothetransformationof

thetraditioninquestionbyre‐presentingoldideasinnovelwaysinadditionto

deemphasizingorignoringincommensurablereligiouselements.

Thefifthapproachisasynthesisoftheotherfour,combiningscholarly

analysisoftheemergingscientifictheoriesofcontemplativesalongwiththe

scientificstudyofBuddhistpracticeandthedialoguethatthesedomainscreate.

HorizonsinBuddhistPsychology:Practice,Research,&Theory,editedbyMauritsG.T.

Kwee,KennethJ.GergenandFusakoKoshikawa,reflectsthismethodology.This

approachinvolvesgrantingthestatusofmodernBuddhismasatraditionwithinits

ownrightandanalyzesBuddhismandScienceinaccordancewiththisliving

tradition.WhatmodernBuddhisminvolvesandwhatthereferent‘Buddhism’of

BuddhismandScienceiswillbediscussedinthenextsection.Thisworkprimarily

followsthisfifthapproach.InthespiritofmodernBuddhismwithitsmultifaceted

nature,Iwillavoidessentializingthevariousperspectives,howevermyaimisalso

toconveytheintellectualvigorofthedialoguebetweenthesevariousapproaches

andhencetooutlinetheinterpretationsthathavesurroundedBuddhist

involvementwithneuroscienceandtoengagewiththephilosophicalquestions

raised.

7

Iwouldalsoliketocontributetothegrowthofasixthapproach,which

involvestheexpansionofdialoguebetweenBuddhistcontemplativesand/or

scholarsofBuddhistphilosophyandwesternphilosophersofscience.Iundertook

thisresearchinparttoaddtothegrowingrealizationthatapurelyEurocentric

approachtobroadphilosophicalquestionsisimposingneedlesslimitations.Iam

certainlynotqualifiedtoassesstheaccuracyofthescientificresearchoradequately

presentthephilosophiesofscienceinentirety,Iwriteasascholarofmodern

Buddhistphilosophywithaninterestintheimpactofscience.However,philosophy

ofscienceisanimportantelementformeaningfulresearchwithinthisdomain.

NeuroscienceisinterpretedalmostexclusivelybyWesternenlightenment

philosophyandanundeniablebiasinthefieldoftenresultsinthecondemnationof

Easternphilosophybeforeitisseriouslyconsidered.Therearemanyopenquestions

inphilosophyofneuroscienceandmindandBuddhismhasmanyideasthatwillbe

noveltowesternreaders.Imakenoattempttodisguisemyownpartialitytowards

andadmirationofBuddhistthought;yetIalsowishtoconveytheimportanceof

expandingdialoguebetweenBuddhistcontemplativesandwesternphilosophersof

scienceatthistime.ThisresearchexploressomeparticularBuddhistencounters

withwesternscience,yetitisnotjustahistoricalstudyofideas,butIhope,a

contributiontotheexpansionofthemodernphilosophicalandintellectual

imagination.

Inviewofthefactthatthisresearchisforadiverseaudienceofscholars,

philosophers,botheastandwest,andscientists,manyreadersarelikelytobe

unfamiliarwithsomeaspectofthisstudy.Therefore,Iwillpresentthereaderwith

8

manyreferencesandfootnotesforclarification.Alsoincludedisabroadoutlineof

theBuddhisttraditionandvariouselementsofbeliefandpractice.Themaintarget

ofthisworkthoughisthemodernappropriationofBuddhismratherthanthe

religionwithintheAsiancontext.WhileIavoidassertingBuddhismissomehow

scientificallyaccurate,Idoattempttoprovideatheoreticalmodelforinterpreting

theneuroscienceandaddressthephilosophicalissuesraised.Themodelcannotbe

foundwithinanysingleBuddhistteaching;ratheritisextrapolatedfromavarietyof

sourcesthathavecontributedtothedevelopmentofmodernBuddhistphilosophy.

Buddhisttheoryofneuroplasticitythereforeisonepresentationofhowamodern

Buddhistphilosophermightinterpretthematerial.Whilethismayseematenuous

compilationofvariouslyidentified‘Buddhist’elements,theanalysisand

presentationofBuddhistphilosophyreflectsmodernBuddhists’ownunderstanding

oftheirtradition,aswillbediscussedinthenextsection.

WhenBuddhismwasfirstintroducedtotheWestitwasofteninterpretedin

termsofwesternexpectationsandassumptions.Presently,scholarshaveaddressed

suchissuesandhavegreatlyexpandedourknowledgeofthelivingtraditioninAsia.

However,becausetheinitialpresentationofBuddhismtotheWestwasoften

wroughtwithmisunderstanding,acounterintellectualtrendemergedwitha

markedtendencytoalmostexclusivelyanalyzethemoderntraditionthrougha

narrowdefinitionof‘Buddhism,’strippedoftheorientalistandessentialistnotions

thatpermeatedearlierscholarship.Yet,everymethodologyhasitslimitsanditis

importanttorecognizethatmodernBuddhismdemandsanewparadigmthatcan

accountforaBuddhismoutsidetheimposedboundariesappliedtothereligionby

9

thiscountertrend.Thequestion‘HowBuddhististhisBuddhism?’isoftenraisedas

anobjectiontoBuddhistappropriationtothemodernworldasifthisformofthe

traditionweresomehow‘inauthentic.’Whilemisunderstandingofthereligionhas

certainlyoccurred,sohaveadaptation,evolution,andrebirthastheresultofboth

consciouslymodernizingindividualsandtheadoptionofthetraditionbyself‐

identifiedBuddhists,whomayormaynotbeawareoftheircontribution.The

noveltiesofthisformofBuddhismarenotindicativeofinauthenticity,butrather

themarkofadistincttradition.Inshort,modernBuddhismshouldnotbeheldupto

some“traditional”standardortoapreconceiveddefinitionofthereligion,ratheras

scholarsandenthusiasts,weshouldembracethisformofBuddhismaspartofthe

greatercultural,intellectual,andspiritualtrendsofmodernity.

ThenextsectionisdevotedtoexploringtheproblematictermsofBuddhism

andScience.Partofthiscounterintellectualtrendisemphasisontheuseofterms.

Obviouslyclarityisalwaysaconcern,howeverthefocushasbeenonresistingthe

generalizationandsimplificationofEasterntraditionswiththeuseofoverarching

wordssuchas‘Buddhism,’‘tradition,’‘Eastern,’and‘Western.’Whileitisimportant

tobeawareofsuchissueswhicharevitaltomuchscholarship,I,likeRichard

DawkinsinTheBlindWatchmaker,takethestandthatwordsareourservants,not

ourmasters.11Itisimpossibletomakeanyrealprogressifeverytermis

problematized.Nonetheless,theterms‘Buddhism’and‘Science’needtobeexplored

todefinetheirusagebythemodernBuddhistphilosopher.Yet,onceIhavemade

knownhowthesewordsaretobeutilized,Iwillthenusethemfreelywithinthe

11SeeDawkins,TheBlindWatchmaker(NewYork:W.W.Norton&Company,1996),4.

10

contextIhavemappedout.ModernBuddhisminpartillustrateshowtheusesof

dichotomiessuchas‘EastandWest’and‘traditionandmodernity’arebecoming

increasinglyineffective.However,perhapsduetomyownlackofimagination,Isee

nowayofcompletelyavoidingtheiruse.Thesetermsarethefingerpointingtothe

moon,notthemoonitself,butIhopemeaningwillbeconveyednonetheless.

ModernBuddhismandthe‘Buddhism’ofBuddhismandScience

Traditionally,Buddhismhasnotconcerneditselfwithscience,howeveroverone

hundredyearsago,themodernworldbegantoinfluenceBuddhisminawaythatled

tounprecedenteddevelopments,influencingthereligioneversince.This

engagementwiththeintellectualtrendsofmodernityhasledtothegrowthofanew

formofBuddhism,onebranchofthelongtradition’sevolution,referredtoas

modernBuddhism.AccordingtoDavidMcMahan,‘modernBuddhism’is:

AnactualnewformofBuddhismthatistheresultofaprocessofmodernization,westernization,reinterpretation,image‐making,revitalization,andreformthathasbeentakingplacenotonlyintheWestbutalsoinAsiancountriesforoveracentury.12

WesternenthusiastsandmodernizingAsiansbecametheavenueofwhich

theBuddhistcommunitypenetratedthemodernworld.Modernintellectualtrends,

suchasscientificrationalism,wereadoptedandsubsequentlyutilizedasameansto

expandBuddhistrelevanceandapplicabilityinavarietyofmoderncontexts.

12SeeDavidL.McMahan,TheMakingofBuddhistModernism(NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress,

2008),5.

11

Disenchantedwesternersbecameimportantcontributorstothedevelopmentof

modernBuddhismaswell.Modernindividualslookedtoeasternwisdomtoaddress

socialproblemsoftheage,includingreligiouspluralism,theincreasingclash

betweenreligionandscience,modernwarfare,andemergingenvironmentalissues.

ThemeetingofBuddhismandmodernityhasoccurredonmanycultural,

intellectual,andhistoricalfronts,theimpactshapinghowBuddhismwould

modernizethroughtime.Althoughtraditionalelementsremaininthisformof

Buddhism,manyhavebeenreinventedtomoldtowesterninclinations,resultingin

thepurgeofmythologicalelementsand“superstitious”ritualfromthereligion.

Aftersuchafundamentaltransformation,Buddhismneededtoemphasizeother

aspectsofthetraditiontomaintainvitalityintheBuddhistworldandatthesame

timesituateitselfinthemoderncontext.Theconsequencesofsuchevolutionhave

includednewphilosophicalinterpretationsofcosmologyandpsychology,vast

changesinritualandotherpractice,withnewspeakersforthetradition,andan

emphasisontheintellectualtrends,socialimplications,andthelanguageof

modernity.‘ModernBuddhism’isnotsimplyBuddhisminthemodernperiod,but

specificallyreferstoformsofBuddhismthathave“emergedoutofanengagement

withthedominantculturalandintellectualforcesofmodernity.”13

ModernBuddhismhasreferredtomultipledifferentformsofBuddhismthat

havearisenfromtheengagementwiththeintellectualtrendsoftheEuropean

Enlightenmentandtheirpredecessors.ThediscourseonBuddhismandScienceis

nodifferent,inthatittoohasmanifesteditselfinmanydifferentways.“Buddhism”13Ibid.,6.

12

hasmeanttheTheravadatraditionofSriLanka,the“esotericBuddhism”of

Theosophy,theZenofD.T.Suzuki,andthetantricBuddhismofTibet,tonameafew.

“Science”hasreferredtoarangeofthingsaswell,includingastronomy,physics,

moderncosmology,andneurobiology.ThecontemporaryphaseofBuddhismand

SciencereferstothatofTibetanBuddhismandthecognitivesciences,including

neuroscienceandpsychology.

Sincethe1990sTibetanBuddhismhasengagedwithsciencetoa

unparalleleddegreeinpreviousformsandphasesofmodernBuddhismandthe

DalaiLamahasbecometherepresentativechampionofthemovement,greatly

contributingtothestrengtheningofrelations.SincethedevelopmentoftheMind

andLifeConferencesandthesubsequentMindandLifeInstitute,creating,

expanding,andimprovingdialoguebetweenBuddhismandScience,theDalaiLama

neverfailstoemphasizethecompatibilityofthetwo.AtthefirstMindandLife

conference,whereunprecedenteddialoguebetweenBuddhistsandscientistswas

makinghistory,theDalaiLamasaid,“ItismyviewthatgenerallyBuddhism,and

particularlyMahayanaBuddhism,isveryclosetoascientificapproach.”14His

HolinessgoesontoassertthattheauthorityinbothBuddhismandsciencecanbe

reducedto“reasoning”and“logic”andthatthe“basicBuddhistattitude”is“analysis

14SeeJeremyW.HaywardandFranciscoJ.Varela,eds.GentleBridges:ConversationswiththeDalai

LamaontheSciencesofMind(Boston:Shambhala,2001),31.

13

andexaminationthroughreasoning.”15Suchsentimentsareubiquitousinthefield

ofBuddhismandScienceandareexpressedatalltheMindandLifeconferences.16

UnlikethevastmajorityofpreviousformsofmodernBuddhism,this

‘scientificTibetanBuddhism’hasmostlysteeredfreeofapologistclaimsand

approachesitsrelationshipwithscienceinawholenewway.Whileprevious

advocatesofBuddhismandScience,andsomecontemporaryones,maketenuous

parallelsbetweenthepopularscienceofthetimeandvariousschoolsofthought,

scientificTibetanBuddhismdoesnotlooktomakeclaims,butrathertoestablish

dialogueandproducemeaningfulexchange.Becauseofthis,theworksofsuch

Buddhists,primarilytheDalaiLamaandhiscolleagues,informthisstudy.TheDalai

Lama’sintellectualintegrityresultsinanimpartialrepresentationofthetraditionat

large,makingnoteofanyvariancefromschooltoschool.Thus,theBuddhist

perspectiveonneuroscientificissuesexploredinthisstudyisextrapolatedfrom

Tibetanthinkersexchangewithwesternscientistsinadditiontoshareddoctrinein

AsianBuddhistthought,includingthatofIndiaandTibet.

AsthesethinkersarepartofthemodernBuddhistmovement,thereislessof

afocusonsectariandifferencesandmoreemphasisonthecomplementariness

betweenanygiventenetofBuddhistthoughtandScience.Oneofthemajor

characteristicsofcontemporarymodernBuddhismisitsnonsectarianandinclusive15Ibid.,32.

16Seehttp://www.mindandLife.org/current.conf.htmlforanoverviewofmeetings,conferences,andevents.Theirvisionasdescribedontheinstitute’swebsiteillustratestheequalstandingofBuddhismandScience:“ToestablishmutuallyrespectfulworkingcollaborationandresearchpartnershipsbetweenmodernscienceandBuddhism—twooftheworld'smostfruitfultraditionsforunderstandingthenatureofrealityandpromotinghumanwell‐being.”Seehttp://www.mindandLife.org/mission.org_section.html.

14

nature.AsthisstudyissubsumedwithinthefieldofmodernBuddhism,the

Buddhistperspectiveisaccordinglyandappropriatelypresentedinanonsectarian

mannerasthemodernBuddhistwould.Thatis,the‘Buddhistperspective’draws

fromallschoolsofthought,withspecifictenetschosenfortheirrelevance,

compatibility(forbothcomparingandcontrasting),consistency,andtheir

complementarinesswithcurrentscienceandtherelatedphilosophies.However,

whenreferringto“Buddhism”andtraditionalthoughtregardingphilosophyofmind

andtheself,IwillbeusingitinthegeneralsenseofbothancientIndianandTibetan

thought,astheschoolsassociatedsharemanyprimaryassumptionsandmuch

doctrine,yetmajorpointsofcontentionwillofcoursebedulynoted.

Naturally,therearemanycontradictionsandcomplicationsthatarisewhen

drawingtogethertwosystemsofthoughtlikeBuddhismandScience.Scholarsand

devoteesalikehaveaccountedfortheseinconsistenciesinanumberofways

includingarguingBuddhismhasalwaysbeenmodernorscientific,dismissing

incompatibilitiesbetweenBuddhistandscientificthoughtasirrelevantoratleast

notcentraltotheargumentathand,andunderstandingtheBuddhistutilizationof

scienceasawestern‐styled“skillfulmeans.”17Theemergenceofallthesedifferent

modelsforunderstanding“BuddhismandScience”illustratethesignificantimpact

thisdialoguehashad,asboththescholaranddevoteestrugglewithunderstanding

science’splaceintheBuddhistworld.Manyscholarshaveaddressedandattempted

17DonaldS.LopezsuggestsjustasBuddhismgrewtoincludeVedicgodsinIndiaandkamiinJapan,

inorderforBuddhismtobesuccessfulintheWest,perhapsthereligionhasgrowntoincludethegodofScienceinthepantheonaswell.SeeLopez,BuddhismandScience:AGuideforthePerplexed(NewYork:UniversityforChicagoPress,2008),37.

15

toanswerthisquestion,somewithanoptimisticoutlook,18somewithmore

doubtfulinclinations.19Yet,despitehowBuddhismhasbeenmodifiedtosituate

itselfinscientificdialogue,thisisnotindicativeofmeaninglessness.“Buddhismand

Science”isanimportanthistoricalmovementthatcontinuestoproducevaluable

dialoguewithmanyimportantimplications.

AfterbrieflydiscussingtheBuddhistperspectiveonthemutabilityofmental

andphysicalprocesses,Iwillturntothescientificresearchonmeditationand

neuroplasticity.Asthesciencewillrevealthephilosophicalissuesinvolved,Iwill

thendiscusstheopenquestionsatlengthandprovideamodernBuddhistanalysis

andinterpretationofneuroplasticityanditsimplications.Iwillconcludewitha

suggestionofhowthescientificstudyofmindmightproceedandtheethical

implicationsofneuroplasticityfromtheBuddhistperspective.Byfocusingonsucha

narrowtopicwithinthefieldofBuddhismandScience,Ihopetoconveythelimitless

possibilitiesformeaningfulexchange.

TheBuddhistPerspective:MutabilityandContemplativeTechniques

TheultimategoaloftheBuddhisttraditionaspresentedbytheBuddhaintheFour

NobleTruthsistoendsufferingorunsatisfactorinessandrebirthbyfulfillingthe

humanpotentialforenlightenmentornirvana.LivinginaccordwiththeEightFold

18SeeB.AlanWallaceandBrianHodel,ContemplativeScience:WhereBuddhismandNeuroscience

Converge(NewYork:ColumbiaUniversityPress,2009).B.AlanWallaceisaknownpractitionerofBuddhism,thefounderoftheSantaBarbraInstituteforConsciousnessStudies,andanactivescholarandsupporterinthefieldof“BuddhismandScience.”19SeeLopez.Lopeztakesatentativeapproachinviewingscientificstudyasaccretiontothe

Buddhistcanon.Whileheseestheaccretionmodelexplanationassomewhataccurate,heisalsowaryofthisapproach,asitreducesmuchofwhatweonceunderstoodtobe“Buddhism.”

16

Pathcultivateswisdom,morality,andmeditation,resultingintheeventual

transformationofbody,speech,andmindandultimatelyliberation.TheBuddhist

contemplativetraditionisbasedonthefundamentalbeliefinthemutablenatureof

humanbeingsandimplicittothisideaisarelationshipbetweenmindandbody

enablingtransformation.

TheBuddhistcontemplativetraditionholdsthatbyusingmentalfaculties,

oneimprovesthequalityofthefaculties,whichpivotsontheassumptionputforth

intheEightFoldPath,thatmind,body,andbehaviorcanbetransformed.20Crucial

totransformationisfirstleveltraininginintrospection,aimedatdeveloping

attentionandequanimity.Attentionisthefacultythathelpsdirectthemind(a

deliberateintention)toachosenobjectamongthevarietyexperienced.Attentionis

developedthrough(a)mindfulness—afacultythatkeepsthemindtiedtotheobject

bymaintainingmeta‐awarenessofmentalstatesand(b)introspectivevigilance—a

facultytodiscernwhetherdistractionoccursandwhetherthevividnessofthe

mind’sfocushasbecomelax.Thesecondfacultycrucialtointrospectionis

equanimity—notexcessivelyintrospectingwherebytheobjectbecomesdistorted

andthemindisdestabilized.Developmentofattentionandequanimitywillleadto

mentalpliancy,inthatthemindiseasilyserviceableandcanbedirectedfreelyto

anyobject,knownasthe‘tranquilabidingofthemind’orśamatha,inSanskrit.21

20Themind’scapacityfortransformationisdiscussedinmanyBuddhisttexts.Someoftheearlier

MahayanaworksincludethefourthcenturyTheSublimeContinuum,attributedtoMaitreyaandPraisetotheUltimateExpanse,attributedtoNagarjuna.Dharmakirti,animportantTibetanphilosopher,alsodiscussestransformationofmind.21Ibid.,153.ŚamathaisknownasshineinTibetan.

17

Secondleveltrainingisknownas‘insight’(vipaśyanā)meditation,andworksto

discerninvestigationandanalysiswhileintranquilabiding.22Itbeginswith

sharpnessofinquiryandthenmaintainingfocusonresultantinsightaslongas

possible.

Thereareothertechniquesaswellincludingstructuredanalysisthathas

beendevelopedtofocuscontemplativeexplorationandaddressthepitfallsto

fantasyanddelusion.23Thesefacultieshavebeentargetedbyspecifictechniquesin

ordertoinducetransformationofmind.Unfortunately,thescientificstudyofthe

causalpowerofmentalstatestomodifybrainconditionwaslongneglected,foras

thelatebiologistFranciscoVarelacommented,“Itseemscounterintuitiveto

Westernassumptions.”However,hegoesontomakethecompellingstatement,“but

itislogicallyimplicitinwhatscienceissayingtoday.”24

22VipaśyanāisknownaslhakthonginTibetan.Bothśamathaandvipaśyanāarepracticedin

TheravadaandMahayanatraditions.

23Ibid.,155.InStagesofMeditation,the8thcenturyIndianBuddhistmasterKamalashilaprovidesadetailedaccountofhowbothśamathaandvipaśyanāmaybesystematicallycultivated.AtranslationandcommentaryofthisworkbytheDalaiLamaisavailable.SeeStagesofMeditation(SnowLionPublications:2003).

24SeeBegley,133.Varelawashighlyaccomplishedintheneuroscientificandcognitivescientificfieldswithover150publications.Asasidenote,theideathatthemindcanbereducedtothebrainbeganintheseventeenthcenturywhenReneDescartesdeclaredthedualismbetweenmindandmattertobeascientificprinciple.Later,thoseknownastheOxfordCircle,ledbyThomasWillis,thefatherofmodernneurology,conductedthefirstscientificexplorationofthebrainandthenervoussystem.Withthesestudiesbeganthetrendofthinkingaboutthemindinreductionistterms,inthatallmentalandemotionalstatescametobeconsideredasmanifestationsofbrainprocesses.AsphilosopherColinMcGinnputit“thereisnothingmoretoaconsciousstatethanitsneuralcorrelate”(quotedinibid.,135).Bythe1990’sneuroscientistshadidentifiedwhattheycalledtheexplanatorygapinhowbrainpropertiesadduptomentality.Someiconoclastsbegantounderstandthemindasanemergentpropertyofbrainfunctions,sothatthemindcanaffectthelower‐orderprocessesfromwhichitcamefrom,aswillbediscussedlater.Whilethemainstreamheldthatmentalstatescouldonlyaffectmentalstatesbecausetheywereinfactbrainstates,someimportantscientists,includingNobelPrize‐winningneuroscientistRogerSperry,stayedfirmwiththeclaimthattheinteraction

18

2

THESCIENCE

MentalFacultiesConducivetoNeuroplasticity

Aftertwo‐waycausationhadbeenimplicatedbysomeinitialresearchon

neuroplasticity,scientistsquicklytookupthechallengetodeterminethecausal

powerofmentalstates.Inonestudy,Harvard’sneurophysiologistAlavaroPascual‐

Leoneshowedthatthoughtsofplayingthepianoalteredthebraininthesameway

asthosewhoactuallypracticedplaying.Mentalpracticeresultedinthesame

physicalexpansionofthemotorcortexandresultedinsimilarreorganizationofthe

brain.25Thisstudyshowsthatinternal,mentalstimuli,suchasthoughtsand

concentration,canchangethebrain.Asstudiescontinuedthroughoutthe1990’s,it

becameincreasinglyapparentthatthedegreeofattentionwasdirectlyrelatedto

themagnitudeofneuroplasticefficacy.Inotherwords,attentionwasfoundtobe

vitalandnecessaryifneuroplasticityistocometofruition.26Thisreflectsthe

Buddhistapproach,asfocusedattentionisthefoundationformoreadvancedmental

training.AsDavidsonnotes,“attentionaltrainingissoimportantinBuddhism,andit

betweenthementalandphysicalwasnotunidirectional.Ashistorywassoontotell,thisseemstoinfactbethecase.

25Notedinibid.,152.SeeA.Pascual‐Leone,A.Amedi,F.Fregni,andL.B.Merabet,“ThePlasticHumanBrainCortex,”AnnualReviewsofNeuroscience28(2005):380.26Forexample,seeG.H.Recanzone,C.E.Schreiner,andM.M.Merzenich,“Plasticityinthe

FrequencyRepresentationofPrimaryAuditoryCortexFollowingDiscriminationTraininginAdultOwlMonkeys,”JournalofNeuroscience13(1993):87‐103.

19

alsoisrecognizedtobeveryimportantbyscientists.Inmanyways,attentional

trainingcanbethoughtofasthegatewaytoplasticity.”27

MeditationandNeuroscience

Buddhismandneuroscienceagreeparticularmentalstates,suchasattention,enable

themalleabilityorplasticityofthemind.However,attentionalonewillnotproduce

change,ratherspecificmeditativetechniquesareneededtoachievethedesired

effect.TheselectionofBuddhistmeditationfortheneuroscientificexplorationof

techniquesforharnessingthepowerofneuroplasticitywasnotanarbitraryone.In

theCambridgeHandbookofConsciousness,thereasonforthischoiceisdescribedas

follows:“unlikemanycontemplativetraditions,Buddhisttraditionstendtooffer

extensive,preciselydescriptive,andhighlydetailedtheoriesabouttheirpracticesin

amannerthatlendsitselfreadilytoappropriationintoaneuroscientificcontext.”28

27Begley,160.

28SeeA.Lutz,J.D.Dunne,andR.J.Davidson,“MeditationandtheNeuroscienceofConsciousness:AnIntroduction”inTheCambridgeHandbookofConsciousness.(Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,2007),503.Thisisnottosaytheambiguityofthetermisnotamatterofconcernforscientists.Muchtothecontrary,thoseinvolvedinsuchstudycontinuetolookformeaningfulwaysofdescribingBuddhistpractice.However,becausethequestionsaskedvarygreatlyfromthatofsocialscientists,theparametersforadefinitionofmeditationarethereforequitedifferent.Whatisdefinediswhatcanbeobservedobjectively.So,whilemeditativetechniquesandthestatesinducedareacceptabletermsofdefiningmeditationbecauseoftheirmeasurableneuralcorrelates,themeditativereflectiononultimaterealityandothersuchphilosophicalcomponentsareseparatedasunverifiable.Davidsonremarked,“Thevalueofconsultingaspecifictraditionispreciselythat–throughaccidentorexpertise–thetraditionmayhavegleanedsomevaluableknowledgeordevelopedsomepracticethatisnotfoundelsewhere.”Focusingonaspecifictraditionallowsscientiststoexploretheparticularpsychologyandepistemologyassociatedwithit,inadditiontothemeditationtechniques,andthenfromthesetenetsderivewhatcontributionsBuddhismcanoffertotheneurosciencesintermsofunderstandingthecognitiveandaffectiveprocessesthatarealteredbymentaltraining.ThereisanotherreasonthatneuroscientistsseevalueinstudyingBuddhisttechniques,itissimplythatBuddhistunderstanding“isstronglyconsistentwithourknowledgeoftheneurosciences.”See499‐502foranexcellentreviewofissuesinthestudyofmeditationandhowtheclaimsanddescriptionsresultingfromsuchstudyarebeingsortedoutbyneuroscientists,makingresearchincreasinglysophisticatedandmeaningful.

20

Whiletherehavebeenover1,000empiricalstudiesdoneonmeditation,the

neurophysiologicalprocessesinvolvedandtheeffectsoflong‐termmentaltraining

remainlargelyunknown.29Partoftheproblemwithsuchstudieshasbeentheuseof

thetermmeditation,asithasreferredtonumeroustypesofpractice.Today,

however,cognitivescientistsaremuchmoreawareofthisproblemandfocuson

specifictypesofBuddhistmeditationinthehopesthatitmayrevealsomeclear

effectsofmentalpractice.30

WhilethetypesofBuddhistmeditationarenumerous,thoseunderrigorous

andcriticalinvestigationcanbecategorizedintothreebroaddivisions:śamatha,

alsoknownasobjectmeditation,cultivatestranquilityandconcentration;

vipaśyanā,sometimescalledmindfulness,providesinsightandwisdom;andmaitrī,29Ibid.,499‐500.ForacompletesurveyoftheempiricalliteratureonmeditationseeJ.H.Austin,

ZenandtheBrain:TowardanUnderstandingofMeditationandConsciousness(Cambridge:MITPress,1998);R.CahnandJ.Polich,“MeditationStatesandTraits:EEG,ERP,andNeuroimagingStudies,”inPsychologicalBulletin132(2006):180‐211;M.M.Delmonte,“ElectrocorticalActivityandRelatedPhenomenaAssociatedwithMeditationPractice:ALiteratureReview,”inInternationalJournalofNeuroscience24(1984):217‐231;Delmonte,“BiochemicalIndicesAssociatedwithMeditationPractice:ALiteratureReview,”inNeuroscience&BiobehaviouralReviews9.4(1985):557‐561;P.B.Fenwick,“MeditationandtheEEG,”inThePsychologyofMeditation,editedbyA.West(NewYork:ClarendonPress,1987),104‐117;D.S.Holmes,“MeditationandSomaticArousalReduction:AReviewoftheExperimentalEvidence”inAmericanPsychologist39(1984),1‐10;andR.R.PaganoandS.Warrenburg,“Meditation:InSearchofaUniqueEffect”inConsciousnessandSelfRegulation(Vol.3),editedbyR.J.Davidson,G.E.Schwartz,andD.Shapiro(NewYork:PlenumPress,1983),152‐210.Atheoreticalmodelinvolvingtheneurophysiologicalprocessesinvolvedinthetransformationofmindbroughtaboutbymeditationwillbeexploredatalaterpoint.

30Neuroscientists,ofcourse,haveveryspecificandsophisticatedwaysofdefiningmeditationsothatitmaybeobjectivelystudied.Meditationisdefinedinfourways.First,aformofmeditationisdescribedaccordingtothepredictableanddistinctivestateassociatedwithit,indicatedbyspecificcognitiveand/orphysicalphenomenonthatcanbeobservedandrepeated.Second,thepredictableandlastingtraitsand/oreffectsonbothmindandbodyinducedbyrepeatedpracticeareusedtodistinguishoneformfromanother.Thethirdwaymeditationisunderstoodisbytheincreasinglevelsofchangefromnovicetoadept,whereimprovementisobservablebytheacquisitionofcertaincognitive,emotional,and/orphysicaltraitsorbytheoccurrenceofcertaincognitive,emotional,orphysicalevents.Fourth,isthattheinductionofmeditativestatesmustbesomethingthatcanbelearned,otherwiseclaimsofarelationshipbetweentheproductionofmeditativestatesandthedevelopmentofcertaintraitsbecomesirrelevant.SeeLutz,Dunne,andDavidson,502‐503and510‐518foradiscussiononhowmeditationterminologyisbeingusedinscientificstudies.

21

orcompassionmeditation,developsloving‐kindness.31TheBuddhistscholar

understandsthatthesecategoriesarevagueandsomewhatarbitrary,asśamatha

andvipaśyanādescribetwoaspectsofthesamemeditativestateandarenotso

easilyseparated.Furthermore,whenscientistsstudymeditationtechniquesthey

oftenlookatonetypethatfallsunderoneofthesethreecategories.32Forthesake

ofsimplicity,thescientificresearchdiscussedhasbeendividedintojustthetwo

categoriesofmindfulnessmeditationandcompassionmeditation.

MindfulnessMeditationandNeuroscience

Mindfulnessmeditationisincreasinglybeingusedinsecularenvironmentstotreata

rangeofmentalpathologies,includingstress,depression,andobsessive‐compulsive

disorder(OCD).InastudyconductedbyneuropsychiatristJeffreySchwartzand

colleagueLewisBaxter,patientssufferingfromOCDwhowentthrough

mindfulness‐basedtherapyshowedadramaticdecreaseinactivityintheorbital

frontalcortex,theareaactivatedbythedisorder,comparedtocontrolsubjects.As

Schwartznoted:

[Thestudy]offeredstrongevidencethatwillful,mindfuleffortcanalterbrainfunction,andthatsuchself‐directedbrainchanges—neuroplasticity—areagenuine

31ThesearetheSanskritterms.SeeDakpoTashiNamgyal,Mahāmudrā:The

Moonlight―QuintessenceofMindandMeditation(Boston:WisdomPublications,2006)foradetaileddescriptionofdifferentformsofmeditation.MaitrīisalsopracticedinbothTheravadaandMahayanaBuddhism.Inadditiontothesebroadcategoriesofmeditation,TibetanBuddhismalsohasthousandsoftantricvisualizations.32Forexample,“focusedattention”meditation,TsécigTingngédzin,occursinmanyformsof

practice,butisgenerallyunderstoodasśamatha.

22

reality.MentalactioncanalterthebrainchemistryofanOCDpatient.Themindcanchangethebrain.33

Inanotherexample,psychologistZindelSegalandCambridge’sJohnTeasdale

andMarkWilliamsdevelopedwhattheycalledmindfulness‐basedcognitivetherapy

forthetreatmentofdepression.Whilepatientsunderusualtreatmentservedasthe

controlgroupwith34percentfreeofrelapse,ofthoseundermindfulness‐based

cognitivetherapy,therateincreasedto66percent.Thatcomesouttobea44

percentreductionintherelapserateamongthoseinvolvedinmindfulnesstherapy,

asreportedin2000.34In2004,Teasdale,alongwithcolleagueHelenMa,replicated

thestudy,findingthesameresultsofreducedrelapse.Bydrawingawarenessto

theirownmentalstates,patientssufferingfromdepressionwereabletokeeptheir

negativethoughtsfromresultinginrelapse.35Thesefindingsindicatetop‐down

plasticity,becausetransformationoriginatesincognitiveactivity,thatis,themind

initiateschangesinthebrain.

Mindfulnessmeditationhasalsofounditselfinthetreatmentofstress.In

1995,JonKabat‐ZinndevelopedaprogramcalledtheCenterforMindfulnessin

Medicine,HealthCare,andSocietyasanoutgrowthoftheacclaimedStress

33Begley,141.Schwartz’sstudiesofOCDandmindfulness‐basedtherapyarediscussedatlengthin

J.M.SchwartzandS.Begley,TheMindandtheBrain:NeuroplasticityandthePowerofMentalForce(NewYork:ReganBooks,2002),chapter2,“BrainLock.”

34SeeJ.Scott,J.D.Teasdale,E.S.Paykel,A.L.Johnson,R.Abbott,H.Hayhurst,R.Moore,andA.Garland,“EffectsofCognitiveTherapyonPsychologicalSymptomsandSocialFunctioninginResidualDepression,”BritishJournalofPsychiatry177(2000):440‐46;andJ.D.Teasdale,Z.V.Segal,J.M.Williams,V.A.Ridgeway,J.M.Soulsby,andM.A.Lau,“PreventionofRelapse/RecurrenceinMajorDepressionbyMindfulness‐BasedCognitiveTherapy,”JournalofConsultingandClinicalPsychiatry68(2000):615‐23.

35SeeS.H.MaandJ.D.Teasdale,“Mindfulness‐BasedCognitiveTherapyforDepression:ReplicationandExplorationofDifferentialRelapsePreventionEffects,”JournalofConsultingandClinicalPsychiatry72(2004):31‐40.

23

ReductionCenter,establishedin1979attheUniversityofMassachusettsMedical

School.36Mindfulness‐basedtherapyhasbeenfoundtoproducealterationsin

patternsofprefrontalbrainactivitythathaspreviouslybeenfoundtoaccompanya

positiveaffect.37CoursesonMindfulness‐BasedStressReductionnowextend

beyondthehospitalsettingforchronicpatientsandareappliedtoawidearrayof

individuals.38Thismethod,withaprimarybasisinBuddhistpractice,isnowbeing

usedtotreatchronicpain,anxietydisorders,generalpsychologicalwell‐being,

psoriasis,andrecurrentdepression.39Recentstudieshaverevealedthatthistypeof

therapyalsoproduceschangesinbrainstructure,showingagainthatmeditation

caninduceneuroplasticity.40

CompassionMeditationandNeuroscience

Inthe1980’ssomeinitialstudiesontheplasticityofbaselineemotionsrevealeda

connectionbetweenattachmentsecurityandcompassion.41Attachmentsecurityis

36Formoreinformation,seehttp://www.umassmed.edu.Kabat‐ZinnisalsoafoundingFellowof

theFetzerInstitutethataimsattheutilizationoflove,forgiveness,andcompassionintransformingindividualsandcommunities.Seehttp://www.fetzer.org.

37SeeR.J.Davidson,J.Kabat‐Zinn,J.Schumacher,M.Rosenkranz,M.Muller,D.Santorelli,S.F.Urbanowski,A.Harrington,K.Bonus,andJ.F.Sheridan,“AlterationsinBrainandImmuneFunctionProducedbyMindfulnessMeditation,”PsychosomaticMedicine65.4(2003):564‐570.

38SeeJ.Kabat‐ZinnandA.Chapman‐Waldrop,“CompliancewithanOutpatientStressReductionProgram:RatesandPredictorsofProgramCompletion,”JournalofBehavioralMedicine,11.4(1988):333‐353;andKabat‐Zinn,Lipworth,andBurney,“TheClinicalUseofMindfulnessMeditationfortheSelf‐RegulationofChronicPain,”JournalofBehavioralMedicine8.2(1985):163‐90.

39SeeP.Grossman,L.Niemann,S.Schmidt,andH.Walach,“Mindfulness‐BasedStressReductionandHealthBenefits:AMetaAnalysis,”JournalofPsychosomaticResearch57.1(2004):35‐43.40SeeS.Lazar,G.Bush,R.L.Gollub,G.L.Fricchione,G.Khalsa,andH.Benson,“Meditation

ExperienceisAssociatedwithIncreasedCorticalThickness,”Neuroreport16.17(2005):1893‐7.41Begley,197‐8.

24

thedegreeofwhichonefeelssecureinhis/herownpersonalrelationshipsand

thosewhohadahighdegreeofattachmentsecurityalsohadhigherdegreesof

compassion.Afteraseriesofstudies,PhillipShaverandMarioMikulincerofBarIlan

UniversityinIsrael,foundthatthecircuitryforattachmentsecurityisplasticand

thereforecanbeincreasedalongwithcompassion,therebydecreasingselfishness

andethnocentrism.42

Thesefindingslaunchedfurtherstudiesindevelopingpositivementalstates

thatwouldtakeadvantageofthepossibilitiesofneuroplasticity.RichardDavidson,

whoisfamiliarwithBuddhistmeditationanditsimplicationsfortransforming

emotions,undertookastudytoexaminetherelationshipbetweenmentaltraining

andthegenerationofenduringhappinessandotherpositiveemotions.His

hypothesiswasthatmeditationhastheabilitytochangethebrain,throughthe

workingsofneuroplasticity,wherepatternsofneuralactivityoreventhestructure

ofneuronscanbealtered.TibetanBuddhistsmonkstraveledtotheUnitedStatesat

theDalaiLama’sencouragementtoactassubjectsofresearchaimedatdetecting

changeinpatternsofprefrontalactivation,thephysicallocationcorrelatedto

positiveemotions,throughtheprocessofmentaltraining.43Themonksfollowedthe

scientists’instructionsinalternatingneutralmentalactivitywithsixmentalstates,

includingcompassionmeditation.Duringcompassionmeditation,theleftfrontal

42MikulincerandShaverdescribetheirworkinnumerouspublications.SeeMikulincer,T.Dolev,

andShaver,“Attachment‐RelatedStrategiesduringThoughtSuppression:IronicReboundsandVulnerableSelf‐Representations,”JournalofPersonalityandSocialPsychology89(Nov.2005):817‐39,foranextensiveoverview.43EEGistheacronymforelectroencephalographyandisatoolformeasuringtheelectricalactivity

betweenneuronsfiringacrossthebrain.

25

cortex,andtheneuralcorrelateforhappiness,washigherthan99.7percentof

everyoneevermeasured.44

Afterlisteningtoareportofthefindings,theDalaiLamamakesthe

compellingremarkthathappinessissomethingthatcanbecultivateddeliberately.45

Davidsonmakesasimilarconclusion,statinghappinessisnotsimplyastateora

trait,butaskill,onethatcanbeenhancedthroughmentaltraining,justasBuddhism

suggests.Davidsonsays:

Thereisatremendouslacunainourworldview,wheretrainingisseenasimportantforstrength,forphysicalagilityforathleticability,formusicalability—foreverythingexceptemotions.TheBuddhistssaytheseareskills,too,andaretrainablelikeanyothers.46

Whereasemotionshadbeenpreviouslythoughttobelocalizedincertain

areasofthebrain,studiesbegantorevealthateveryareaofbraindedicatedto

emotionisalsodevotedtosomeaspectofthought;bothemotionandcognitive

processingsharethesameneuralcircuits.47Thisneuroanatomyisconsistentwith

theBuddhistnotionthatthoughtsandemotionsareinseparablepartsofthesame

mentaleventandonlyfurtherthehypothesisthatcognition,withmentaltraining,

44Begley,229.

45Ibid.FormoreinformationregardingBuddhistandscientificunderstandingsofemotions,seePaulEkman,RichardJ.Davidson,MatthieuRicard,andB.AlanWallace,“BuddhistandPsychologicalPerspectivesonEmotionsandWell‐Being,”inCurrentDirectionsinPsychologicalScience14.2(2005),59‐63.46Begley,231.

47Ibid.,232.

26

canalterthecircuitryofemotions.48Davidsoncontinuedtoinvestigatethe

possibilitiesofemotionalplasticity.UsinganfMRItomeasureactivityinthe

amygdala,theareaofthebrainassociatedwithemotionssuchasdistress,fear,

anger,andanxiety,hefoundthatsimplybyhavingtheaspirationthatapersonina

photobefreeofsuffering,subjects,evenwithoutmentaltraining,canalter

activationinthebrain.49Thoughtwasalteringemotion.

Inanotherexperiment,DavidsontestedeightBuddhistadeptsalongwith

eightnon‐meditatorsascontrols,toengageinloving‐kindnessmeditationwhile

theirbrainwavesweremeasuredbyEEGs.Theprominentpresenceofgamma

waveswasnoticedatonce,thesignalcontinuingtoriseoverthemeditationperiod.

Gammawavesarebelievedtogenerallybeassociatedwithmentaleffortinaddition

tobeingthesignatureforactivitybetweenwidespreadbraincircuitryandseemto

berelatedtoconsciousnessandperception.Evenduringneutralmentalactivity,the

monks’increaseingammawaveswaslargerthanhadeverbeenrecordedin

previousneuroscienceexperimentation.50Furthermore,Davidsonfoundalinear

relationshipbetweenthenumberofyearspracticedandtheirbaselinegamma

signal,showingthatthedegreeofmentaltrainingisrelatedtothedegreeof

change.51Thestudywasthefirststudyoncompassionmeditationeverconducted

48Buddhistnotionsofcognitive‐emotionalprocessing,designatedbytheunitvithiinthe

Abhidharma,willbediscussedatalaterpoint.

49Ibid.,232‐3.

50Ibid.,234.

51Ibid.,236.

27

andwassoonpublishedintheprestigioussciencejournalProceedingsofthe

NationalAcademyofSciences.52

Theresultsalsoshowedthatevenwhennotmediatingtheadepts’brain

signalsweresignificantlydifferentthannon‐meditators,illustratingthatmeditation

ormentaltrainingcanmanifestasanenduringbraintrait.Buddhistsdonotfindthis

surprising,asitsupportstheclaimthatmeditationhassignificantandlastingeffects

beyondtheactualperiodofpractice,influencingthepersononafundamentallevel

thatchangeseverydaylife.OfevengreatersignificancetoBuddhistsistheregionsof

thebrainthatwereshowntobeactiveduringcompassionmeditation,asthe

physicalcorrelatesofthepracticereflectwhatthistypeofmeditationismeantto

cultivate.Duringmeditation,thebrainsofexperiencedmeditatorsandthecontrol

subjectsalikebothshowedactivityinareasrelatedtomonitoringemotions,

planningmovements,andpositiveemotionssuchashappiness.Fortheadepts,

however,therewasincreasedactivationintherightinsulaandcaudate,thenetwork

associatedwithempathyandmaternalloveandthatisexactlythedesiredeffectof

thistypeofmeditation.Theamountofhoursspentinmeditationwasagain

informativeofthedegreeofactivationintheseareas.Andbecauseofthisincreased

activationintheareaofthebrainrelatedtoplannedmovement,itseemedasifthe

monksheldtheintenttoactonthiscompassion.AsDavidsonnotedatthetwelfth

52SeeA.Lutz,L.L.Greischar,N.B.Rawlings,M.Ricard,andR.J.Davidson,“Long‐TermMeditators

Self‐InduceHigh‐AmplitudeGammaSynchronyduringMentalPractice,”ProceedingsoftheNationalAcademyofSciences101(Nov.16,2004):16369‐73.

28

MindandLifeconference,theseresultsseemedtogiverealmeaningtothephrase

‘movedbycompassion.’53

AnotherconsistencybetweenBuddhismandsciencerevealedbysuch

studiesisthatthemeditatingmonksshowedactivationinnetworksassociatedwith

painand,asDavidsonnotes,showsthenotionof‘sufferingwith’someonemakes

realsenseneurologically.54Aspartofcompassionmeditationinvolvesthe

‘ingestion’ofothers’suffering,thismakessensetoBuddhistsaswell.55Furthermore,

regionsthatareinvolvedintheunderstandingofwhatis“self”andwhatis“other”

showedreducedactivity,inadeptsandnovicesalike.56TheBuddhistscholarcan

immediatelyseehowthesestudiesaresocompellinginthestudyofBuddhist

philosophy.Asallmeditationisultimatelyorientatedtowardrealizingthewisdom

ofemptinessandno‐self,physicalevidenceofmeditationquietingthenotionof

“self”isquitecompelling.Theconceptofno‐selfwillbediscussedatalaterpoint.

Suchactivityofthebrainisnotablyhigherinexperiencedmeditators,suggesting

againthatthecultivationofthesepositiveskillscanbetrained.

Ofcourse,theseresultsareofgreatinteresttotheneuroscientificcommunity

aswell,for,asDavidsonsays:

53Begley,238.

54Ibid.,238.

55InTibetanthispracticeiscalledtonglenandinvolvessendingoutyourhappinessandcompassiontoallsentientbeingswiththeexhalationofbreath,proceededbytheinhalationofallothers’painandsuffering.

56Ibid.,237.

29

Becauseincreasedtrainingincompassionmeditationresultsingreateractivationofareaslinkedtoloveandempathy,itsuggestthatemotionsmightbetransformedbymentaltraining.Sciencehaslongheldthatemotionalregulationandemotionalresponsearestaticabilitiesthatdon’tmuchchangeonceyoureachadulthood.Butourfindingsclearlyindicatethatmediationcanchangethefunctionofthebraininanenduringway.57

57Ibid.,238‐9.

30

3 PHILOSOPHICALIMPLICATIONSOFRESEARCH

AstheresearchhasrevealednotonlyconsistenciesbetweenBuddhismand

neuroscience,butalsosomequitecompellingpossibilities,itseemstheimplications

ofthefindingsforphilosophyofminddeservessomeattention.Buddhismhaslong

consideredthepotentialoftheplasticmind,whichhasbeensubjecttointense

analysisbyseriouscontemplatives.TheresultantBuddhistmodelofmindisan

alternatevisionthathasnotbeenfullyconsideredbywesternphilosophers,one

thataddressesthedifficultiesandpitfallsassociatedwithcurrent,predominantly

acceptedmodelsinthefield,includingphysicalismanddualism.58

TheMiddleWaybetweenPhysicalismandDualism

Regardingthestructureofreality,Buddhismrejectsbothphysicalismanddualism,

insteadtakingthemiddlewaybetweenthetwo.Buddhismsuggeststherearethree

fundamentalaspectsofthemundaneworldofconditionedthings,theworldof

conventionalexperience:(1)matter—physicalobjects;(2)mind—subjective

experience;and(3)abstractcomposites—mentalformations.Sciencedeals

primarilywiththatwhichisphysical,observable,andobjectifiableandoften

maintainsthemetaphysicalassumptionthatallrealityisultimatelyreducibleto

such,includingthemind.Manyphilosophersofneurosciencemaintainsimilar

58Thisisavastoversimplificationofthesophisticatedargumentsputforthbymanyimportantthinkers.Yet,reducingthephilosophicalviewpointstothisdichotomywillhelpillustratetheBuddhistunderstandingbycomparison.Foracomprehensiveoverviewofpastandpresentcontributionsinphilosophyofmind,seeDavidJ.Chalmers,ed.,PhilosophyofMind:ClassicalandContemporaryReadings(NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress,2002)

31

views.AccordingtotheBuddhistperspective,thementalrealmisheavilycontingent

uponphysicalbases,howeveritisalsoconsideredseparatefromthematerialworld.

Inotherwords,thementalcannotbereducedtothephysical,althoughitmay

dependuponthephysicaltofunction.59Atfirstglancethismayappeartobe

dualistic,howeverthisinfactisnotthecase,aswillbediscussedshortly.Thethird

realmofabstractcompositescannotbecharacterizedasphysicalormentalbecause

itisnotcomposedofmaterialconstituentsnordoesitexistonlyinsubjective

experience.Theseincludefeaturesofrealitythatareintegraltoourunderstanding

oftheworld,includingtime,concepts,andlogicalprinciplesthatareessentially

constructsofourmindbutdistinctfromthetypologyofmentalphenomena.All

phenomenawithinthisrealmarecontingentuponeitherthephysicalormental

realmsbuthavecharacteristicsdistinctfromthetwo.60

Buddhistphilosophyfurtherdividesthementalrealmintoasix‐foldtypology

ofmentalphenomena:theexperiencesofsight,hearing,smell,taste,touch,andthe

mentalstates.61Mentalphenomenacorrespondingtothefivesensesareconsidered

59WiththeexceptionofonematerialistschoolinIndia,mostancientIndianandTibetan

philosophicalschoolsagreethatthementalcannotbereducibletothephysical.SeeHisHolinesstheFourteenthDalaiLama[TenzinGyatso],TheUniverseinaSingleAtom:TheConvergenceofScienceandSpirituality(NewYork:BroadwayBooks,2005),126.

60ThisissimilartophilosopherofscienceKarlPopper’svisionofreality.See“ThreeWorlds,”theTannerLectureonHumanValuesdeliveredattheUniversityofMichigan,April7th,1978.Accessibleathttp://www.tannerlectures.utah.edu/lectures/documents/popper80.pdf.61OnedivisionoftheYogacaraschoolpositsaneightfoldtypology.Inadditiontothesixdiscussed,

theyarguefortheexistenceofa‘basicmind’thatretainsthroughoutthelifetimeofanindividualandisbestunderstoodas‘foundationalconsciousness.’Inextricablefromthisfoundationalconsciousnessistheconsciousnessofselfhood,asserting“Iam.”Thisisunderstoodasadistinctstreamofconsciousness.TheMiddleWayschool,generallyupheldbyTibetanthinkers,rejectsthistypologybecauseofthepotentialimplicationsoffoundationalconsciousnessregardingthenatureofself.SeetheDalaiLama(2005),123‐124.

32

contingentuponthesensoryfacultiesthatareunderstoodasmaterial(i.e.physical).

Theexperienceofmentalstatesontheotherhand,havegreaterindependencefrom

theirphysicalbasesasfacultiessuchasimaginationillustrate.Therearetwo

primarycharacteristicsthatdefinethesevariousstatesasmental:luminosityand

knowing.62Luminosityorclarityreferstotheabilityofmentalstatestorevealor

reflect.Knowingorcognizancereferstomentalstate’sfacultytoperceiveor

apprehendwhatappears.Allphenomenahavingthesequalitiesareregardedas

mental.TheDalaiLamaprovidesfurtherelucidation:

Justasinlightthereisnocategoricaldistinctionbetweentheilluminationandthatwhichilluminates,soinconsciousness[i.e.mentalstates]thereisnorealdifferencebetweentheprocessofknowingorcognitionandthatwhichcognizes.Inconsciousness,asinlight,thereisaqualityofillumination.63

Mentalityisnotconsideredtobedistinctfromthesementalprocesses;ratherthe

mindischaracterizedassuch.

Asphysicalismholdsthatmentalprocessesarenothingotherthanphysical

processes,categorizingthemindasmentalprocessesmayseemtosuggestthe

mentalissimplyphysical,evidencedbyneuralcorrelatesofmentalevents.

However,theprimarycharacteristicofmindisitssubjectivenatureandnothing

purelyobjectivecanfullyaccountforsubjectivity.Itisbynaturedifferentthanthe

physical,objectiveworld.Becausethenatureofthementalandphysicalare

necessarilydifferentonecannotbethesubstantialcauseoftheother.Thisis62YoungTibetanBuddhists’firstlessoninepistemologyis,“Thedefinitionofthementalisthat

whichisluminousandknowing.”Ibid.,124.

63Ibid.,125.

33

becauseaccordingtoBuddhisttheoryofcausationtherearetwoprinciple

categoriesofcauses:(1)thesubstantialcause,thesubstancethatturnsintoa

particulareffect(forexample,clayisthesubstantialcauseofapot);and(2)

contributoryorcomplementarycauses,thatisallotherfactorsthatmaketheeffect

possible(continuingthepreviousexample,thiswouldincludesuchthingsasthe

potterandkiln).64AccordingtoBuddhisttheoryofconsciousness,consciousness

andmattercananddocontributetowardtheoriginationofeachother,butonecan

neverbethesubstantialcauseoftheother.65Furthermore,ifthisisthelineof

demarcationbetweenthementalandthephysicalthansubjectiveexperiencehaving

neuralcorrelatesdoesnotrefutetheclaimthatone’smind,one’ssubjective

experiencecanalterthephysical.Infact,theneuralcorrelatescanbeinterpretedas

supportingsuchatheory,astheyprovidethemechanismofwhichthementalcan

actonthephysical.

Dualismsuggeststherearetwoindependentsubstances,mindandmatter.

ThisisnottheBuddhistview.Instead,realityasexperiencedbyordinaryperception

istheworldofconditionedthings.Thenatureofrealitycontainstwotruths,the

conventionalandtheultimate.Theyaredistinctandneitherismore“true”thanthe

other.Ontheultimatelevel,nothinghasinherentexistenceandisknownas

“empty,”rathereverythingisdependentlyoriginated,thatiseverythingoriginates

accordingtocausesandconditionsandisthereforesubjecttochange.Allthings64ItisperhapsworthnotingthesubstantialandcontributorycausesarecomparabletoAristotle’s

materialandefficientcauses.

65Ibid.,131.BuddhisttheoryofcausationhasbeenexploredbythinkerssuchasDharmakirti(ca.7thcent.).HisphilosophyisgenerallyupheldbyTibetanthinkersandispartofthemonasticcurriculum.

34

experiencedintheconditionedworldgothroughthethreephasesofarising,

remaining,andceasing.Themind,likeallconditionedphenomena,arisesfrom

manycontributingfactorsandisdependentonandrelationaltomanycomponents.

Mindandbodyaredistinct,butnotwhollyseparate,related,butnotequivalent.

Bothphysicalismanddualismhavedifficultyaccountingfortwo‐way

causationimplicatedbyneuroplasticity.Thephilosophyofphysicalismis

complicatedbyrecentresearchshowingtheproductionofphysicalchangethrough

attentionandothervolitionalmentalstates(suchasequanimity),whichwouldbe

impossibleaccordingtotheprevalentviewinneurosciencethatrejectsmental

causation.Two‐waycausalityisaproblemfordualisminthatifmindandmatterare

completelyexistentiallyindependentfromeachother,howcouldanykindofcausal

relationshipbetweenthetwobeaccountedfor?Justasitisdifficulttoacceptthat

mindandmatterarereduciblyequivalent,positingthementalandthephysicalare

whollyindependentisequallyunsatisfactory.Rather,themiddlewaybetweenthe

two,positingdistinction,butnottotalseparationbetweenmindandbodyseemsto

beconsistentwiththeneuroscientificresearchandtheimplicationsof

neuroplasticity.66

TheNeuroplasticMind,TwoWayCausation,andtheProblemofSelf

66B.AlanWallacehasalsoacknowledgedtheBuddhistviewasthe“MiddlePathbetweenDualismandMaterialism.”SeeHoushmand,etal.,34‐37.

35

Buddhistsseeneuroplasticityasanexpressionofthefluidityandimpermanenceof

mentalstatesintheever‐changingprocessesthatcharacterizeconsciousness.67This

ideaisoffundamentalimportancetoBuddhism,inthatneuroplasticitycanbe

equatedtomentaltransienceandattainingunderstandingofthenatureofmindis

thefoundationoftheBuddhistnotionofno‐self,tobediscussedshortly.

Neuroplasticitysuggeststhemindisnot,infact,someautomated,mechanical

processemergingfromthephysical,butisdistinctandenjoyssomeindependence

fromthebrain,reflectingBuddhistunderstanding.68Eventhoughthemindis

consideredtobedistinctfromthebrain,thisisnotseenasestablishinganykindof

permanentorinherentexistence.Rather,themindischaracterizedbythetransitory

processesofconsciousnessorneuroplasticpotentialand,therefore,hasno

permanentattributesthatcouldaccountforinherentexistence.TheMadhymikaor

CentristviewofTibetanBuddhismrejectstheinherentexistenceofallthings.

However,thingsdoexistinrelationtoeachother,includingthementalandthe

physicalrelatedthroughsensation,perception,andconception.Thisschoolof

thoughtrejectsboththephilosophiesofdualismandphysicalismasnotedabove.

Phenomenadonotexistinthemselves,butdoexistasdependentlyrelatedevents.67HisHolinesstheDalaiLamaexplicitlyexpressesthisview.SeetheDalaiLama(2005),150.There

aremanyvarietiesofawarenessanddegreesandqualitiesofconsciousnessfallingalongaspectrumfromtheverygrosstotheverysubtle.Thosethatareofagrossernatureareentirelydependentonthephysicalbodyasdiscussedearlier,howeversubtlelevelsofconsciousnessarerelatedtoconceptualawareness(asopposetosensoryawareness).ForabriefdiscussiononthespectrumonconsciousnessbetweenHisHolinessandwesternscientists,seeZaraHoushmand,RobertB.Livingston,andB.AlanWallace,eds.ConsciousnessattheCrossroads:ConversationswiththeDalaiLamaonBrainScienceandBuddhism.Ithaca:SnowLionPublications,1999,37‐55.

68Buddhismconcedesthatthebrainorthebodyisthebasisforcertainkindsofawareness,butthebrainisnotunderstoodasapprehendinganythingatall.Theawarenessapprehends,notthephysicalbody.SeeDanielGoleman,ed.HealingEmotions:ConversationswiththeDaliaLamaonMindfulness,Emotions,andHealth.Boston:Shambhala,1997,232.

36

Dependenceisthreefold:(1)thingsariseindependenceonprecedingcausal

influences,(2)phenomenaexistindependenceontheirownattributes,and(3)they

aredependentonhumankind’sverbalandconceptualdesignationofthem.69The

mindtoo,existsasacausalnexus,partofwhichissharedwiththebody,allowing

fortwo‐waycausation.70

Inlightoftheimplicationsofneuroplasticityregardingmind‐bodycausality,

bothphysicalistsanddualistsneedtomodifysomeoftheirclaimsaboutthemind‐

bodyrelationship.Whilethisisstillamajorproblemthatneedstobeaddressedin

dualism,advocatesofphysicalismhaveputfortharevisedargument,positingthe

mindisan‘emergentproperty’ofthebrain,whichhasbecomethepredominant

theoryinneuroscience.Theideathatthemindisapropertyofthebrainisa

philosophicallytrickyexplanationthatfindsawaytorecognizethemindand

dismissitatthesametimeandattemptstosupportthetwocontradictorynotions

thatmindhasexistencebutiswithoutsubsistence.Thisexplanationallowsforthe

continuationofthereductionist,physicalistviewbydenyingthemindany

categoricaldistinctionfromthebrain.Buddhistsandneuroscientistsagreethat

consciousnessisaprocess;however,ifthemindisaprocessitnecessitatesacause69SeeHoushmand,etal.,35.

70Somephilosophersofscienceargueforanetiologicalunderstandingofexplanations,thatisexplanationshoulddescribecauseandeffectintermsofasharedcausalnexusbetweensupportingcomponentparts,ratherthanaconstitutiveexplanationofcomponentpartsthatunderstandscauseandeffectinreductionistterms.Forexample,seeWesleyC.Salmon,CausalityandExplanation(NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress,1998),whichbringstogetherthisimportantthinker’scontributionsoverthecourseofhiscareer.Buddhistunderstandingofdependentoriginationcanbecomparedtotheetiologicalexplanationposition,inthatcauseandeffectdonotoccursolelyasthemechanical/physicalreactionofcomponentparts,butalsooccurasacausalnexus.Agoodexplanationtherefore,willaccountforcausalrelations.Followingthislineofreasoning,anadequateexplanationofmindshoulddescribethemindnotintermsofreduciblyphysicalcomponentparts,butratheraccountforanexusbetweenmindandbody.

37

andthespontaneousemergenceofmindfrombrainseemstosuggestaninitialpoint

ofwhichthereisnocause.Logicallyacauselessinitialcauseisinconsistentand

difficulttoaccept.71Thistheorycreatesasituationofwhichthemindcanstillbe

understoodassomedefinable,determinable,physicallyobservablephenomenon,

givingittheillusionofsubsistenceandprovidingahavenforitsexistencetoreside

in.Inotherwords,thetheoryallowsfortop‐downcausalitywithouttop‐down

causes,allowsformind‐to‐braincausalitywithoutgrantingmentalcauses.72

Suchproblemsariseinpartduetoattachmenttothenotionofpermanent

selfhoodpervadingwesternthinking.Westernphilosophytoooftenconflatesthe

termsmindandself.Forexample,anygivenbookonphilosophyofmindwilldevote

sometimetothenotionoffreewill.Therelevanceoffreewilltomindliesinthe

ideathatthemindholdstheautonomyandindependenceoftheself.While

previouslythepredominantviewwasthatselfhoodpersistedinsuchformsasa

soul,asreligiousthoughtbecamelessrelevantaftertheEuropeanenlightenment,

selfhoodwasrelocatedtothementalrealm,whichtomanywasreduciblyphysical.

Theimpermanenceofthebodywasgranted,howeverthepermanenceorinherent

existenceofsomeattributesconstitutingtheselfwasassumednonetheless.

71AtthethirdMindandLifeconference,theDalaiLamaandwesternscientiststouchedonthis

subjectofcategorizingthemindasanemergentpropertyofthebrain.TheDalaiLamacommented:“Therearemanydegreesofsubtletyofconsciousness,andsciencehaslookedonlyattheordinarylevels.So,sciencehasmerelynotfoundthemoresubtleones…andmerelynotfindingisnotenoughtocontrovert…becauseofthehumanbody,thereisacertainconsciousnessthatentirelydependsonthehumanorganism.Obviously,wecallthatgrosserlevelofmindthehumanmind.Inthatsense,youcouldvirtuallyspeakofthehumanmindasbeinganemergentpropertyofthebody.”However,inregardstosubtlerlevelsofconsciousness,thesubstantialcauseforthementalmustbemental.SeeGoleman(1997),227‐228.

72Foradiscussionregardingphilosophicalissuesraisedininterpretingtop‐downcausalityintermsofinterlevelcausation,ratherthanintralevelcausation,seeCarlF.CraverandWilliamBechtel,“Top‐DownCausalitywithoutTop‐DownCauses,”inBiologyandPhilosophy(2007)22:547‐563.

38

Thisassumptionhasledwesternphilosophersofmindtofocusonexplaining

whatpermanentattributescouldaccountforselfhoodandoftenignoringthe

possibilitythatthereisnoself.73Eventhe“emergentmind”hypothesis,which

attemptsatdismissingamindthatiscategoricallydistinctfromthebrainreflects

suchproblems.Iftherewerenoselftoconsideralongwithnomindtodeny,there

wouldbenoneedtoestablishthemindasexistentiallydependenton,butcausally

distinctfromthechanging,neuroplasticbrain.Asresearchonneuroplasticity

revealedthebrainisratherdynamic,itcouldnolongerserveastheseatofselfhood.

Selfhood,thenmustresideinthementalrealm,existingbywayofmemoryorsome

othercontinuity.Inordertomakesuchnotionsofselfhoodconsistentwith

physicalistornaturalisticphilosophies,thementalcametoberegardedasan

emergentpropertyofthebrain.Inthisway,thementalrealmisgrantedsome

independence,butnotgrantedcategoricaldistinctionfromthebrain,allowing

selfhoodtopersistoutsideoftheimpermanent,transientbodywhilesimultaneously

maintainingamindthatisreduciblyphysical.Thesimplerexplanationtoaccount

formind‐braincausalitywouldbetoconcludethemindissubjecttocauses,

conditions,andchangeandisnomorestableorenduringthanthebrain,bothlack

permanenceandexistonlyindependenceonparticularcausalnetworks,although

theyaredistinct.Neuroscientificfindingsregardingneuroplasticityclearlyindicate

theimpermanenceofbrainstructureandmentalstates.Theimplicitobjectionto

73Forexample,seeRobertR.Llinas,IoftheVortex:FromNeuronstoSelf(Cambridge:MITPress,2002),whichexaminesselfhoodfromtheperspectiveofcellularphysiology.

39

suchamodelofmindisifthemind,likethebrain,isimpermanent,whatisleftto

identifytheselfwith?74

TheSelf

Neuroplasticityrevealsthathumanbeingsarenotsomefixed,monolithicentity,

ratherboththementalandthephysicalaspectsoftheindividualareplasticandare

evencharacterizedbyimpermanentandvaryingprocesses.Knowingthatchangeis

thenatureofourbeing,thequestionofselfhasneverbeengreater.75Ifbothmind

andbodyareconstantlychangingandthereforelackpermanentattributes,what

accountsforselfhood?FromtheBuddhistperspective,perhapsthemostsignificant

implicationsofneuroplasticityarethoseregardingconceptionsoftheself.

AccordingtoBuddhism,justasthemindissubjecttoparticularcausesand

conditions,undergoingconstantchangeandthereforeimpermanentandlacking

inherentexistence,sotoofortheself.WhenBuddhistsassertthatthereisnoself,

whatisbeingsuggestedisthatthereisnopermanententityofwhichtoidentify

withtheselfandtheexperienceofselfasaenduringbeingisanillusion.Rather,the74Somescientistsinthefieldofbiologyandcognitivescienceareawareoftheproblemofselfwhen

thinkingofthemindasanemergentpropertyofthebrain.Forexample,neuroscientistFranciscoVarelanotesthattheBuddhistnotionofno‐selforemptyselffollowsthemodelof“virtualself”beingdevelopedinhisfield.Followingthisview,theselfcanbeseenastheemergentpropertyofthemind,butlikethemind,theselfhasnoinherentexistenceandissomethinglikeanopticalillusionofthemind.Individualsreifytheselfandattributepermanenceandsoliditytosomethingthatisillusory.However,eventhisnotionofvirtualselfseemstomaintainattachmenttothenotionofapermanentself,despitetheimplicationsofsuchatheory.Whileitisnotedthattheselfcannotbelocatedanywhereinthebody,theselfisdescribedas“producedbyanunderlyingnetworkofbiologicalandcognitivesystems.”However,followingthelogicalconclusionof“virtualself”thereshouldbenothingthatcouldbeidentifiedas“produced,”exceptperhapswhenspeakingoftheconventionalexperienceofself,butthatisnothowitisused.SeeDanielGoleman,ed.,DestructiveEmotions:AScientificDialoguewiththeDalaiLama(NewYork:Bantam,2004),93.

75Naturally,manythinkershaveexploredthequestionofself.Foracontemporaryandinfluentialwork,seeDouglasR.HofstadterandDanielDennett,TheMind’sI:FantasiesandReflectionsonSelf&Soul(NewYork:BasicBooks,2001),whichcontainsDennett’swell‐knownessay,“WhereAmI?”.

40

selfisdesignatedasatransientlyexistentphenomenon,meaningtheselfisboth

existentandillusory.

No‐selfcanbeexaminedasfollows.Whenthinkingof‘I,’therearisesa

conceptionofsomethingindependentofthebody,mind,oracontinuumofsuch

elements,asifthesethingswereirrelevanttoandseparatefrom‘I.’Thenonemay

questionifthis‘I’isonewiththeelementsordifferentfromthem.Buddhists

understandmentalandphysicalaggregatesashavingdifferenttypesandsources,

lackingtheunityof‘I.’Becausetheseaggregatesareofmanykinds,therewouldbe

manytypesof‘I’iftheselfcouldbeequatedtotheseelements.Furthermore,ifthese

aggregateswereeliminatedordestroyed,‘I’wouldbealso.Itisimpossible,

therefore,that‘I’andtheaggregatescouldbeoneinthesame.

However,ifthe‘I’andtheaggregateswerecompletelyindependentofeach

other,theycouldnotrelatetoeachother.Then,whenthebodyissick,itwould

meanthe‘I’isnotsick,whenthebodysuffers,‘I’donotsuffer,butthisisnot

supportedbyexperience.Therefore,theselfandmentalandphysicalaggregates

cannotbeunrelated.

Yet,fortheselftohaveexistenceitmusthavesubsistence(somethingthat

categorizesitasexistentandasexistentiallydistinctfromotherexistententities)

andwhatcharacterizesitshouldeitherbethesameordifferentfromtheaggregates.

Becauseneitheroneisthecase,onemustconcludethatthereisnothinginherently

existenttothe‘I.’The‘I’doesnotexist,butthisisalsocountertoexperience,soone

mustconcludethatitisnottotallynon‐existent.Conventionally,thereisaself,butit

41

isanominal‘I’ofimputedexistence.76Theselfisnotinherentlyexistent,itisnot

totallynon‐existent,itisnotbothofthese,anditisnoteitherofthese.77Theself

mustbeunderstoodbothontheconventionalandultimatelevels.Asmentioned,a

fundamentalBuddhistphilosophicalbeliefisthe‘twotruths:’thetwolevelsof

reality.AstheDalaiLamastates:

Onelevelistheempirical,phenomenalandrelativelevelthatappearstous,wherefunctionssuchascausesandconditions,namesandlabels,andsooncanbevalidlyunderstood.Theotherisadeeperlevelofexistencebeyondthat,whichBuddhistphilosophersdescribeasthefundamental,orultimate,natureofreality,andwhichisoftentechnicallyreferredtoas‘emptiness.’78

Sowhiletheselfdoesnotexistattheultimatelevel,itcancontinuetobevalidly

understoodintermsoftherelativelevelofordinaryexperience.

Amajorobjectiontosuchaviewisifthe‘I’hasimputedexistence,whois

doingtheimputing?Inotherwords,theremustbeselftoestablishself.However,

thisobjectionassumesanihilisticinterpretationoftheBuddhistviewandisnotin

agreementwithwhatisbeingsuggested.Buddhistsaredenyingtheinherent

76ThelogicusedinanalyzingtheselfisextrapolatedfromtheDalaiLama’spresentationofthe

argument.SeeH.H.theDalaiLama,TheBuddhismofTibetandtheKeytotheMiddleWay(Delhi:VikasPublishingHouse,1975),42‐45.

77Inthediscussiononthenatureofself,theDalaiLamaquotesNagarjunahere,fromtheFundamentalTextCalled‘Wisdom’(XV.10):“‘Existence’isholdingtopermanence,‘Non‐existence’isaviewofnihilism.Notexistent,notnon‐existent,notbothandnotsomethingthatisnotboth.”Quotedinibid.,44.

78SeeDalaiLama,HerbertBenson,RobertA.F.Thurman,DanielGoleman,andHowardGardner,etal.,MindScience:AnEastWestDialogue,proceedingsofthesymposiumsponsoredbytheMind/BodyMedicalInstituteofHarvardMedicalSchool&NewEnglandDeaconessHospital,andTibetHouseNewYork,editedbyDanielGolemanandRobertA.F.Thurman(Boston:WisdomPublications,1991),14.

42

existenceofselfasaphenomenonindependentofotherphenomena.Thus,inherent

existenceistheobjectofnegation.Theideathattheselfiscompletelynon‐existent

isnottheBuddhistview.Rather,theselfisadependentlyoriginatedphenomenon

andisconstantlyundergoingchange,howeverasaresultofconditioning,

phenomenaappeartoinherentlyexist.Attachmenttotheideaofpermanence

invariablyleadstodissatisfaction,orsufferingasnotedintheFourNobleTruths.

FromtheBuddhistperspective,allmentalafflictionsarisefrommisunderstanding

thenatureofthings,namelythenatureofself.79

TheMindBodyProblem

Whiledependentorigination,discussedearlier,explainstheontologicalstatusof

mindandmatterandconfirmsbothassubjecttochangeandthereforewithout

inherentexistence,thetheorydoesnotexplainhowthephysicalandmental

interact.Knownasthemind‐bodyprobleminwesternphilosophyofmind,the

questionishowcansomethingnonphysical(themind)actonthephysical(the

body)?Whatisthemechanism?AccordingtoBuddhism,thecausalnetworksof

mindandbodyareintertwined,yettheyarenotidentical,noraretheysubjecttoall

thesamelaws,asmentalstatesindependencefromphysicalsensoryinformation

79ForaninterestingcomparisonbetweenBuddhismandscienceregardingafflictionsrelatingto

identity,seeWilliamS.Waldron,“CommonGround,CommonCause:BuddhismandScienceontheAfflictionsofIdentity,”inBuddhismandScience:BreakingNewGround,editedbyAlanWallace(NewYork:ColumbiaUniversityPress,2003),145‐191.

43

illustrates.80Therefore,whenthephysicalandmentalrealmsinteract,the

occurrencesarewithinaparticularcausalnetwork.

Whenthenoseasphysicalsensoryorgancomesincontactwiththescentofa

flower,thereoccursamentalcorrelatetophysicaloccurrence.Thatmental

correlateorsensationismediatedbyperceptionandtranslatedintotherealmof

subjectivityasaconcept.Thephenomenongoesfromatransitiontophysical(for

example,arose),thenexistsasbothphysicalandmentalphenomena(smellingthe

rose),thenenjoysindependencewithinthementalrealm(smelloftherose).The

Abidharmakosasastra(AbhidhammainPali),oneofthethreepartsofthePalicanon

knownastheTripitaka(Pali:Tipitaka),regardsconsciousnessasactingwithoutan

actor,butnotwithoutcause,andconsciouscognitionisthereforeunderstoodin

termsofthedynamicsofinputandoutput.81Theinputdataaretheobjectsof

consciousness.Whentheobjectsofconsciousnessarisefromthephysicalsenses

theyareknownasrupa,translatedasbodyormatter.Otherinputcomesfrom

consciousnessitself,independentfromthephysicalsenses,callednama,translated

asmind.AccordingtotheAbidharma,themindisregardedasthesixthsense,as

80Thatisnottosaytherearenolaws.OneimportantBuddhistthinkerwhoexploredpsychological

lawswasDharmakirti(ca.7thcent.).

81TheAbidharmaisacompilationofcanonicalTheravadaBuddhisttextsandoneofthreesetsofvolumesknowncollectivelyastheTipitakaor“ThreeBaskets.”ThetextsareinPali,compiledaround500B.C.E.to250B.C.E.anddealwithphenomenologicalpsychologyasobtainedthroughtheeffectsofmeditationortrainedintrospection.SeeHenkBarendregt,“TheAbhidhammaModelofConsciousnessandItsConsequences,”inHorizonsinBuddhistPsychology,(TaosInstitutePublications:ChagrinFalls,2006),331‐349forasketchoftheAbidharmamodelandaninterpretationofthatmodelregardingvariouspsychologicalnotionslikeneurosis,psychosis,andcopingmechanisms.Theeffectsofmindfulnessmeditationareconsideredinlightofpsychotherapeuticexplanations.NotallvolumesoftheAbidharmahavebeentranslatedintoEnglish,includingfivevolumesofthePatthana.

44

notedearlierwhendiscussingthetypologyofmentalphenomena.Yet,thisdoesnot

refertoanythingsupernaturalas‘sixthsense’impliesintheWest,butreferstothe

abilityofconsciousnesstosupplyitsowninput.Whenrupaistheobject,itis

immediatelycopiedtoconsciousnesswithacorrespondingnama,asintheabove

exampleofsmellingtherose.82Namathenbecomesoutputintermsofmentalstates

andbodymovementsandspeech.83

SomesuggesttheAbidharmaisnotsolvingthemind‐bodyproblem,noreven

addressingit.84However,thatisbecauseinBuddhistphilosophythereisnomind‐

bodyproblem.Thequestion‘howcanthemindactonthebody?’wouldonlyhave

relevanceifthemindwherecompletelyindependentfromthephysicalworld,

becausethentherewouldbenocausalnetworksbetweenthetwotoaccountfor

interaction.However,sincetheminddoesinfactaffectandinfluencethebody,as

thebodydoesthemind,theyarenecessarilyrelatedandmustbesubjecttosomeof

thesamecausesandconditions.Asstatedearlier,Buddhismdoesnotassume

dualitybetweenmindandbody,rathertheygiverisetotheoriginationofeachother

andthereforemustsharesomeofthesamecausalnetworks.Two‐waycausationis

thelogicalproductofsuchconditionedphenomena.Itisexactlybecausethemind

andbodyareconditionedphenomenathatthemindisabletoactonthebodyand

82Partofrupadoesnotcomefromthephysicalsense,butfromthemind.Organizinginformation

intocompositepartsisanexample.Anotherexampleistheimmediatejudgmentsofvisibleobjectsbeingedibleorhavingsexualquality.Seeibid.,332.

83Ibid.,333.84Ibid.,332.

45

thebodyonthemind.Iftheyexistedcompletelyindependentlyofeachother,

causalitywouldbeanimpossibility.

Understandably,thisexplanationwouldseemsomewhatinsufficientfor

thoseinthefieldofscience.Themaincomponentthatseemstobemissingisthat

mindcannotbelocalizedinspatio‐temporalterms.Inotherwords,howisoneto

objectivelyidentifysomethingthatexistsoutsidethelawsofthephysicalworld,

howcoulditpossiblybeaccountedfor?Whiletheanswerstosuchquestionswillbe

exploredmorefullyintheconclusion,itseemsappropriateheretoaddressthe

relationshipbetweenthementalworldandphysicalreality.Empiricismisbasedon

observationandexperienceinthehopesofidentifyinganobjectiveworld

independentofmentalsubjectivity.However,empiricism,andthevalidityof

objectiveaccounts,isbasedonthefundamentalassumptionthatrealityexistsaswe

experienceit,oratleastthatthereissomecorrelationbetweenthetwo.Ifthere

werenone,allsensoryevidencewouldbeirrelevant.Yet,theempiricaltoolusedfor

scienceisafterallthemindandifscientistsdonotunderstandhowthemindis

relatedtophysicalreality,howcantheyeverexpectempiricaladequacy?85As

mentioned,Buddhistsregardthementalasoneofthefundamentalaspectsof

reality.Thefollowingthoughtexperimentwillhopefullyelucidatewhyandillustrate

whereandhowmentalityresidesinreality.

85B.AlanWallacecomments,“Theprimaryinstrumentthatallscientistshaveusedtomakeevery

typeofobservationisthehumanmind[…]Thisistantamounttousinganinstrumentforthreehundredyearsbeforesubjectingittoscientificscrutiny.”SeeWallaceandHodel,56.

46

Aclassicthoughtexperimentasks,“Ifatreeweretofallintheforestandno

onewerearoundtohearit,woulditmakeasound?”Ifsoundisunderstoodasthe

physicalwavesthatoccur,thenyes,thetreemakesasound.However,ifsoundis

understoodintermsofvibrationswithintheearresultinginhearing,thenno,sound

didnotoccur.Yet,assumethattheworldismadeupofalldeafbeings.Ifscientistsof

soundweretoconfinetheirresearchtosoundwavesalone,withoutanyreportsofa

hearingexperience,theywouldnotunderstandmuchaboutsound.Indeed,they

wouldhavenoreasonbasedonsoundwavesalonetoconcludetheyarecorrelated

tohearingatall.Now,removeallreferencetosensoryinformation.Inthisuniverse,

thereislittlereasontodetermineanythingregardingcorrelationsbetweenthe

mentalrealmandthephysicalworld.Rather,thisuniverseissilent,dark,andempty.

Furthermore,itwouldbecompletelymeaninglesstoaskquestionsaboutthis

abysmalworldbeyondourobservations.86

Therecanbenoknowledgewithoutknowingandnoknowingwithout

luminosity.Themindiswhatcaststhelightonthisuniverseresultinginthe

explosionofsensations,perceptions,andconceptions.Itisnothingotherthanthis

illuminationandknowing.Whenwetrytofindthemind,weneedonlylookatthe

brillianceofrealitysurroundingus.Withoutmind,matterwouldbeimpenetrably

dark,andwithoutmatter,mindwouldbeblindinglight.Betweenthetwoarisesthe

worldofconditionedthingsandquiteliterally,realityasweexperienceit.

RealityasWeExperienceIt:Perception

86Forafascinatingandcontroversialthesisontheemergenceofconsciousness,seeJulianJaynes,TheOriginofConsciousnessintheBreakdownoftheBicameralMind(Boston:MarinerBooks,2000).

47

AccordingtoBuddhistepistemology,ourabilitytoascertainobjectshasinherent

limitations.Onelimitationistemporal,inthattheordinaryuntrainedmindcanonly

ascertainaneventthatoccursoveracertainperiodoftime,traditionallythoughtto

beaboutaspanofafingersnap.Whileonemayperceivetheevent,itisnotsubject

toconsciousrecollection.87Thesecondlimitationonhumanascertainmentisthe

inclinationtoregardobjectsoreventsaccordingtotheircompositenature.For

example,ifIweretolookatacoffeemug,Iwouldnotseetheindividualmolecules

orthespacebetweenthem,ratherIwouldseethecompositeobjectthatismade‐up

ofsuch.Momentsaresimilarlyconflatedintoonecontinuum,wheninfactanygiven

momentiscomposedofnumberlesstemporalsequences.88

HowperceptionsariseisamajorpointofinterestinIndianandTibetan

Buddhistepistemologyandcontinuestobedebated.Therearethreemainschoolsof

thought.Onesuggeststhatwhenlookingatamulticoloredobject,forexample,there

isamultiplicityofperceptionsthatoccurwiththevisualexperience.Accordingly,

anygivenperceptionismadeupofendlessamountsofminuteperceptions.A

secondschoolupholdstheviewthatperceptionandtheobjectperceivedare

identicalandtheeventissplitintoobjectiveandsubjectivehalves.Thethird

positionisthattraditionallyacceptedinTibetanschools,andarguesdespitethe

myriadfacetsofachosenobject,perceptualexperienceoccursasasingleunitary87Buddhistepistemologydistinguishesbetweenascertainmentandperception,withtheformer

referringto‘whollyregisteringtheobject/event,’subjecttorecollection.Perceptionsareacomponentofascertainment,howeverthenatureofperceptionismuchmorecomplicatedandwillbediscussedbelow.

88SeeDalaiLama(2005),172.HisHolinessexplainsthenatureoftemporalconflationbyusingtheexampleofperceivingamovieasonefluidmotioneventhoughitisinfactmadeupofaseriesofindividualpictures.

48

event.89Howweexperiencerealityisnotinfactmirroring‘whatisoutthere,’butis

acomplexprocessoforganizationthatmakespotentiallyinfiniteamountsof

informationmanageabletothehumanmind.

Anotherlong‐standingquestioninWesternphilosophyofmindishowcan

experiencebeaccountedfor?Howcanneuronsgiverisetoexperience,howcan

neuronsbeaboutsomething?Thesequestionsariseduetotheneedforatheoryof

cognitiverepresentationconsistentwithaphysicalistornaturalistontology.Yet,

accordingtothetraditionalinterpretationofTibetanschools,becausethenatureof

perceptionpreventsthemindfrommirroringreality,thisviewdoesnotneedto

answerthequestionhowneuronscanbeaboutsomething,thatsomethingisthe

perception,notarealityorentity.Perceptualexperiencecannotbeequatedto

reality,althoughtheyarecorrelated.Eventhoughperceptioncannotreflectultimate

realityunderordinarycircumstances,itmaintainsconventionaltruth.Forall

practicalpurposes,ascertainingultimaterealityisirrelevantfordeterminingthe

truthofconventionalexperienceandconventionalrealityisrealityasweexperience

it.So,whileperceptiondoesnotreflectultimatereality,itretainstruth‐valuein

understandingourworldofconvention.90

Consciousness,Neurophysiology,andMindBodyCausation

Neuroscientificresearchregardingmeditationhasshownmentalpracticeandthe

developmentofcertainmentalstatesisconducivetoneuroplasticity.The

89Ibid.,172‐3.90AnotherpointofinterestinBuddhistepistemologyistheanalysisoftrueandfalseperceptions.

Seeibid.,173.

49

implicationsofsuchresearchfromtheBuddhistperspective,providesevidencefor

thetransformativenatureofmind,theexistentialdistinctionbetweenmindand

body,theabilityofthementalandphysicaltoinfluenceeachother,andasevidence

forthedistinctionbetweenperceptionandreality.Buddhistphenomenologyof

mindmayalsoprovideameansofwhichtounderstandtop‐downcausationin

termsoftheassociatedneurophysiologicalhappenings.Afurtherexaminationofthe

Abidharmamodelofconsciousnessmayprovideatheoreticalexplanationofwhy

somemeditation‐basedtherapyissuccessful.

TheAbidharmasuggestsconsciousnessisnotcontinuous;rather

consciousnessismadeupofminutesequencescalledcetas.Acetahasthreephases

ofarising,existing,anddisappearing,allinashortdurationoftime.Eachcetais

directedtowardsomeobjectofcognitionandwilldetermineproceedingcetas,

knownasthekarmic(Pali:kammic)effectoftheceta.Therearemanydifferent

typesofcetasthatcouldbeassociatedwithanygivenobject.Forexample,avisual

objectmayincitegreed,lust,orcompassion.Boththetypeandtheobjectoftheceta

influencefuturecetas.Suchinfluenceresultsinaccumulatedkarma,whichis

transferredandaugmentedtoproceedingcetas.Accumulatedkarma,caninfluence

presentcetasorfuturecetasinanumberofways.Whenacetahasadirecteffecton

thefollowingcetaitisknownasproducingkarma.Producingkarmaissubdivided

intounwholesome,leadingtoattachmentandsuffering,andwholesomekarma,

givingrisetofreedomanddecreasedsuffering.Whencollaboratedwithothercetas

toproduceaneffectitisknownassupportingkarma.Whenthekarmaforceofaceta

50

orcetasresisttheeffectsofothercetasitiscalledobstructingkarma.Someeffectsof

cetascanbewhollypreventedbyothercetas,calleddestructivekarma.

Cetasarecomposedofwhatareknownascetasikas,meaning“borntogether

withaceta,”andcanbethoughtofasmental“elementaryparticles.”91Cetasikas

occursimultaneouslywithcetasandsharethesameobject.Mostcetasare

determinedbytheircetasikasofwhichtherearethreemaingroups:unwholesome,

neutral,andbeautiful.Cetasikasarealsodistinguishedaccordingtotemporality,

eitheruniversaloroccasional.AccordingtotheTibetanview,therearefivefactors

universaltoallmentalevents:feeling(valuejudgment,emotion),recognition

(rudimentarydistinctions,perception),engagement(volition,motivation),attention

(choosinginput),andcontact(obtaininginput)withtheobject.92Therecanbe

additionalfactors.Mentalfactorsarenotconsideredseparateentities,butratheras

differentaspectsorprocessesofthesamementalevent,distinguishedbytheir

functions.93Vithisconsistofaserialcollaborationofcetasandhavetodowith

cognitive‐emotionalprocessing.

In“TheAbhidhammaModelofConsciousness,”HenkBarendregtshowshow

theAbidharmamodelispossiblyimplementedinthebrainintermsofcurrent

neurophysiologicalunderstanding.Barendregtstates,“Itiswell‐knownfrom

91SeeBarendregt,335.

92TheAbidharmapositssevenuniversalneutralcetasikas:contact(obtaininginput),feeling(valuejudgment),volition(motivation),perception(rudimentarydistinctions),attention(choosinginput),cooperation(synchronization),andone‐pointedness(focus).Ibid.,336.FortheTibetansystem,seeDalaiLama(2005),176.Therearemanysystemsofenumeration,howeverthestandardversiontraditionallyupheldbyTibetanthinkersfollowsthatofthefourth‐centurythinkerAsanga.

93SeeDalaiLama(2005),176.

51

neuropsychologicalexperimentsthatconsciousnesshasparallelandserialaspects,”

andthatisexactlywhattheAbidharmamodelemphasizes.94Cetasshow

consciousnesshasastrongserialcomponentandcollaboratingcetasikassuggest

parallelprocessing.Serialdiscreteseriesofcetasperhapsoccurasthefiringofone

groupofneurons,asthisfiringindeedhappensindiscreteunits.Also,justasthe

cetahasthreephasesofarising,existing,andceasing,theactionpotentialforeach

neuronclearlyexhibitssuchalifecycle.Furthermore,thefourtypesofkarma

(producing,supporting,obstructing,anddestroying)areconsistentwiththewell

establishedcollaborating,excitatory,andinhibitorytypesofneurons.Finally,

accumulatedkarmamayoccurasnewsynapsesbetweenneurons.

AsBarendregtdiscusses,theAbidharmacanprovideinsightintothenature

ofsuchmentalafflictionsasneuroses,psychoses,andotherpathologiessuchas

depression.Forexample,Freuddiscussesneurosesintermsofconflictbetweenthe

superego,atthelevelofcognition,andtheid’sunderlyingdrives.TheAbidharma

explainshowthisoccurs.Allcetascontainacetasikaoffeeling,howevervithis,asa

chainofcetas,constitutecognitive‐emotionalprocessing.Emotions/feelings

associatedwithparticularcetascanandoftendoconflictwiththoughtsinthevithis.

TheAbidharmamodelshowstheorganizationofconsciousnessintermsofnotonly

thecognitivelevelofourmind,buttheneuroticcoreaswell.AsBarendregtnotes,

psychotherapistsoftenworkatthecognitivelevelofmindandattemptatmodifying

94SeeBarendregt,346.

52

one’sthinking(i.e.one’svithis).However,workingdirectlywiththecetasand

cetasikasmaybeapowerfultreatmentaswell.95

TheAbidharmamodelillustrateshowconsciousnessmightoccuratthe

neurophysiologicallevel.Suchmodelingsuggestsatheoreticalexplanationasto

whysomemeditationtherapyhasbeensuccessful,evidencedbytheMindfulness

BasedStressReductiontreatmentdevelopedbyKabat‐ZinnandMindfulnessBased

CognitiveTherapydevelopedbySegaldiscussedearlier.WhattheAbidharmamodel

ofconsciousnessillustratesishowsuchtop‐downcausationmaypossiblyoccur.

Purificationofmentalafflictionsthroughmindfulnessinvolvesthepreventionof

unwholesomecetas,resultinginnonewaccumulationofnegativekarma.Thereisa

coherentphysiologicalexplanationfortheexperienceofadvancedmeditators:with

thereductionofthefiringofneuronsassociatedwithmentalafflictions,thebrain

circuitryfallsintodisuse,whilethenetworksresponsibleforpositiveemotions

becomeeverstronger.96Thisnotionisconsistentwiththeseventh‐century

philosopherandmonkDharmakirti’spsychologicallawofimpermanenceregarding

thetransformabilityofconsciousness.Thelawpositsonementalstatecannotbe

developedwithoutunderminingtheintegrityofopposingmentalstates.Thismeans,

forexample,thatthecultivationofcompassionwillnecessarilyresultinthe

diminishmentofhateandethnocentrism.97Neuroplasticityhasshownthatchanges

inthemindandbrainarepossible,neurophysiologyprovidesameansofphysical

95Ibid.,339‐340.

96ThisargumentwasputforthatthetwelfthMindandLifeconference.SeeBegley,242.

97SeeDalaiLama(2005),147.

53

manifestation,andtheAbidharmanotionofconsciousnessprovidesatheoretical

modelforthetransformationofassociatedmentalandphysicalstates.

54

4 CONCLUSION

Neuroplasticityisthemeansbywhichmeditationcanbringaboutenduring

physical,mental,andemotionalchanges.Scientistsnowknowthatthebrain

undergoesconstantchange,eventhroughadulthood,andthatunderstandingand

controllingneuroplasticityisvitalforadaptingtochangingconditions,learningnew

things,anddevelopingnewskills.NeuroscientistMichaelMerzenichatthe

UniversityofCalifornia,SanFranciscobelievesthatinthefuture,ourunderstanding

ofneuroplasticitywillbringinanageof“brain‐fitness”basedonthenotionthatjust

asoneneedstoexercisethebody,thebrainneedstobeworkedaswelltopromote

healthandwell‐beingandBuddhistscouldnotagreemore.98Yet,beforethiscanbe

realized,someadvancesinthescientificstudyofmindareneeded.

ScientificStudyoftheMind

Althoughthemindpermeatesourexperiences,sciencegenerallyexcludesthe

subjectivefromthenaturalworldandattributescausalityonlytophysical,objective

phenomena.Thisisbecauseempiricismandscientificmaterialismareoften

conflated,resultinginthedogmawithinthescientificfieldthattheindividual,

private,andsubjectivearenotpartofthemetaphysicalcompositionofthecosmos.

Theassumptionisthattheobjectiveworldsomehowliesbeyondthesubjective

realmincludingalloursensoryandmentalinformation,whichisnotgrantedthe

98Begley,248.

55

samestatusof‘existence’asthephysical,butratherconsignedthestatusof

epiphenomenonorillusion.

Scientistsfurthermoreputgreatemphasisonreductionism,analyzingreality

accordingtoitsconstituentparts.Althoughreductionismhasservedthescientific

traditionwell,itisnotalwaystheappropriateapproach.Justasexamining

phenomenaatthesubatomiclevelwillnotrevealtheglobalprocessesoccurringin

diverseregionsofthebrain,soasolelyobjectiveaccountofthebraincannot

accountforsubjectivementaleventsoranymind‐braincorrelates.Suchanobjective

reductionistaccountbyitselfcannotrevealanytypeofevidencefortheexistenceof

consciousnessorsubjectiveexperienceatall,justassoundwavesalonecannot

explaintheexperienceofhearingasnotedearlier.Neuraleventscouldnoteven

havemeaningoutsideoffirst‐personaccountsofmind.Suchacommitmentto

ontologicalreductionismunderminesthefundamentalidealofconsiliencefoundin

thesciences.Oncefreefromthedogmasofmaterialismandreductionism,scientific

inquiryofconsciousnesscanbegreatlystrengthenedbyBuddhistthoughtandthat

ofothercontemplativetraditions.99

Buddhism,likescience,presentsitselfasabodyofsystematicknowledge

aboutthenaturalworldandpositsarangeoftestablehypothesisandtheories

regardingthenatureofmindanditsrelationshiptothephysicalenvironment.These

theorieshavebeentestedandexperientiallyconfirmednumeroustimesoverthe

99B.AlanWallacemakessuchanargumentin“Introduction:BuddhismandScience—Breaking

DowntheBarriers.”SeeBuddhismandScience:BreakingNewGround,editedbyB.AlanWallace(ColumbiaUniversityPress:NewYork,2003),1‐29.

56

pasttwenty‐fivehundredyears,bywayofduplicablemeditativetechniques.

Althoughscientificknowledgeiscollectiveandpublicandcontemplativeinsights

areprivate,notbeingdemonstrableisnotequivalenttobeingunobservable.Any

competentresearcherwithsufficienttrainingcanreplicatetheresults.

Yet,themindisauniquecaseofinquiry,inthattheobjectofstudyismental,

theinstrumentofstudyismental,andthemediumbywhichthestudyisundertaken

ismental.Theresearchinstrumentsofsciencearedesignedtomeasurephysical

phenomenaandthereforecontemporaryneuroscienceinvolvesanalysisofsuch

physicalmeasurements.Buddhistcontemplativesrejectthismethodologyoutof

hand.Abriefdigressionwillillustratethepoint.AttheDalaiLama’surgingseveral

TibetancontemplativesresidinginthehillsofDharamsalaagreedtomeetwitha

groupofwesternscientiststostudytheeffectsofmentaltraining.Eachmonk,after

beingbriefedontheprojectandtheintendedresearch,madesimilarcomments

regardingthescientists’proposedmethodology:‘ifyouwanttounderstandthe

mind,youshouldexaminethemind.’Oftentheencountersturnedintolongdebates

regardingthevalidityofscientificanalysisforthestudyconsciousness.Intheend,

resistancetoscientificanalysiswassoseverethatnousabledatawasgainedfrom

thescientists’timespentinDharamsala.100

SuchcomplicationsariseduetoBuddhistunderstandingofmentality,

characterizedbyitssubjectivenature.Allofsubjectiveexperiencehastwo

components,thephysicalcomponentssuchasbrainchemistryandbehaviorofan

100SeeBegley,215‐219.

57

individualandthephenomenologicalexperienceofthementaleventsthemselves,

includingcognitive,emotional,andpsychologicalstates.Inorderforthescientific

studyofmindtobecomplete,aparadigmshiftinmethodologyisneededtoaccount

fornotonlytheneurologicalandotherbiologicalhappenings,butalsothesubjective

experienceitself.Inordertoaccomplishsuchatask,useofboththethird‐person

andthefirst‐personapproachisnecessary.AstheDalaiLamanotes,itisforthe

phenomenologyofmindthattheapplicationofafirst‐personmethodisessential.101

First‐personmethodologyisvitalinadvancingunderstandingofthequaliaof

consciousness,somethingsciencehasyettoaddresssufficiently.Noobjective

accountofneuronsandbrainfunctionscanconveythesubjectiveexperienceitself.

ModernBuddhistsurgescientiststoutilizethefirst‐personinvestigativeanalysisof

thenatureandfunctionsofthemind,bytrainingthemindtofocusonitsown

internalstates.ReferredtoasgominTibetan,thismentaltrainingcarriesthe

connotationoffamiliarizationandimpliesrigorous,focusedanddisciplineduseof

introspection,mindfulness,andinsighttomakeempiricalobservations.Thisis

perhapsthemostscientificaspectofBuddhism.AstheDalaiLamahasargued,andI

101Ibid.,145.Somephilosophersofsciencehavearguedforthethird‐personapproachaswell.For

example,seeGualtieroPiccinini,“DatafromIntrospectiveReports:UpgradingfromCommonsensetoScience,”JournalofConsciousnessStudies10.9‐10(2003),141‐156.Piccininiarguesscientistscanandshouldanalyzeintrospectivereportsandprovidesamethodologybasedonpublicevidenceandassumptionsinassessingthevalidityofthird‐personaccounts.Alsosee,AlvinGoldman,“EpistemologyandtheEvidentialStatusofIntrospectiveReports:Trust,Warrant,andEvidentialSources,”JournalofConsciousnessStudies11.7‐8(2004),1‐16,forsimilarviews.LudwigWittgenstein,inPhilosophicalInvestigations,putforthafamousobjectioncalledthe“beetleinthebox”thatarguesthemindistreatedasanentity,howeverthatentityisunobservableandthereforeanyconclusionsofcommonalitybetweenmindsisgroundedonthebeliefinsomethingwecannotbecertainexists.Wittgenstein’sbeetlehasbeenappliedtoavarietyofphilosophicalinvestigations.SeeDavidG.Stem,“TheUsesofWittgenstein’sBeetle:PhilosophicalInvestigations[section]293anditsInterpreters,”inWittgensteinandHisInterpreters:EssaysinMemoryofGordonBaker,editedbyGuyKahane,EdwardKanterian,andOskariKuusela(Oxford:BlackwellPublishing,2007),248‐268.

58

agree,“thecombinationofthefirst‐personmethodwiththethird‐personmethod

offersthepromiseofrealadvanceinthescientificstudyofconsciousness.”102

ScienceandtheEthicalGoalsofBuddhism

EthicsisfundamentaltoBuddhistphilosophy;anythingwithphilosophical

implicationsalsohasethicalimplications.103Compassion,theprimaryethicof

Mahayana,isunderstoodasbuiltintotheFourNobleTruths,wereawishtobefree

ofsufferingisextendedtoincludeallsentientbeings.However,freedomfrom

sufferingcannotbebestowed,itisaccomplishedonlybyinternalizingthetruth.The

goaloftheMahayanaBuddhistpractitionerthen,istofirstknowandembodythe

truthoneselfandthenteachittoothers.104

Buddhismhasestablishedfivefieldsofknowledgeinregardstocaringfor

others:medicine,technology,logic,thescienceofsound,andinner

knowledge/spiritualpractice.105Inthisethicalcontext,sciencebecomesamodeof

disseminatingknowledgeonappropriatepractice,revealingthetruthandefficacyof

Buddhistteaching.Oneofthebroadergoalsoutlinedinsuchorganizationsasthe

MindandLifeInstituteisthecollaborationbetweenBuddhistsandscientistsin

alleviatingsufferingandincreasingtheoverallwellbeingofhumankind,illustrating

102TheDalaiLama(2005),142.103Ethicsisconsideredtobethebasisofallotherpracticeandthesupportforattainingwisdom

andtherefore,ethicalconductisprimary.SeeDalaiLama(1975),45.

104Ibid.,46‐47.Buddhasaidtheonlywaybeingscanbefreeisthroughthetruthofthenatureofthings.TheDalaiLamagoesontoexplainhowthegoaloftheBuddhististospreadtheteachings,arguingpeopleneedtobetaughtwhatshouldbeadoptedandwhatshouldbediscardedinpractice.

105SeeGoleman(1997),245.

59

theroleofscienceasanallyinfollowingtheBuddhistethic.106Scienceactuallyhas

littletonoaffectonTibetannationals’practiceandbelief,butthiswasneverits

intendedroleinBuddhism.107Rather,scienceisateachingaidinthemodern

contextandcanbecompletelyseparatefromtheachievementofwisdomandthe

practiceoftheBuddhisttraditionatlarge,evenformodernBuddhists.108

JustaswithanyphilosophicaltopicswithinBuddhism,neuroplasticityis

interpretedinpartaccordingtoitsethicalimplications.Neuroplasticityhascalled

intoquestionwhatcriticscallneurogeneticdeterminism,thebelief,propelledby

moderngeneticsandpharmacology,thatgenesandchemicalcompositionarethe

ultimateandinescapabledeterminantsofbehaviorandmentalhealth.109Thisview

isnotarguedforexactly,ratheritisimplicitinmedicalresearchaimedatidentifying

genesthataccountforvariouspathologiesandthepharmacologicalattemptstofind

medicinalcuresforpsychologicalandbehavioraldisorders.Determinismoften

producesanihilisticattitudetowardspersonalresponsibility,asonecannotbe

accountableforhis/hernaturalcomposition,makingethicsirrelevant.However,

neuroplasticityrevealsthepowerofmindovermatter,makingindividualmoral

responsibilityrelevantonceagaininthemodernandscientificWest.SharonBegley,

106TheDalaiLamareiteratesthesegoalsateveryMindandLifeconference.107TheDalaiLamaintroducedscientificdiscourseaspartofthemonasticcurriculumandtoday,

moreandmoreBuddhiststudentsfrommonasticuniversitiesengageinsomesystematicstudyofscience.Nonetheless,TibetannationalslackthesameengagementwithsciencethatisoccurringintheWest.SeeBegley,23and50.

108TheDalaiLama’srepeateddescriptionofscienceas“ammo”forspreadingtheDharmaillustrateshowscienceisusedasatoolforgranderBuddhistgoals.Forexample,seeGoleman(1997),248,“Youscientistsaregivingmemoreammunitionnow!”109Ibid.,252.

60

NewsweeksciencewriterandauthorofTrainYourMindChangeYourBrain,

followingtheproceedingsofthetwelfthMindandLifeconference,states,“Perhaps

oneofthemostprovocativeimplicationsofneuroplasticityandthepowerofmental

trainingtoalterthecircuitsofthebrainisthatitunderminesneurogentic

determinism.”110Ratherthanadeterministicscenario,thisstudyhasrevealeda

dynamicone,intermsofthenatureofmindandbodyandethicalorientation.From

theBuddhistperspective,neuroplasticityvindicatestheroleofethics.

Intherealmofphilosophy,therelationshipbetweenBuddhismandScience

becomesquiteabitmorecomplex.Wherefactendsandtheorybeginsweseea

differentkindofrelationshipemergebetweenthetwo,notofethicalallies,but

philosophicalcompetitors,vyingforinterpretativesuperiority.Theemergenceofa

Buddhisttheoryofneuroplasticityillustratesthecreativetensionbetweenthetwo

traditions.Thisprocessisnotantagonistic,butconstructiveandrevealsalotabout

therelationshipbetweenBuddhismandScienceandthepotentialforfuturegrowth.

Neuroplasticityisanareaofstudythathasandcontinuestoproduce

particularlymeaningfulexchangewithBuddhism.Theinterpretationandanalysisof

neuroplasticityfromtheBuddhistperspectiveservesasacontributiontowestern

philosophyofscience,answeringmanyopenquestionsaboutthemindandthe

mind‐bodyrelationship.Furthermore,theBuddhistinterpretationillustratesthe

wideapplicabilityofBuddhistideastomodernwesternones;neuroplasticityisjust

oneareaofstudywithintherealmofBuddhismandScience,yettheimplications

110Ibid.,253.

61

andapplicationsarenumerousandofvitalimportance.Whatthisstudyhopefully

elucidatesisthevalidityandvalueofcontinuingdialogueandincludingBuddhist

philosophyinwesternphilosophyofsciencediscourse.Idonotthinkitisan

exaggerationtostatethemindisthescientificquestionofthetwenty‐firstcentury,

yetcontemporarywesternphilosophycannotadequatelyexplainneuroplasticity

andmind‐bodycausality.Buddhismcan.Thenatureofourbeingischange,

harnessingthatchangebecomescultivation,andcultivationinducestransformation.

Imagineaworldofmentalfitness,nurturingtheskillsofhappinessandcompassion

anddecreasingsufferingandhate,aneraoflimitlesshumanpotential.

62

WORKS CITED Austin,J.H.ZenandtheBrain:TowardanUnderstandingofMeditationand

Consciousness.Cambridge:MITPress,1998.Barendregt,Henk.“TheAbhidhammaModelofConsciousnessandIts

Consequences,”inHorizonsinBuddhistPsychology,ed.MauritsG.T.Kwee,KennethJ.Gergen,&FusakoKoshikaw(ChagrinFalls:TaosInstitute

Publications,2006),331‐349.

Begley,Sharon.TrainYourMind,ChangeYourBrain:HowaNewScienceRevealsOurExtraordinaryPotentialtoTransformOurselves.NewYork:RandomHouse,

2007.

Cahn,R.andJ.Polich.“MeditationStatesandTraits:EEG,ERP,andNeuroimagingStudies.”PsychologicalBulletin132(2006):180‐211.

Chalmers,DavidJ.,ed.PhilosophyofMind:ClassicalandContemporaryReadings.NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress,2002.

Craver,CarlF.andWilliamBechtel,“Top‐DownCausalitywithoutTop‐Down

Causes.”BiologyandPhilosophy22(2007):547‐563.DakpoTashiNamgyal.Mahāmudrā:TheMoonlight―QuintessenceofMindand

Meditation.Boston:WisdomPublications,2006.

DalaiLama,HisHolinesstheFourteenth[TenzinGyatso].TheBuddhismofTibetandtheKeytotheMiddleWay.Delhi:VikasPublishingHouse,1975.

‐‐,trans.StagesofMeditation.ByKamalashila.Ithaca:SnowLionPublications,2003..TheUniverseinaSingleAtom:TheConvergenceofScienceandSpirituality.New

York:BroadwayBooks,2005.

Davidson,R.J.,J.Kabat‐Zinn,J.Schumacher,M.Rosenkranz,M.Muller,D.Santorelli,S.F.Urbanowski,A.Harrington,K.Bonus,andJ.F.Sheridan.“Alterationsin

BrainandImmuneFunctionProducedbyMindfulnessMeditation.”PsychosomaticMedicine65.4(2003):564‐570.

Dawkins,Richard.TheBlindWatchmaker.NewYork:W.W.Norton&Company,

1996.Delmonte,M.M.“BiochemicalIndicesAssociatedwithMeditationPractice:A

LiteratureReview.”Neuroscience&BiobehaviouralReviews9.4(1985):557‐

63

561.

‐‐.“ElectrocorticalActivityandRelatedPhenomenaAssociatedwithMeditationPractice:ALiteratureReview.”InternationalJournalof

Neuroscience24(1984):217‐231.Ekman,Paul,RichardJ.Davidson,MatthieuRicard,andB.AlanWallace,“Buddhist

andPsychologicalPerspectivesonEmotionsandWell‐Being.”Current

DirectionsinPsychologicalScience14.2(2005):59‐63.Fenwick,P.B.“MeditationandtheEEG,”inThePsychologyofMeditation,ed.A.West

(NewYork:ClarendonPress,1987),104‐117.

FetzerInstitute,http://www.fetzer.org/(accessedApril10,2010).Goldman,Alvin.“EpistemologyandtheEvidentialStatusofIntrospectiveReports:

Trust,Warrant,andEvidentialSources.”JournalofConsciousnessStudies11.7‐8(2004):1‐16.

DanielGoleman,ed.DestructiveEmotions:AScientificDialoguewiththeDalaiLama.

NewYork:Bantam,2004.‐‐,ed.HealingEmotions:ConversationswiththeDaliaLamaonMindfulness,Emotions,

andHealth.Boston:Shambhala,1997.

‐‐andRobertA.F.Thurman,eds.MindScience:AnEastWestDialogue.DalaiLama,HerbertBenson,RobertA.F.Thurman,DanielGoleman,andHoward

Gardner,etal.ProceedingsofthesymposiumsponsoredbytheMind/BodyMedicalInstituteofHarvardMedicalSchool&NewEnglandDeaconess

HospitalandTibetHouse.NewYork:WisdomPublications,1991.

Grossman,L.Niemann,S.Schmidt,andH.Walach.“Mindfulness‐BasedStressReductionandHealthBenefits:AMetaAnalysis.”JournalofPsychosomatic

Research57.1(2004):35‐43.Hayward,JeremyW.andFranciscoJ.Varela.GentleBridges:Conversationswiththe

DalaiLamaontheSciencesofMind.Boston:Shambhala,1992.

Hofstadter,DouglasR.andDanielDennett.TheMind’sI:FantasiesandReflectionsonSelf&Soul.NewYork:BasicBooks,2001.

Holmes,D.S.“MeditationandSomaticArousalReduction:AReviewofthe

ExperimentalEvidence.”AmericanPsychologist39(1984):1‐10.Houshmand,Zara,RobertB.Livingston,andB.AlanWallace,eds.Consciousnessat

64

theCrossroads:ConversationswiththeDalaiLamaonBrainScienceand

Buddhism.Ithaca:SnowLionPublications,1999.Jaynes,Julian.TheOriginofConsciousnessintheBreakdownoftheBicameralMind

Boston:MarinerBooks,2000.Kabat‐Zinn,J.andA.Chapman‐Waldrop.“CompliancewithanOutpatientStress

ReductionProgram:RatesandPredictorsofProgramCompletion.”Journalof

BehavioralMedicine11.4(1988):333‐353.Kabat‐Zinn,J.,Lipworth,andBurney.“TheClinicalUseofMindfulnessMeditationfor

theSelf‐RegulationofChronicPain.”JournalofBehavioralMedicine8.2

(1985):163‐90.Kwee,MauritsG.T.,KennethJ.GergenandFusakoKoshikawa,eds.Horizonsin

BuddhistPsychology:Practice,Research,&Theory.ChagrinFalls:TaosInstitutePublications,2006.

Lazar,S.,G.Bush,R.L.Gollub,G.L.Fricchione,G.Khalsa,andH.Benson.“Meditation

ExperienceisAssociatedwithIncreasedCorticalThickness.”Neuroreport16.17(2005):1893‐7.

Llinas,RobertR.IoftheVortex:FromNeuronstoSelf.Cambridge:MITPress,2002.

Lopez,DonaldS.Jr.BuddhismandScience:AGuideforthePerplexed.Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress,2008.

Lutz,A.,J.D.Dunne,andR.J.Davidson,“MeditationandtheNeuroscienceofConsciousness:AnIntroduction,”inTheCambridgeHandbookof

Consciousness,eds.PhilipDavidZelazo,MorrisMoscovitch,andEvan

Thompson(Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,2007),499‐551.Lutz,A.,L.L.Greischar,N.B.Rawlings,M.Ricard,andR.J.Davidson,“Long‐Term

MeditatorsSelf‐InduceHigh‐AmplitudeGammaSynchronyduringMentalPractice.”ProceedingsoftheNationalAcademyofSciences101(Nov.16,

2004):16369‐73.

Ma,S.H.andJ.D.Teasdale,“Mindfulness‐BasedCognitiveTherapyforDepression:ReplicationandExplorationofDifferentialRelapsePreventionEffects.”

JournalofConsultingandClinicalPsychiatry72(2004):31‐40.

McMahan,DavidL.TheMakingofBuddhistModernism.NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress,2008.

65

Mikulincer,M.,T.Dolev,andR.Shaver,“Attachment‐RelatedStrategiesduring

ThoughtSuppression:IronicReboundsandVulnerableSelf‐Representations,”JournalofPersonalityandSocialPsychology89(Nov.

2005):817‐39.MindandLifeInstitute,http://www.mindandlife.org(accessedApril10,2010).

‐‐.“BooksandPublicationsfromMindandLife,”

http://mindandlife.org/books.pubs_section.html(accessedApril10,2010).‐‐.“ConferencesandEvents,”http://www.mindandLife.org/current.conf.html

(accessedApril21,2010).

‐‐.“MindandLifeInstitute’sVision,Purpose,andMission,”http://www.mindandLife.org/mission.org_section.html(accessedApril10,

2010).Pagano,R.R.andS.Warrenburg.“Meditation:InSearchofaUniqueEffect,”in

ConsciousnessandSelfRegulation(Vol.3),eds.R.J.Davidson,G.E.Schwartz,

andD.Shapiro(NewYork:PlenumPress,1983),152‐210.Parker,JamesN.andPhilipM.Parker,eds.Brain:AMedicalDictionary,Bibliography,

andAnnotatedResearchGuidetoInternetReferences.IconGroup

International,2004.Pascual‐Leone,A.,A.Amedi,F.Fregni,andL.B.Merabet,“ThePlasticHumanBrain

Cortex.”AnnualReviewsofNeuroscience28(2005):380.Piccinini,Gualtiero.“DatafromIntrospectiveReports:Upgradingfrom

CommonsensetoScience.”JournalofConsciousnessStudies10.9‐10(2003):

141‐156.Popper,Karl.“ThreeWorlds,”theTannerLectureonHumanValuesdeliveredatthe

UniversityofMichigan,April7th,1978.Accessibleathttp://www.tannerlectures.utah.edu/lectures/documents/popper80.pdf

(accessedApril10,2010).

Recanzone,G.H.,C.E.Schreiner,andM.M.Merzenich,“PlasticityintheFrequencyRepresentationofPrimaryAuditoryCortexFollowingDiscrimination

TraininginAdultOwlMonkeys.”JournalofNeuroscience13(1993):87‐103.

Ricard,MatthieuandTrinhXuanThuan.TheQuantumandtheLotus.NewYork:ThreeRiversPress,2001.

66

Salmon,WesleyC.CausalityandExplanation.NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress,

1998.Schwartz,J.M.andS.Begley.TheMindandtheBrain:NeuroplasticityandthePower

ofMentalForce.NewYork:ReganBooks,2002.Scott,J.,J.D.Teasdale,E.S.Paykel,A.L.Johnson,R.Abbott,H.Hayhurst,R.Moore,

andA.Garland,“EffectsofCognitiveTherapyonPsychologicalSymptomsand

SocialFunctioninginResidualDepression.”BritishJournalofPsychiatry177(2000):440‐46.

StanfordEncyclopediaofPhilosophy,http://plato.stanford.edu(accessedApril10,

2010).‐‐.“Behaviorism,”http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/behaviorism(accessedApril

10,2010).‐‐.“Dualism,”http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/dualism(accessedApril10,

2010).

‐‐.“Functionalism,”http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/functionalism(accessedApril10,2010).

‐‐.“Physicalism,”http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/physicalism(accessedApril10,

2010).Stem,DavidG.“TheUsesofWittgenstein’sBeetle:PhilosophicalInvestigations

[section]293anditsInterpreters,”inWittgensteinandHisInterpreters:EssaysinMemoryofGordonBaker,eds.GuyKahane,EdwardKanterian,and

OskariKuusela(Oxford:BlackwellPublishing,2007),248‐268.

Teasdale,J.D.,Z.V.Segal,J.M.Williams,V.A.Ridgeway,J.M.Soulsby,andM.A.Lau,“PreventionofRelapse/RecurrenceinMajorDepressionbyMindfulness‐

BasedCognitiveTherapy.”JournalofConsultingandClinicalPsychiatry68(2000):615‐23.

UniversityofMassachusettsofMedicalSchool,http://www.umassmed.edu

(accessedApril10,2010).Waldron,WilliamS.“CommonGround,CommonCause:BuddhismandScienceon

theAfflictionsofIdentity,”inBuddhismandScience:BreakingNewGround

ed.B.AlanWallace(NewYork:ColumbiaUniversityPress,2003),145‐191.Wallace,B.Alan,ed.BuddhismandScience:BreakingNewGround.NewYork:

67

ColumbiaUniversityPress,2003.

‐‐.“Introduction:BuddhismandScience—BreakingDowntheBarriers,”inBuddhismandScience:BreakingNewGround,ed.B.Alan

Wallace(NewYork:ColumbiaUniversityPress,2003),1‐29.‐‐andBrianHodel.ContemplativeScience:WhereBuddhismand

NeuroscienceConverge.NewYork:ColumbiaUniversityPress,2009.

change your mind: neuroplasticity & buddhist transformation

Documents