Spirituality Studies 10-2 Fall 2024 13 Samuel Bendeck Sotillos The key to understanding this erosion of humanity’s spiritual traditions can be found in the following statement by American psychologist Robert E. Ornstein (1942–2018), disciple and main representative of Idries Shah: “As the esoteric disciplines of other cultures become accessible to the [note: modern] West, they emerge as psychologies” (Ornstein 1972, 11). Ichazo also frames the Arica system in an analogous fashion so as to appeal to a modern mindset: “Protoanalysis follows the same path as the real ancient spirituality, and it is a modern presentation… of all human potentialities in order to become actualized” (quoted in Isaacs and Labanauskas 1997, 21). Palmer (1991, 52) also echoes this process: “The [note: Enneagram of personality types] system was being developed as an esoteric psychological tool.” It is apt to recall that an early teacher of Tibetan Buddhism in the West, Chögyam Trungpa (1939–1987), predicted this tendency in religion, stating in 1975: “Buddhism will come to the West as a psychology” (quoted in Goleman 2005, vii) [10]. While Sufi psychology, just like its Buddhist equivalent, has increased in popularity, both have suffered attempts to extract them from their traditional contexts. With Súfism, this has led to a distortion of its central message, which cannot be cut off from Islam as a whole, since all Sufi orders are linked through an unbroken “chain” (Ar. silsilah), stretching back to the Prophet himself. In Buddhism, some of the most advanced teachings and practices are often offered to Western aspirants with little or no commitment, or without any assessment of their qualifications. This development has been rather nuanced, so the utmost vigilance is required to thwart a burgeoning reductionism at the heart of mainstream psychology. Orenstein writes (1971, 139): “My intention is not to ‘reduce’ totally the phenomena of the esoteric disciplines to psychological terms, but simply to begin the process of considering these aspects of the traditions which fall within the realm of a modern psychological analysis.” And what do we say about that which does not lend itself to verification through the five senses? The Spirit lies outside the empirical order. Does this mean that spiritual traditions, that do not readily conform to the prejudices of modern psychology, are likely to be ignored? There are many unfortunate implications to this trend which affect how we understand the intermediary realm of the human psyche and what lies beyond it. While psychology today – as an autonomous science separate from religion and philosophy – began with the emergence of modernism (and which continues into the post-Enlightenment era), it is erroneous to suppose that traditional religions did not possess their own integral psychologies, even if they did not explicitly use that term. Ouspensky (1981, 4) indicated that “it is necessary to realize that psychology except in modern times has never existed under its own name”. In the premodern world, the human psyche was always viewed through the lens of metaphysics, in stark contrast to the materialist tenor of modern science, which no longer recognizes the human “soul”, having replaced it with the more scientifically acceptable term “mind”. “Psychology is sometimes called a new science. This is quite wrong. Psychology is, perhaps, the oldest science, and, unfortunately, in its most essential features a forgotten science” (Ouspensky 1981, 3). The notion that modern psychology offers something “new” or “superior” to the sacred psychology of traditional peoples is related to a deficient grasp of what it means to be fully human, which is a direct consequence of authentic spirituality having become, in large measure, eclipsed in the contemporary world. Ouspensky (1981, 3) continues: [P]ractically never in history has psychology stood at so low a level as at the present time. It has lost all touch with its origin and its meaning so that now it is even difficult to define the term ‘psychology’: that is, to say what psychology is and what it studies. And this is so in spite of the fact that never in history have there been so many psychological theories and so many psychological writings. This personifies the thought process that mirrors what has been termed the “psychological impostor” (Schuon 1966, 98–101), a seduction that misunderstands the plenitude of authentic spirituality with its corresponding “science of the soul” – something that is quite evident in the “enneagram community.” All spiritual traditions teach their own version of the famous inscription found at Delphi – “Know thyself” (Gr. Gnóthi seautón) – which did not emerge with Sigmund Freud (1856–1939), or modern psychology for that matter, but can be seen as a timeless truth that has been taught since time immemorial in all cultures. Rather than approaching the human psyche through the sole lens of modern science, we would be better off paying close attention to what Richard of St. Victor (d. 1173) had to say: “If the mind would fain ascend to the height of science, let its first and principal study be to know itself” (quoted in Gardner 1925, xv). Although each religion possesses a corresponding psychology, its insights can only be fully efficacious when realized within the nurturing and protective environs of an authentic spiritual tradition.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTUwMDU5Ng==