Deepak
Chopra is very wealthy. He told me so himself, leaping to his feet to
defend his personal brand of spirituality, and pacing up and down in
front of me. Spiritual people should not be ashamed of being wealthy, he
declared. I did not disagree.
All
this took place at Toward a Science of Consciousness, a biennial
conference in Tucson, Arizona, where I was invited, along with Menas
Kafatos and Leonard Mlodinow, to debate with the spiritual guru and
purveyor of Ayurvedic medicine.
Chopra
is used to debating with scientists, indeed his book with Mlodinow, War
of the Worldviews, inspired the title of our debate. These science v
spirituality debates can be rather frustrating because Chopra uses lots
of scientific ideas in his books and talks – from quantum mechanics to
evolution – but he tends to twist them just at the crucial point. For
example, he claims that consciousness not only gave rise to the entire
universe but also directs evolution. This means we are all evolving
towards a higher state of consciousness. Nice thought – popular thought
too – but it kind of misses the whole point that evolution by natural
selection (and related processes) is a marvellously mindless process
that does not require a designer or the power of consciousness to
produce its wonders.
But
my arguments took a different tack. I chose to tackle his brand of
spirituality rather than his wobbly science, although I think he treats
both in the same disingenuous way. He takes their underlying, and often
uncomfortable, insights and then twists them into something far more
palatable – into something everybody would like to be true.
The
problem, as far as consciousness is concerned, is the same for both
science and spirituality – it's dualism. We seem to be conscious selves
having a stream of mental experiences in a physical world, yet there
cannot be two kinds of stuff – the physical and the mental. Scientists
tend to make matter primary and cannot explain how a physical brain
creates subjective experiences; Chopra's version of spirituality makes
consciousness primary but cannot explain how consciousness creates
matter. Meanwhile mystics and meditators throughout the ages have said
all this is illusion – ultimately I am not separate from the world
around me. Seeing the true nature, or becoming enlightened, means seeing
through the illusion to oneness, or realising non-duality.
I
have been training in Zen for 30 years as well as being involved in
consciousness research. So I am familiar with both sides. That's why I
agreed with Chopra when, in his workshop the night before (actually a
solid, three-hour lecture), he said: There is no separation between mind
and body … Self and other co-arise and fall away all the time.
I
am not a dualist, he proclaims. But he is. How do you wiggle your toes?
he asks. Isn't your mind sending an order to your feet? or, Before a
brain can register a thought, a mind must think it … every step of the
way is mind over matter … We override our brains all the time.
Aha
– so there's a me that overrides my brain. This is straight dualism and
is precisely what most spiritual traditions deny. Their teachers know
that denying the persistence and importance of our very own self is
painful, as the Buddha did. They know it is hard to accept our self as
an ephemeral construction (to put it in scientific terms), or something
that arises and falls away all the time (in spiritual terms).
So
Chopra twists his spirituality right back on itself into the old,
familiar and comfortable idea that I exist, I control my own body, I am
important and may even live forever. In his book Reinventing the Body,
Resurrecting the Soul he gives the soul the attention it deserves: a
dualist project if ever there was one.
I'll
give two further examples. In Ageless Body, Timeless Mind (two million
copies sold) Chopra describes those timeless experiences familiar to
long-term meditators and those who have spontaneous or drug-induced
mystical experiences. The world does not disappear, yet self, time and
space cease to have any meaning. All is one and time is gone. Whether
you come at this from a scientific or spiritual perspective this makes
sense as a process of dropping the usual illusions of self and
separation.
Yet
for Chopra this is the quantum alternative to growing old. Through
developing the timeless mind the effects of ageing are largely
preventable, he says. So he has slithered from what I think is a genuine
insight about the nature of self and time to claiming to prevent
ageing. Indeed, he claims that in moments of transcendence, when time
stands still, your biological clock will stop. The spirit is that domain
of our awareness where there is no time.
The
biological clock will stop? All those multiply-interlinked chemical and
biochemical processes that provide aspects of timing in a complex body
will stop? I doubt it. His evidence includes the effect of meditation on
the enzyme telomerase, which he interprets as proof that consciousness
has the power to slow ageing. I interpret it as that meditation, with
all its effects on attention, relaxation and attitude, has positive
health benefits too.
Finally
there is that question of wealth itself. I ended my presentation on his
mega-bestseller The Seven Spiritual Laws of Success, where Chopra
considers the creation of wealth. One might be forgiven for thinking he
is talking about spiritual wealth; about the joy, equanimity, compassion
or peace that may result from spiritual practice. But no. He is urging
us to align our consciousness with the subtle yet powerful, unseen
forces that affect the flow of money in our lives.
What
then of enlightenment? Aside from his video game promising a soothing
journey to enlightenment, in his lecture Chopra described enlightenment
as getting rid of the person that never was. I agree with him (again).
This is the whole thrust of the spiritual journey, that you discover
that you aren't, and never were, who you thought you were. The feeling
of being a powerful entity who persists through time and who will either
die or live on when your body dies is an illusion. Yet it is surely
precisely this illusory self who craves an ageless body and an eternal
soul, and who longs for success, material wealth and control over the
flow of money.
One
who has transcended the ordinary illusions of self and duality might or
might not be wealthy, but they would surely not crave power and money
or encourage others to do so. This is why I concluded by saying: Deepak,
you may be happy to call this 'spirituality' but I am not. And this, in
turn, is why he leapt so eagerly to his feet to defend himself and his
enormous wealth.
The guardian
Sue Blackmore
2012-05-14
2012-05-14
No comments:
Post a Comment