More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Susan Smalley, Ph.D.

GET UPDATES FROM Susan Smalley, Ph.D.
 

In The Name Of The Father

Posted: 03/13/08 09:08 AM ET

I heard the words, "In the Name of the Father" many times in my Lutheran upbringing in Indiana. While not of any religious orientation, I have had experiences that would be considered mystical or spiritual or 'experiences with God' by those who follow a monotheistic tradition. These first-person experiences are difficult to describe because in naming them, one becomes removed from them. Lao-tzu spoke of this challenge in the classic Tao Te Ching, in the line "The Tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao." Investigation into the nature of such experiences are being described through neuroscience today, with 'God experiences' brought upon through hallucinogenic drugs, neurosurgical procedures, meditation, or brain anomalies such as temporal lobe seizures.

The brain is a window into the self-transcendent states described by mystics (for example, see William James book, The Varieties of Religious Experience). Self-transcendent experiences are correlated with activity of the right hemisphere of the brain, the sort of parallel (non-linear, non-verbal) processor of experience when not under the control of the left hemisphere, the serial (linear, verbal) processor of experience. Leonard Shlain wrote in The Alphabet Versus the Goddess: The Conflict Between Word and Image how cultures emphasizing more right hemisphere (art, nature) than left hemisphere (writing, reading) activities correspond with religious orientation shifting from more paternal/hierarchical to maternal/holistic. While certainly not that simple, it is an intriguing thought that the spiritual (and non-religious) shift in parts of the world today may be coinciding with the onset of the Internet, computers and visual media that place a greater emphasis on right hemisphere processing than print media of the past.

What would the world be like if we all had more mystical or spiritual experiences and did not work to label them and create doctrine around them? It is likely that we would fight less for religious reasons as that arises when we label, define, contrast and compare. It is likely that we would be kinder and more peaceful, as mystical experiences generally increase a sense of interconnectedness and dependent nature. Spiritual experiences arise naturally but may also be nudged through meditation practices, yoga, contemplative practices, breathing meditation, TM, Tai Chi, mindfulness, or brought on without request as in the case of life-altering events such as near death experiences, tragedy, or life-threatening illness.

As science moves closer to understanding the brain and body and how our world views are shaped, we will begin to understand the differences between the spiritual experiences we have and the names we give them. As science continues to measure and define spirituality from biology, we need remember that the Experience and its Description are very different things. A scientific description doesn't alter the experience of communing with God, the Oneness of the Universe, or seeing our Dependent Nature, it merely provides a new Description of it. The Taoist saying may need to be reworded in the 21st century of science and technology age as "The Tao that can be Weighed is not the constant Way." It may be the greatest challenge in human evolution to enhance spirituality, experience it, but not attempt to control it by Name.

 

Follow Susan Smalley, Ph.D. on Twitter: www.twitter.com/suesmalley

I heard the words, "In the Name of the Father" many times in my Lutheran upbringing in Indiana. While not of any religious orientation, I have had experiences that would be considered mystical or spi...
I heard the words, "In the Name of the Father" many times in my Lutheran upbringing in Indiana. While not of any religious orientation, I have had experiences that would be considered mystical or spi...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 8
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Popularity
12:02 AM on 03/14/2008
Susan, Your post goes to the heart of the atheist/ theist conflict; at least as far as I can see: That the root of all religions is not superstition, but a basic personal experience. Dogma follows later. You are in a unique position to appreciate the problem that arises when this experience is not named: it is easily dismissed as 'only' subjective or 'merely' a function of brain chemistry. Yet we must name something in order to talk about it, and you bely the greater meaning present when you call it a "self-transcendant state." Later you even call it a spiritual experience. So if we do indeed transcend the individual self at these times, and we see meaning and the spirit of Life infused throughout all creation - but no personal god - what then do we say we are percieving? More importantly, what does it mean for humanity, other than a vague feeling of connectedness? I don't think the present scientific tools available to us are able to describe this energy at play within us. A new scientific paradigm is neccesary, one that postulates a level of reality hitherto unsuspected, except by primitve, and now deformed, religious ideologies. I agree with your assertion about the evolutionary challenge we face. I would add that not only experiencing it, but learning how to regularly access this unfathomable spirit is the inescapable issue for all of us. Thanks for bringing it up! P&L, S.
04:00 PM on 03/13/2008
Dear Dr. Smalley,

There was a time when I would have thought you were speaking to non-sense as I was not aware, but as it turns out, seems we are in the same stream of consciousness.

Strange, that at one time I was of the mind that giving up the God paradigm I would be loosing something, and was afraid to let go... Only to find a net gain when I did. Without the understanding of cognitive science I don't know if I would have had the courage take the plunge, as it seems to be the key-stone holding it all together.

Thanks for another wonderful essay. Agape.
12:13 AM on 03/14/2008
Hey Dap, I'm (pleasantly) surprised at your post. I would have expected you to take issue at Dr. Smalley's describing this type of experience as "self transcendant." Or "spiritual" even. Ya gotta admit, these terms do seem to take it out of the realm of subjectivity and traditional cognitive science! Whatever; isn't she a marvelously eloquent writer though? P&L, S.
02:25 PM on 03/14/2008
Dr. Smalley and I on Huffington Post go way back to October of 2005, to Henry David Thoreau (My favorite author) and Emerson.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/susan-smalley/to-know-oneself_b_8313.html

Then there was Her eloquent essay/post Towards a Modern God, when RJ Eskow, Sam Haris, Cenk Uygur, Dr.Chopra, Chuck Gutenson, Dr. Smalley, et al were all expressing our God paradigm's or lack there of, as it were.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/susan-smalley/towards-a-modern-god_b_8545.html

So Brother stevesrant, this has been an on-going discussion for quite some time now, it also as become quite heated by way of our emotions at times throughout the years, yet it has been collaborative effort to share information (as we know it) from that POV, HeevenSteven, has been in the mix and match since then too.

Personally I don't remember a time when I was an agnostic, in the sense you speak to, I was "wondering?" for a time, but mostly crossed over from believer to non-believer in a moment in time, after becoming exposed to Joseph Campbell's work "The Power of Myth" comes to mind. It was the A-Ha, or Eureka moment, but it came all together because of my understanding and *deep* interest in cognitive science up to that point. Since that time, many moons ago now, the science has come a very long way, and has clearly been adding quite a bit of weight to these concepts.

I argue always, that our human *emotional* need for spirituality is just that, and that a supernatural "God being" is not a necessary component to our being, emotionally fulfilled spiritually. Thus my statement:

God is just an emotion, locked inside the psyche of a human being because of the Human condition, and is perpetuated by those that are illusional (those that have a need for such illusions) and those that seek control of others. (those that use the power of myth, for their own purpose)

Like it or not, accept it or not, believe it or don't, it does *Not* change the Truth-In-Empirical-Fact of the matter. Is stands until the end of time, in any dimension in space time and above any quantum mechanics as yet to be uncovered.

Whether or not one likes my expression of certainty as to what I've found, does not really matter, it is what it is, plain and simple, I could not change it if I wanted to.

But most importantly it takes nothing from our Humanity, the essence of our being, spiritually or our virtuousness.

And yes, I agree Dr. Smalley is among our Huffington Post treasures. Although I'm thinking, maybe my comment was kind of pulling her in a direction she was not fully comfortable with, yet.? Don't be surprised, high-road, or low-road, we are all on the road together, some at differing points along the way. Agape, P&L.
02:24 PM on 03/13/2008
I, too, recently had a mystical experience: http://tinyurl.com/2v9qvk
02:11 PM on 03/13/2008
Some times long term excruciating pain can bring on mystical experiences.
Some times you actually go looking for the god that gave you that pain to spit in his eye.
Then an awakening of God can happen.
I too was raised Lutheran, and my vision of God has been a progressive revalation.
It gave me the freedom to look for myself and not to accept what others have said.
Looking for God 'within' instead of out there in the universe..