Product Description

How does the mind experience the sacred? What biological mechanisms are involved in mystical states and trances? Is there a neurological basis for patterns in comparative religions? Does religion have an evolutionary function? This pathbreaking work by two leading medical researchers explores the neurophysiology of religious experience. Building on an explanation of the basic structure of the brain, the authors focus on parts most relevant to human experience, emotion, and cognition. On this basis, they plot how the brain is involved in mystical experiences. Successive chapters apply this scheme to mythmaking, ritual and liturgy, meditation, near-death experiences, and theology itself. Anchored in such research, the authors also sketch the implications of their work for philosophy, science, theology, and the future of religion itself.

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #364647 in Books
• Published on: 1999-08
• Original language: English
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Paperback
• 228 pages

From Publishers Weekly
How does the brain generate and process mystical states? What are the neurological explanations for religious experiences? How does the mind create myth, religious ritual and liturgy? The late D'Aquili (Brain, Symbol, and Experience) and Newberg, a researcher in nuclear medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, explore these and other questions in their exhilarating study of religion and the science of mind. The authors contend that since the "mind and brain are responsible for all of our experiences, they are also the mediator for our experience of God." Using the insights of neurology and neuropsychology, they develop a "neurotheology" that serves to explain how the mind functions to create religious experience. In the first section, the authors map out the structure of the brain, focusing on the parts that are most significant for understanding human emotion and cognition. Here the authors contend that the mind and brain form a kind of "mystical union," and they examine the ways in which the mind/brain provides "our advanced methods of experiencing and interpreting the external world." The second section explores the relationships between myth, ritual, liturgy and the mystical mind. D'Aquili and Newberg assert that "all religious and spiritual phenomena, including the concept and experience of God (Absolute Unitary Being), are generated by the brain and central nervous system." The book's final section argues that "Absolute Unitary Being (Pure Consciousness or God) paradoxically and counterintuitively generates experience and the world (including the brain)." D'Aquili and Newberg make difficult scientific concepts understandable and accessible as they formulate this fresh approach to religion and science. (June)
Copyright 1999 Reed Business Information, Inc.

About the Author
The late Eugene d'Aquili, M.D., Ph.D., was, until his recent death, Clinical Associate Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Pennsylvania Medical School. A pioneer in neurological research of religion, he published in the area for twenty-five years, including co-authoring Brain, Symbol and Experience (1990).

Andrew B. Newberg, M.D., is Clinical Assistant Professor in the Department of Radiology and Instructor in the Department of Psychiatry, University of Pennsylvania Medical School. He is author, with d'Aquili, of numerous research studies underlying this volume

Customer Reviews

The Neuropsychology of Mysticism
The Mystical Mind may be viewed as a modern version of William James' Varieties of Religious Experience. Andrew Newberg (who completed this volume after the death of co-author Eugene Aquili) has a unique background to warrant such a lofty comparison. He is a physician and a scholar with expertise in research methods, neuropsychology, comparative religions, and philosophy. Though the approach of neuropsychology dominates this work, Newberg moves seamlessly to other models as the focus and purpose of analysis requires. He utilizes this broad range of conceptual tools to examine the continuum of mystical phenomenon, from the creation of myth to the sense of peace related to the performance of rituals to the profound mystical state of Absolute Unitary Being (AUB).

The book is divided into three sections. The first provides an overview of the central nervous system and cognitive functions. In the second section, a neuropsychological model for understanding the continuum of religious and mystical experiences is presented. Finally, the third section suggests how a theology based on neurology (neurotheology) can serve as both a meta-theology (i.e. a basis of understanding the entire range of world religions and theologies) and a mega-theology (i.e. a basis for developing a universal theology).

The author presents compelling evidence that everything that we know or experience is dependent upon and mediated by the brain. In particular, he relies on the study of patients with strokes and brain tumors, who loose function in the areas predicted by neuropsychology. It is also validated by the experiences that are generated through electrical stimulation of specific areas of the brain and by imaging data of patients and monks in deep meditation.

Because of this intimate connection between the brain and the mind Newberg adopts the term brain/mind. This term reflects the reality that the brain and the mind must be viewed as a single, inseparable totality and that a focus on one or the other reflects the manner of observation rather than a difference in that which is being observed. This integrated concept of brain/mind is also central to the metaphysics he takes up in the final section.

In the second section of the book, Newberg applies the neuropsychological model he has developed to the religious phenomenon of myth, ritual, liturgy, near-death experiences, and mystical experiences. In the interest of brevity, I will restrict this review to his discussion of mystical experiences. When one examines descriptions of the most profound mystical experiences (AUB) across time and cultures, one is struck with their general similarity and one significant difference. Mystics universally indicate that these experiences are beyond words, space, time, all dualities (including self-other), and are characterized by a profound sense of absolute unity and oneness. It is viewed as more vivid and "real" than our ordinary consciousness and has the power to transform lives. However, some mystics attach this experience to a neutral affective state (e.g. void consciousness of Buddhism) while others attach it to a state of ultimate bliss and ecstatic rapture (e.g. unio mystica of Christian mysticism). Newberg's neuropsychological analysis of these experiences explains both these similarities and their differences.

AUB may be reached through both the active (i.e. beginning with the sympathetic portion of the autonomic nervous system that mediates arousal) and passive (i.e. beginning with the parasympathetic portion of the autonomic nervous system that mediates homeostasis and quiescence). I will focus on parasympathetic side and substantially simplify the neuropsychological processes. In this form of meditation, one begins with the intent to clear one's mind of thought and to withdrawal from sensory stimulation. As the meditation deepens, the subjective sensation of a relaxation grows to profound quiescence. As elements of the parasympathetic nervous system become fully aroused they "spill over" into and activate the sympathetic nervous system. When both the sympathetic and parasympathetic portions of the autonomic nervous system are maximally aroused, one experiences AUB. If this experience is accompanied by the arousal of the limbic system, the experience is accompanied by rapturous ecstasy (unio mystica), if not, the experience is one of void consciousness.

This simplification does not do justice to the neurological detail and complexity of Newberg's model. But it does give the reader a sense of how he relates profound mystical states to neurological structures and activity. Though he acknowledges that this model is a work in progress, and far from perfect, it is validated by an impressive body of scientific evidence.

The final section of this book focuses on philosophy, neurotheology, and metaphysics. Newberg suggests that neuropsychology offers a scientific model (i.e. metatheology) for examining the religions and theologies of the world as well as a basis (i.e. megatheology) for creating a new theology based in science. But perhaps the most fascinating and controversial portion of this work lies in its metaphysical speculation.

In building any metaphysical system, it is necessary to establish a starting point and it is generally assumed that this may begin by focusing on the fundamental reality of experience (i.e. idealism) or on observation (i.e. empiricism) and both result in intractable problems. If one begins with experience one is left unable to acknowledge the reality of other sentient beings and if one begins with observation (and the underlying assumption of dualism) then one, paradoxically, must deny the reality of one's own subjective experience. What Newberg suggests, is that the starting point of metaphysics be the experience of AUB, an experience that is neither subjective nor objective, but the source of both subjectivity and objectivity. This resolution of opposites is analogous to what happens in myth, where opposites are unified and the binary operator in the brain is overpowered by the holistic operator. Again, this presentation is overly simplistic and the reader is urged to study Newberg's fascinating depiction of this process.

In my opening paragraph I compared The Mystical Mind to William James' Varieties of Religious Experience. That was the highest complement I could offer Andrew Newberg and this amazing book. I hope this review has given readers a glimpse into the Mystical Mind and encourages them to delve into this extraordinary work.

Neurobiological hot air
This book, although excellent for an overview of neurobiological funtions in the brain, is, unfortunately, absolutely useless in 'explaining' consciousness and its relation to brain function. I note that the reviewer Magellan airlily dismisses German Idealists and related ilk with a wave of his hand, and assumes, as do most neurophysiologists, that consciousness is something 'squeezed' out the brain, like toothpaste out of a tube. The varied states caused by the functions of the different areas of the brain are taken to be items or products, rather like different car makes from Ford. The mind, so called, is, for Magellan, a sum of the physical activities and their filtering functions. It is absolutely NOT clear "that consciousness is the result of a number of diverse and separate brain areas whose actions have to be coordinated and integrated in time for it to occur"; these are modifications of something perhaps, but not the source. We always have assumed that awareness and self-consciousness are what we mean as an overall umbrella category when the word "consciousness" is used. In fact, as has been pointed out in various places, this is only one arena, not the whole enchilada. It has to exist a priori in order to be another of Magellan's physical mechanisms. The states achieved by mature meditators are remarkable, and in no way is he qualified to understand or judge their merits. Yes, brain functionality is involved in passing ephemera, but the 'screen' upon which this is enacted is not. A lot of dualistic nonsense is running around here, and a lot of rather naive scientific mechanistic assumptions as well. I don't mind at all having the brain analyzed nor do I reject science, but I do object to arrogant assumptions about really understanding in our 'contemporary sophistication' that patronize an astounding and quite misunderstood part of the human experience. He might read Philosophy of Consciousness Without an Object for some tips. Smart guy; problem is, he's a smart guy.

A few comments
This book attempts to integrate mystical and religious experience with our current understanding of the brain. Starting out with a review of the revelant neuroanatomy and neurobiology, the authors go on to discuss those areas of the brain that are thought to be intimately involved with the mediation of mystical and religious experiences. Various areas of the brain have been found to produce feelings of wholeness and oneness akin to those experienced by mystics, such as has been found in the case of abnormal stimulation of the temporal lobe. The authors examine this evidence in detail, and then in the final sections propose a general theory of how the mind and brain give rise to mystical and spiritual experience.

Since we're on the subject, I thought I would make a few more comments on that, specifically related to the mystical approach to knowledge and spiritual experience. The mystical view of the world and that of science now stand at a critical juncture, since science now has the tools to investigate this experience in more detail. The question I want to consider is that, although I think meditation and other mental disciplines can provide self-knowledge, and I think there is value in that, but what can we say about the mystical view of consciousness and the mind in view of current evidence?

The mystical view of things and the western views were probably pretty close in terms of knowledge until I would say, post-Cartesian philosophy, but certainly after Kant, the western models have taken things much further than the old mystical models in terms of their understanding of the mind and brain. What they accomplished was certainly worthy of note for the time, but progress doesn't stand still, and things have just moved on, and they really haven't gotten the message.

One reason the mystical models and concepts seem so vague and unsatisfying to modern ears is that they really have reached an impasse. The reason why their concepts are so vague is for a very good reason--and again for one they don't understand since they're usually not aware of the science--but when you understand the neurology, it's quite obvious.

This is because the human brain has no intrinsic cranial nerves for sensing its own internal states, or even basic sensory information. In fact, you could take a knife to your own brain and you wouldn't feel a thing, because there are no intrinsic pain nerves. The brain is specialized to receive and process and analyze information from the five senses, not itself.

Thus, the brain has no direct way of sensing and getting information about its own internal states, because it actually lacks the nerves for doing so. Hence, mystical knowledge must be gleaned second-hand from very indirect perception of these vague, amorphous, hard to define mental states. So these systems are really nothing more than vague speculations about what are basically epiphenomenal interior states.

In other words, the brain really isn't designed to do what they're trying to do with it very well, since the very act of trying to empty the mind goes against highly optimized memory functions relating to memory storage and retrieval.

I'd like to consider one more thing we've learned about the brain in the light of the present discussion. This is the question of why emptying the mind during meditation is so difficult. The mystical view doesn't explain this very well, if at all, only that it is very difficult to do, but that it is necessary in order to penetrate to the deeper levels of awareness and consciousness.

The answer is basically very simple, even in terms of the brain neurophysiology (which it often isn't), and the answer came from a seemingly unlikely area--from sleep studies.

It used to be thought that the brain basically was quiescent during sleep, except for things like dreaming and REM sleep, but many centers are active during sleep, such as the locus coeruleus in the brain stem, the occulomotor nuclei, and so on. And also memory areas in the temporal lobes become more active. This is the reason why people often experience vivid imagery during sleep.

But it was learned that memory functions play an important role in sleep that is different from waking consciousness as a result. It turns out that during waking, the memory areas of the brain are actually under a certain amount of constant inhibition from centers lower in the brain. The reason why is that without it, memories would flood willy-nilly into consciousness, and make ordinary attention and thought impossible. Hence, there must be some overall mechanism to prevent this from happening. There is and it's known as corticocipedal inhibition.

Then, as I said, during sleep, this tonic or constant inhibition is turned off, allowing memories to be retrieved pretty much at random. This is one reason for why dreams often seem to be so chaotic or nonsensical, since there's no overall pattern to the flow of memories. Some dreams are more meaningful, of course, but many aren't and this is the reason why.

This is also why so many pre-scientific systems of thought that try to make sense of dreams are unfortunately missing the point-- which is that many, perhaps most dreams--are just nonsense.

But anyway, the point here is that during wakefulness the inhibition of the memory areas and consciousness is basically optimized so that memories are retrievable when needed, but not so disinhibited that they flood into consciousness unbidden.

Hence, the reason for why it's so difficult to quiet the "monkey brain." During meditation, the memory areas become more active and so it's harder to quiet them down. So the reason why emptying the mind is so difficult is that it goes against the basic overall functioning of the memory and attention mechanisms.

To sum up, I am willing to concede that meditation and other mental disciplines perhaps can provide self-knowledge, and there is certainly value in that, but as far as an explanation of the mind and consiousness goes, they are no longer adequate. It's now very clear that self-knowledge derived from introspective methods and a true explanation for the mind and consciousness are two different things.

Finally, consider the concept of "pure consciousness" in mystical experience. Despite the undifferentiated and unitary nature of consciousness that is presented to meditative experience, this is an illusion, nor is there any one area in the brain where such consciousness can be said to reside or be controlled. Rather, it has become clear from recent research that consciousness is the result of a number of diverse and separate brain areas whose actions have to be coordinated and integrated in time for it to occur.

These explanations are good examples of the type of advance in our understanding of the brain that had to await the advent of more modern scientific techniques.