The Psychology of Awakening

John Welwood

Wisdom Collection

To access the content within the Wisdom Collection,
join Tricycle as a Supporting or Sustaining Member

© Jean McMannWhen I first encountered Zen in the 1960s, I found myself particularly drawn to the mysterious satori—that moment of seeing into one’s own true nature, when all the old blinders were said to fall away. In such a moment, I imagined, one became an entirely new person, never to be the same again. I found the prospect of this kind of ultimate realization compelling enough to turn my life in that direction.

Yet along the way I also discovered something I was not prepared for: that spiritual realization is relatively easy compared with the much greater difficulty of actualizing it, integrating it fully into the fabric of one’s daily life. Realization is the movement from personality to being, the direct recognition of one’s ultimate nature, leading toward liberation from the conditioned self, while actualization refers to how we integrate that realization in all the situations of our life. When people have major spiritual openings, often during periods of intensive practice or retreat, they may imagine that everything has changed and that they will never be the same again. Indeed, spiritual work can open people up profoundly and help them live free of the compulsions of their conditioning for long stretches of time. But at some point after the retreat ends, when they encounter circumstances that trigger their emotional reactivity or their habitual tensions and defenses, they may find that their spiritual practice has hardly penetrated their conditioned personality, which remains mostly intact, generating the same tendencies it always has.

Of course, realization has many levels, from temporary experiences to more stable attainment. Yet even among advanced spiritual practitioners, certain islands—unexamined complexes of personal and cultural conditioning, blind spots, or areas of self-deception—may often remain intact within the pure stream of their realization. Some would say that these shadow elements are signs of deficiency in one’s spiritual practice or realization, and this is undoubtedly true. Yet since they are so common, they also point to the general difficulty of integrating spiritual awakenings into the entire fabric of our human embodiment.

In the traditional cultures of Asia, it was a viable option for a yogi to pursue spiritual development apart from worldly involvement, or to live purely as the impersonal universal, without having much of a personal life or transforming the structures of that life. These older cultures provided a religious context that honored and supported spiritual retreat and placed little or no emphasis on individual concerns. In Asia, yogis and sadhus who had little personal contact with people could still be venerated by the community at large.

Many Westerners have tried to take up this model, pursuing impersonal realization while neglecting their personal life, but have found in the end that this was like wearing a suit of clothes that didn’t quite fit. Taking on the challenges of a fully engaged personal life—finding right livelihood in a complex materialistic world, being involved in a committed intimate relationship, dealing with the social and political concerns facing us at every turn—inevitably brings up unresolved psychological issues. For this reason, Western seekers may also need the help of psychological methods to help them more fully integrate spiritual practice and realization into their lives.

For most of my career I have explored what the Eastern contemplative traditions have to offer Western psychology. Yet more recently I have also become interested in a different question: How might Western psychological work serve a sacred purpose, by helping us to integrate our spiritual insights into our everyday lives? In its ability to shine light into the hidden nooks and crannies of our conditioning, psychological inquiry can serve as a powerful ally to spiritual practice. It can help break up the hard, rocky soil of our personality patterns so that this soil becomes permeable, allowing the seeds of spiritual realization to take root and blossom there more fully. Of course, this kind of psychological work would require a much larger understanding and aim than conventional psychotherapy, whose focus is on pathology and cure rather than transformation.

Psychological and spiritual work address different levels of human existence. If the domain of spiritual work is emptiness—unconditioned, universal, absolute truth—the domain of psychological work is form—our individual, conditioned ways of experiencing ourselves and the world—or relative truth. Spiritual practice, especially mysticism, points toward a timeless trans-human reality, while psychological work addresses the evolving human realm, with all its issues of personal meaning and interpersonal relationship.
© Jean McMann

My initial interest in psychotherapy developed in the 1960s, at the same time as my interest in the Eastern spiritual traditions. At first I imagined that psychotherapy could be the Western version of a path of liberation. But I quickly found Western psychology too narrow and limited in its view of human nature. As I became more involved in Buddhism, I went through a period of aversion to Western psychology. Now that I had “found the way,” I became arrogant regarding other paths, as new converts often do. I was also wary of becoming trapped in endlessly processing emotional issues. But in my newfound spiritual fervor, I was falling into the opposite trap—of refusing to face the personal "stuff" at all. In truth, I was much more comfortable with the impersonal, timeless reality I discovered through Buddhism than with my personal life. Compared with the peace and clarity of sitting still and following the breath while resting in the open space of awareness, my personal feelings seemed messy and entangling.

Yet in studying Tantric Buddhism, with its respect for relative truth, I began to appreciate aspects of Western psychology in a new light. Once I accepted that psychology could not describe my ultimate nature, and I no longer required it to provide answers about the nature of human existence, I realized that it had an important place in the scheme of things. I also found that my own personal psychological work helped me approach spiritual practice less encumbered by unconscious agendas.

Share with a Friend

Email to a Friend

Already a member? Log in to share this content.

You must be a Tricycle Community member to use this feature.

1. Join as a Basic Member

Signing up to Tricycle newsletters will enroll you as a free Tricycle Basic Member.You can opt out of our emails at any time from your account screen.

2. Enter Your Message Details

Enter multiple email addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
teecomb's picture

Wonderful timing for a wonderful article. I feel the tensions between Buddhists teachings and certain psychological traumas that I am working to overcome, and have a very hard time reconciling these issues. I first found the dharma when doing a volunteer stint in Nepal and being offered a chance at teaching in a Tibetan Buddhist monastery. While teaching I made a spiritual friend who, after hearing the story of my childhood trauma, recommended a Vipassana 10-day meditation retreat as a healing modality to cure my psychological illness. Back home, I contacted my nearest vipassana center and was told, due to my history of mental health disorder, that I was a liability and not welcome there. Following this I lapsed into an intense period of confusion and despair (a sensitivity to rejection being a trigger of high emotion for me) before going into the emotions with awareness to realize that this was the message I needed to get truly better- I sought psychotherapy for the first time in my life.

What this article says rings very true to my ears, that Buddhism and meditation is not a magic pill to swallow that will make you feel better, and that psychotherapy is often necessary to lay the foundation of mental stability so that spiritual growth may happen. Psychotherapy and a short daily meditation practiced together are very beneficial to mental health. A daily meditation practice makes maintaining control/awareness throughout a therapy session easier, leading to a more fruitful counselling session. Likewise, psychotherapy helps clear away all the repetitive chatter of the mind, making meditation more rewarding. The two schools of mental health compliment each other!

bradykath1's picture

I've struggled with these issues for years and still don't feel I've found the ease and authenticity in personal relationships that I would like. I have found mindfulness practice very helpful in noticing my reactivity and how this leads to isolation, and applying kindness to myself at these points does help soothe the raw edges. Risking more of myself is difficult unless I risk that with another person who has a kind and steady heart and no agendas! I have veered away from psychotherapy as I found it hard to explain my experience and felt misunderstood, infantilised and interpreted. I'm working with developing compassion which is a step towards offering myself the care and love that I never felt in my early life; I'm hoping that as I become familiar with feeling loved I will choose relationships wisely and be able to receive love.

raymondtovo's picture

GOOD ARTICLE
Thank you.
When I AM IN MY THERAPY SESSIONS, I FEEL THAT I AM THE ONLY ONE IN THE WORLD WITH THESE psychological PROBLEMS SUCH AS EXTREME EMOTIONAL REACTIVITY. AMONG OTHERS .MY THERAPIST KEEPS ME IN THE WHAT IS GOING ON INSIDE OF ME FOCUS. When THAT HAPPENS, I do feel helped to identify my sticking points, yet iI FEEL alone in my suffering. The only one with issues of lack of Self Esteem.
IT IS UNFORTUNATE THAT psychotherapists don't SEEM to EMPHASIZE THAT YOUR ARE NOT ALONE IN YOUR PREDICAMENT ,MANY OTHER CLIENTS HAVE SIMILAR. PROBLEMS .It IS THE NATURE OF EXISTENCE TO SUFFER. Spirituality for me is more sustainable as a recovery--THE BEST WAY OUT.
What THE ARTICLE HELPS ME WITH ,IS THAT THE Buddha HAD IT FIGURED OUT LONG BEFORE WESTERN psychology WAS BORN.!
I COULD SIT IN THE THERAPISTS OFFICE FOR YEARS WITHOUT GOING ANYWHERE psychologically., WHILE THEY RAKE IN THE REVENUE. Most t OF IT IS A BUSINESS, WHILE SPIRITUAL PRACTICE , FEELS TO ME TO BE MORE AUTHENTIC.
Do WE REALLY NEED PSYCHOTHERAPY/?
thanks
Raymond

celticpassage's picture

Do we really need psychotherapy? In my opinion, no. That is, 'normals' don't need psychotherapy, and a lot of the more serious psychological issues can get by without it too.

"Psychotherapy" a lucrative industry, and like any industry is primarily interested in it's own survival. Never mind the hugely profitable spinoff industry of psycho self-help books, and psycho-spiritual self help books which are well nigh useless.

Psychotherapy does an awful job of trying to fill in for what is actually lacking: supportive community. It never will be able to substitute for community. Psychotherapy is, at best, a twisted form of human relationship which is and always will fall very short.

Tharpa Pema's picture

I find John Welwood’s writing about psychology and Buddhism very useful. Of course, I could be one of your rare, abnormal people who do need psychotherapy!

Many of the ideas Welwood discusses here and in “Human Nature, Buddha Nature” (Tricycle, Spring 2011) were both startling and enlightening to me when I first read them. I’ve gone on to read his book “Perfect Love, Imperfect Relationships,” which was tremendously helpful to me.

I do not view psychotherapy as a substitute for community, but rather as a complement to such community as actually exists in my life in the 21st century United States.

It is worth noting that while communities themselves can be healthy, they can also be incredibly stifling and conformist—and “wrong.” Herd mentality can be wise or foolish, kind or cruel, depending on many different factors. I grew up fearing the herd, the mob, the majority in my part of the country, who objected violently to granting equal rights to all human beings. Then it was the community iconoclasts who were practicing the dharma.

Whether psychotherapy would continue as an institution were we to achieve more “supportive communities,” I do not know. It is an intriguing idea, but unlikely to be realized any time in the foreseeable future. More importantly, if we have never experienced it, how can we know if “supportive community” would really make us feel better? We could have supportive communities and still be unhappy! The unsatisfactory nature of human experience will always leave us wanting something “out there” that we feel we don’t have.

Certainly my life experience has been that supportive community is indeed inadequate in our society, at least to meet mine and many other people’s needs. I used to imagine what that ideal community might be like. I was eager that we as a people stop denying the suffering of so many people in our society and work harder at supporting one other.

That dream is not dead, but it is now, I believe, better informed.

The truth was that I never in my life had experienced healthy family or community, so I didn’t know what I was talking about. Having never experienced those things, I continually contrasted my ignorant assumptions about what I wanted and what “ought to be” with a present social reality that admittedly wasn’t working for me.

Now that I have experienced being a member of a very supportive community, a group thriving even in the midst of a deeply conservative, often-bigoted, small Southern town, I know that some of what I wanted is available already. Rare yes, but not nonexistent, even in this desolate place.

Sometimes the greatest obstacle to community lies within ourselves—in our bitter and offputting manner of speaking and being with others. Yes, I am talking about you, celticpassage, your speech is often harsh!
Happy people have often learned that they have to work at it within their own spiritual selves, as well as striving to build and maintain supportive communities. Healthy people choose to spend at least some of their time around other people who are in happy mode, people who can set aside their bitterness some of the time and relate to others with joy, even if they are not getting everything they want out of life.

Some of us are committed to returning to the hell realms, to the people who have lacked the opportunity to experience healthy community and psyche. Deprived people are draining to be around because they continually take out their anger on other people and on themselves. That is not a reason to abandon those who are deprived—it is a reason to train as best we can in the art of healthy relationship.

Those compassionate, nonaggressive warriors among us who keep going back, over and over again to the unhappy places within our society, include many psychotherapists. They are nourished in that task by healthy relationships in other parts of their lives. I appreciate them.

Dominic Gomez's picture

Isn't the aim of psycho-therapeutics to render a client/patient healthy enough to rejoin "the community" (whether said community is "healthy" or not)?

Tharpa Pema's picture

I tend to think psychotherapeutics has as many different aims as there are different moods and viewpoints among those who practice it!

For myself, I use it to reduce suffering, a fundamental Buddhist aim. I seek to limit my agenda to that, although each day I open to new awareness of my previously hidden agendas.

That is the dilemma of being human.

So for me, psychotherapy can be used for community-integration or to separate oneself from community.

Dominic Gomez's picture

Thank you, Tharpa. Such is the case with Buddhism. Its teachings have been shaped to fit as many different viewpoints as those who've discovered it.

celticpassage's picture

Well, in the scenario you speak of, I would say the job of psychotherapy is to return a person to behaving in a societally approved way.

Nevertheless, to me you ar talking about a specific population...quite disturbed people, or more likely the prison population. The quite disturbed group is usually treated and controlled primarily by drugs. While the vast majority of the prison population receives no psychological treatment at all.

Regardless of those groups, most psychotherapy and it's offshoots are 'consumed' by normals. That is, people who think they have problems, or want to become 'better' people. And by far the greater number in this group get their 'psychotherapy' from psycho-self-help-books. The interesting thing is that these people believe that they are being helped, or are becoming 'better', but there is generally no real improvement in their behaviors or life as witnessed by others, or even themselves over the long term. So they await for and buy the next book that promises to help them overcome their limitations. And the cycle repeats again and again.

I don't think all psychotherapy and therapists are totally useless, but the majority of either do not really change people much. For the most psychologized country in the world, the US doesn't show any difference compared with other country's populations, and may even be worse (measured happiness, life contentment, etc.)

A gifted therapist may be able to help some people in the short term but again I think this is primarily because the client thinks they are being helped. (but again, these are primarily 'normals' and would get 'better' on their own). As well, to the degree that some people are helped is to the degree that the therapist/client relationship mimics a supportive accepting environment: the real harbinger of change.

And of course, a true spiritual community can bring the greatest most lasting change in people.

Tharpa Pema's picture

I think you may have a blind spot, celticpassage. Perhaps you are seeing only the data that confirms your opinion.

I see some people whose suffering is reduced by psychotherpy and some whose suffering is not.

celticpassage's picture

Perhaps it's you who has a blind spot.

celticpassage's picture

Well, I think a couple of points or so.

I don't doubt that psychotherapists believe their work to be useful and beneficial, if they didn't, they wouldn't be doing it. That doesn't mean, however, that they are correct. Indeed, psychotherapists tend to be a group that is easily self-deluded about their own efficacy.

Also, just because a healthy supportive community is rare, or even non-existent, doesn't mean that a healthy supportive community is not what is needed for psychological health.

Finally, I'm not surprised that you find psychotherapy and its multitudinous offshoots to be useful and beneficial. The problem is that the only group that is more deluded than psychotherapists about a therapy's efficacy is the client. (This is not intended as a slight against you, Pscho self-help books always sell extremely well, so many people *think* that they are beneficial)

teecomb's picture

You just admitted the usefulness and effectiveness of psychotherapy.

What is the purpose of psychotherapy? To treat disorders of the mind. Here the disorder is the intrusions of thoughts like, "I need help", "There is something wrong with me.", "I cannot handle my life, therefore I need to self-medicate with some kind of substance or self-harm", "I am an angry/awful/ugly person by nature"...

You said "I'm not surprised that [people] find psychotherapy and its multitudinous offshoots to be useful and beneficial. The problem is that the only group that is more deluded than psychotherapists about a therapy's efficacy is the client."

I agree with this wholeheartedly. The delusions of the people that seek therapy are those with thought-patterns I gave you examples of. The purpose of psychotherapy is to identify them, their root and come up with a solution. Delusional people find psychotherapy to be beneficial because it treats their delusion and helps them cope with their stress. What you said, in a nut shell, is that people with healthy minds do not need psychotherapy- which no one is arguing against.

Normally I would not bother responding to someone determined to bash something, but the danger of doing so on a public forum may be that someone who would benefit from treatment chooses not to.

melcher's picture

One could begin with a similar set of personal attitudes about teachers, doctors, lawyers, Republicans, Presbyterians or carpenters and proceed to deny that their point of view has any validity or worth. Sounds like talk radio.

I am particularly puzzled at your repeated use of the term, 'normals'. Is this some sort of science fiction terminology? Is this some club that you belong to?

To clarify, your statements, to me, come off as a form of bigotry.

Thanks anyway for the instruction. It has given me pause to examine my own preciously held set of prejudices.

Emma Varvaloucas's picture

Hi Everyone,
Just so you know, this article is from our archives. It was first printed in 2000, which means that the book has been out for quite some time! You can buy it here: http://www.amazon.com/Toward-Psychology-Awakening-Psychotherapy-Transfor....
Best wishes,
Emma Varvaloucas
tricycle.com

dhammadoc's picture

I have found personally that excursions into psychological explanation turn out to be ever more nuanced efforts by the ego to survive. Just practice diligently. A stone must be hard to take an edge. An edge is needed to cut through illusion.

melcher's picture

Spoken like someone who has never been part of a large spiritual community. Just stare at the wall and it will all work out. Unlikely.

Paul Stevenson's picture

Well, denigrating that which you know nothing about doesn't get you much, either. For the record, it's:
1. Stare at the wall.
2. Realize you are not the thing staring at the wall.
3. Realize that the thing having issues is not you, either.
4. Let the thing go off and have it's issues. Eventually, those issues pass for lack of an audience. Peace is nice.
5. Realize that you have some influence on what arises in the thing, the mind, if you wish. A Bodhisattva mind may arises for you if that is what you truly want. (I assume.)

Everyone has Buddha nature so do have a nice day.

Paul Stevenson

Dominic Gomez's picture

Re: "Just stare at the wall...". Faith is a powerful thing.

melcher's picture

This is the single most valuable article I've encountered in these pages. It goes a long way toward addressing both my own tendencies and struggles along the spiritual path and the collective struggles and abuses that so often surface in spiritual communities. The concept of 'spiritual by-passing' can also be characterized as psychological avoidance.

Absolutely brilliant and absolutely necessary. I look forward to the publication of the book.

celticpassage's picture

An even longer rehash and advertisement for "spiritual bypassing" which is a barely disguised attempt to more fully open spiritual life to an endless series of useless psycho-spiritual self-help books.

Dominic Gomez's picture

A nice assessment of one method of introducing Buddhism to Westerners. But not all Westerners are raised psychotherapeutically. For most of us the tradition is the Judeo-Christian belief system, and that is what Buddhism needs to address more immediately.

idaleung1's picture

The article is deep and wise but I am uncomfortable with the oft repeated assessments regarding "western anomie." Is the book fully footnoted and referenced?

Reinand Ortiz Feliciano's picture

How wonderful to see one's ideas and feelings captured so clearly in words. As a practicing psychologist struggling for years with practicing Buddhism, this morning I have been shown a glimpse of a possible route of integration and transformation. Where do I sign for a copy of the upcoming book? Thanks!