Bodhisattvas and Singularities: Using Technology to Catalyze Awakening. Part 2.

Inducing Mystical Experience

I’m going to take a slight turn away from Kurzweil’s predictions and focus on some contemporary research that is chronicled in the book, Why God Won’t Go Away: Brain Science & The Biology of Belief. The authors of this book, Neuroscientists Andrew Newberg and Egene D’aquill, recorded some interesting findings in the laboratory with advanced Tibetan meditators and Franciscan nuns, using SPECT scanning technologies (short for single photon emission computed tomography). They found that during meditative peak experiences their subjects showed a dramatic decrease in activity in the cortical part of the brain called the posterior superior parietal lobe. This segment of the brain, which they refer to as the “orientation association area” or OAA is responsible for orienting the individual in physical space, and does so by creating “the physical limits of the self.” ((Andrew Newberg, Eugene D’aquili, & Vince Rause, Why God Won’t Go Away (New York: Ballantine Books, 2001), 5.))

The subjective correlation with this objective data was very much the standard mystical experience of unity consciousness, timelessness, and in the case of the nuns mingling with God. ((Newberg et al., 7.)) There conclusion was that the objective data they found was in fact correlated with these descriptions of Ultimate Reality, and that “spiritual experience, at its very root, is intimately interwoven with human biology.” ((Newberg et al., 8.)) The reason I mention this study, is because it shows that at the very least there is some sort of correlation between subjective mystical experiences and objective brain states.

Now take this piece of the puzzle and place it into the larger conversation concerning Kurzweil and the exponential growth of computational ability and the reverse-engineering of the human brain. What starts to emerge is the possibility that one could use technology to profoundly impact the spiritual growth of the individual (human or otherwise). Of course, this is done via various methods; some change the objective side of the equation, thereby creating a movement towards mystical maturity, by inducing certain brain states that correlate to mystical states. Other methods take a more comprehensive approach and use objective indicators to help entrain one’s subjective state—keeping in mind that these indicators are becoming exponentially more refined as time progresses.

An example of this approach, being used today, is with neurofeedback. “Neurofeedback (NFB), also called neurotherapy, neurobiofeedback or EEG biofeedback, enables an individual to train brainwave activity, as measured by electrodes on the scalp, via feedback of EEG information in the form of a video display, sound or vibration.” ((Wikipedia, “Neurofeedback” n.d., http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurofeedback (accessed May 1, 2006).)) One can then use the intimate understanding of our physical organism to help us more rapidly entrain the mind to recognize its own truest nature.

Imagine a scenario, where you are on retreat with your teacher. Now imagine what it might be like to be fully connected to a large computer network that was wirelessly transmitting physical indicators of your mental state, all in a way that was completely undetectable to you. Suppose that your teacher, along side brilliant computer scientists, had translated most of their keen knowledge concerning how best to help a student, depending on where they were in their practice, into computer language, such that an advanced algorithm could effortlessly, and in real time, give you feedback.

You might hear a beep every time that your mind wandered, or perhaps hear appropriate instructions at a certain point in time, like the pithily timed sayings of a Zen Master, which then help unlock deeper levels of reality. Perhaps certain states of consciousness are induced at the beginning of a practice period, to help give you a taste of what state you’re learning to rest in. Imagine how much more quickly, with that kind of information and that degree of precision one might be able to recognize and then cultivate the unaided recognition of emptiness. Would it make sense to use these technologies, to put them to use, and to benefit from them if consequent advances in practice were possible?

The Ethics of Neurotheology

The concern that one could raise is that using technology to alter our mental state would somehow take away from the process of spiritual unfolding, that it isn’t natural or that it’s somehow un-spiritual. All of these are valid concerns and must be addressed if as modern Bodhisattvas we are to make choices concerning what technologies we do or do not use to aid ourselves and our students.

The first thing that I would say, going back to my opening paragraph, is that a Bodhisattva, by his or her very definition, is willing to do whatever it takes to help other people awaken from the dream of separation. If that includes using cutting edge technologies, and doing things in a slightly different way from how they’ve been done in the past, then without a doubt, I think they would be willing make those changes. ((Assuming of course they don’t cause any abnormal or long-term damage to the practioner. These methods would still be subject to the pre-established precepts in Buddhism, and the other great wisdom traditions.))

Furthermore, any ideas we have about what is “natural” and what “should be” are just that, ideas. And ideas, like all things, change. Is it anymore un-natural for me to use a search engine like Google to help with the research for this paper, rather then being restricted to the old dewy decibel system in a physical library, and hard copy books (which we might note were quite revolutionary and un-natural only a short time ago)? Some people may think so, but for almost everyone who grew up using search engines, and who knows how much more efficient they are, using Google is unquestionably natural. I don’t think it would be too much of a leap to think about the methods we use to help nurture spiritual growth in a similar way.

The other concern I mentioned, namely that using technology to help us on our spiritual path is “un-spiritual” is a ridiculously unnecessary one. Granted it is always challenging to adapt to new ways of doing things, new does not equate to un-spiritual. It only equates to unfamiliar, and anyone trying to collapse what is familiar with what is spiritual is missing the boat entirely. And isn’t it the case that the enlightened mind, is itself unattached to the descriptions or mental concepts that are tacked on to “it?” The enlightened mind is and always will be that very same recognition, for it is by its very nature unborn and therefore outside the stream of time, technological progress, and indeed this entire thought experiment. Its realization and recognition are what’s important, and if we change the rituals, methods, and skillful means that we use to help cultivate this recognition then how could we be taking anything away from that which is already indivisible?

The last thing I would like to mention, and perhaps the strongest argument for using whatever means we have at our disposal to help us awaken, is the Buddhist notion of upaya, or skillful means. It is said that the Buddha taught to various peoples in different ways, giving them teachings that were most appropriate for them and the world they lived in. This was the Buddha exercising skillful means. Isn’t it possible that a Buddha or Bodhisattva in today’s work would do that very same thing? Would they not, out of deep compassion for all beings, seek to relieve them of their suffering, and in a way that is most expedient and effective? It could be said, and I certainly believe this to be true, that anything less would be an act of ignorance and a breach of the Bodhisattva’s vow.