Psychology paradigm a potential obstacle to progress

patbb

Psychology: always insufficient by itself because it never leads to permanent freedom from suffering.
Limited potential is to indirectly solving a few karmic baggage (which can be life saving for many).

Potential fatal obstacle to one's progress.

http://www.buddhistgeeks.com/2010/04/the-practical-dharma-of-mahasi-sayadaw/

“A good student of mine several years ago was undertaking a three-month retreat—she had already been practicing a few years—and was at a stage in her practice where her sense of self was very porous and destabilized,” he recalls. “However, she was gaining insight knowledge into the way things are. At the end of her retreat, when she went back home, she felt extremely ill-at-ease. She went to her local dharma teacher for advice, who told her, ‘You need therapy.’ ”

Nonetheless, the yogi’s inner voice told her she had come this far by relating to all meditative objects—mental, physical, good, bad or indifferent—on a sensate, rather than psychological level. She had enough resolve to choose the cushion over the couch, Armstrong says. “She went to Burma, ordained as a nun, and through intensive practice over the course of the next year attained the first of the Four Paths of Enlightenment,” he says. “That was fortunate for her, but it also illustrates the limitations of teachers who have not yet experienced the first path, and then offer teachings from a perspective which might be more about psychology than vipassana.”

SherabDorje

However apt the example may be, this is only one example. One should certainly not go to the other extreme and ignore the necessity of therapy when it is warranted. As far as it being a "potentially fatal obstacle to one's progress", I would say that that is impossible, because if one is making progress and has the same insight as this student, one will continue to make progress either by simply persisting in their practice as she did, or by going to therapy, finding it wanting, and persisting in their practice as she did.

It may be an unnecessary detour for some people, but I hardly think it's a potentially fatal obstacle to one's progress.

zenff

What I pick up from your post is something else.
After a serious retreat there should be some kind of qualified aftercare available.

I remember once or twice coming out of sesshin very open, very shaken, very confused, and I felt like a loose canon at the time.
Fortunately nothing really bad happened, but I think it was dangerous in a way.

If teachers are not willing or able to supply such aftercare they shouldn’t give the retreat.

patbb

It may be an unnecessary detour for some people, but I hardly think it's a potentially fatal obstacle to one's progress.

"potential" fatal obstacle.

Imagine someone else just like this lady. But with less experience.
Choosing the couch instead of the cushion.
All of a sudden she is diagnosed with a laundry list of personality problems.
Years go by on therapies and perhaps drugs.
Wake up twenty years later wondering what would have happened if she had chosen the cushion over the couch.

by "potential obstacle" i meant it is a reasonable probability. Especially if someone is from the west where we are raised to believe that psychology is the authority, and meditation is a good tool to calm ourselves (ask any uniciated who have no idea about Buddhism, i think their opinion will be very close to this).
Where the probability that the family and friends, having no education about reality, pressure that person to "forget about this crazy cult stuff" and go see a doctor who knows what he's talking about.

zenff

Whether to go for the couch (and maybe the medication) or the cushion is very much casuistic.
I wouldn’t dare to say anything general about that.

SherabDorje

Of course the "potential" for choosing the "couch instead of the cushion" is there.

We would just need to know the specifics of the situation. This woman's "sense of self was very porous and destabilized". What does that mean? It was obviously something the local dharma teacher felt required therapy.

I agree with zenff that some sort of follow-up would be in order. But I would also say that the article overgeneralizes in the opposite direction. It's dangerous to make generalizations about psychology vs. meditation. I think we've had this conversation before, pat.

It needs to be treated on a case-by-case basis rather than generalization. There is not enough specific information about what was going on with the woman in question to take any idea of value away from the conversation except a general idea that sometimes dharma practice really is better as opposed to psychological treatment.


"Potentially" a gasoline tanker could crash here on the corner where I live and explode and destroy the apartment building I live in and kill me. "Potentially" lots of things could happen. Your point is taken, but I say we shouldn't overgeneralize in the other direction either.

compassionate_warrior

What I pick up from your post is something else.
After a serious retreat there should be some kind of qualified aftercare available.

I remember once or twice coming out of sesshin very open, very shaken, very confused, and I felt like a loose canon at the time.
Fortunately nothing really bad happened, but I think it was dangerous in a way.

If teachers are not willing or able to supply such aftercare they shouldn’t give the retreat.

This is a very good point. And I say, good for the yogi, to perceive that she needed help beyond what teachings and practice could provide, and for not being so invested in his worldview that he was not able to refer her to the type of care she needed. That sort of thing doesn't happen enough. It needs to be acknowledged that some people who come to the Dharma need extra help.

patbb

This is a very good point. And I say, good for the yogi, to perceive that she needed help beyond what teachings and practice could provide

re-read the post.

She perceived that she didn't need anything else than the practice and the teaching; that the "beyond" that was suggested would have been inappropriate.
hence why she ordained. Turn out to have been the right decision for her (notice the "for her"; not generalizing. to SherabDorje)

ps: this is the psychology paradigme exactly. to believe that psychology is somehow "beyond" or more advanced. Keep a open mind to the idea that it may be the other way around; that expertise on the mind and soul should be seeked from the people who actually investigated and mastered it.

Dakini

She perceived that she didn't need anything else than the practice and the teaching; that the "beyond" that was suggested would have been inappropriate.
hence why she ordained. Turn out to have been the right decision for her (notice the "for her"; not generalizing. to SherabDorje)

ps: this is the psychology paradigme exactly. to believe that psychology is somehow "beyond" or more advanced. Keep a open mind to the idea that it may be the other way around; that expertise on the mind and soul should be seeked from the people who actually investigated and mastered it.

Thanks for the extra info, PatB; we don't always have time to check out the links.

This particular case aside, there are people who do need psych help, there are people who can't handle some of the practices (especially the more radical ones, like destroying the ego), there are even some people who can't handle meditation. So I'm heartened to hear of a yogi or lama who is enough in his integrity to refer a student to outside help. It apparently wasn't appropriate in this instance, but there are instances in which it would definitely be appropriate. And referring someone to another practitioner is vastly preferable to what sometimes happens; the teacher takes advantage of an obviously vulnerable student and initiates a sexual relationship. I think there's a place for Western psychology in Buddhist practice for some students; I see nothing wrong with that. HHDL himself has commented many times that many Westerners have psychological or emotional problems that he and others don't understand and don't feel equipped to address.

patbb

It apparently wasn't appropriate in this instance, but there are instances in which it would definitely be appropriate.

I completely agree.

SherabDorje

I completely agree.

So what you're saying is that sometimes psychological or psychiatric treatment is appropriate and that sometimes more meditative practice is appropriate.

So what else is new?

twilly

Imagine someone else just like this lady. But with less experience.
Choosing the couch instead of the cushion.
All of a sudden she is diagnosed with a laundry list of personality problems.
Years go by on therapies and perhaps drugs.
Wake up twenty years later wondering what would have happened if she had chosen the cushion over the couch.

Most psychiatrists are reputable and do not "all of a sudden" treat problems which are (as you seem to suggest) non-existent. Your scenario above is close to being imaginary.

I don't see it as an either/or proposition, either couch or cushion. And neither would most psychiatrists. In fact, there's a Buddhist psychiatrist who has written 3 (I think) books on the intersection of psychiatry and Buddhism. Here's one of them.

Psychotherapy without the self: a Buddhist perspective - Page 1

Mark Epstein - 2007 - 261 pages - Preview
Immersed in Buddhism before beginning my study of Western psychiatry and psychotherapy, I could not help but examine the Western ... As I learned more about Buddhism, I came to appreciate that its central tenet of anatta, or no-self, ...
books.google.com

The topic is much more complex than your post seems to indicate.

patbb

I completely agree.

So what you're saying is that sometimes psychological or psychiatric treatment is appropriate and that sometimes more meditative practice is appropriate.

I'm saying that it would be nearly impossible to take someone with no knowledge of Buddhism and no experience with meditation (let say run of the mill american), and put him in a Vipassana retreat an ask him to progress on the path.

What im saying is the reason for this is not necessarily because the psychological disorders will be better theated by psychology, but because the culture wont allow for the course of action which has far more potential.

patbb

Imagine someone else just like this lady. But with less experience.
Choosing the couch instead of the cushion.
All of a sudden she is diagnosed with a laundry list of personality problems.
Years go by on therapies and perhaps drugs.
Wake up twenty years later wondering what would have happened if she had chosen the cushion over the couch.

Most psychiatrists are reputable and do not "all of a sudden" treat problems which are (as you seem to suggest) non-existent. Your scenario above is close to being imaginary.

I don't know how psychiatrists work where you are but it is different than where i am if what you are saying is true.

psychiatrists and psychologists will run an interview and try to see which psychological disorders the patient has (pretty much from a list that the doctor has memorized).

Usually ending up with a lengthy list (even for a "normal" person).

Somebody deep into meditation, into the dark nights of the soul stages of the first path perhaps, will very likely be "diagnosed" with some serious mental disorders.

zenff

I don't know how psychiatrists work where you are but it is different than where i am if what you are saying is true.

psychiatrists and psychologists will run an interview and try to see which psychological disorders the patient has (pretty much from a list that the doctor has memorized).

Usually ending up with a lengthy list (even for a "normal" person).

My God!
Where are you? We may have to come over and get you out of there. :cool:
If that’s psychiatry no person should be exposed to it, yogi or not.

patbb

My God!
Where are you? We may have to come over and get you out of there. :cool:
If that’s psychiatry no person should be exposed to it, yogi or not.

how is it different from where you from?

SherabDorje

I don't know how psychiatrists work where you are but it is different than where i am if what you are saying is true.

psychiatrists and psychologists will run an interview and try to see which psychological disorders the patient has (pretty much from a list that the doctor has memorized).

Usually ending up with a lengthy list (even for a "normal" person).

Somebody deep into meditation, into the dark nights of the soul stages of the first path perhaps, will very likely be "diagnosed" with some serious mental disorders.

These are pretty strong assertions. Do you have source materials to cite or is this just based on your own experience?

patbb

These are pretty strong assertions. Do you have source materials to cite or is this just based on your own experience?

How do you think people diagnose anything?

compassionate_warrior

These are pretty strong assertions. Do you have source materials to cite or is this just based on your own experience?

How do you think people diagnose anything?

Well, in my humble experience, few mental health practitioners diagnose in the first session, if at all, some misdiagnose after a few sessions, many take your money for years without any concrete treatment strategy in mind, some appear to be lost souls themselves and can't diagnose the obvious no matter how many sessions are involved, and a rare few are really on the ball, figure out what's going on reasonably promptly, and actually help their clients heal without requiring a lifetime commitment and or even more than a couple of years' commitment, if that (depending on the case). The last type is hard to find. According to my experience and that of friends, not a lot of diagnosing seems to be going on, unless some type of insurance is involved, and the practitioner is required to document a diagnosis. I think psychotherapy can be very powerful and helpful at the direction of the right person, but it's a bit of a crap shoot practitioner-competence-wise. Though I've never heard of "lengthy lists" of disorders being diagnosed. I suppose that's to keep the practitioner's income steady....?

SherabDorje

patbb said:


How do you think people diagnose anything?

I don't understand your question/response. People diagnose things based on academic knowledge and clinical experience. So I would expect your assertions to be at least partially based on academic knowledge, so that we can examine those sources for ourselves to see if we understand them as well as you do and if we agree with them or not. But you cannot make such assertions based only on your own experience without specifying that they are only based on your experience.

Do you have some type of written citation for these assertions or not? I'd like to read it for myself.

twilly

My comments are based on my experience with one psychiatrist. In the past I've also seen various psychologists, some better than others. That said, I was particularly hard to diagnose because my problem looked like clinical depression, and it took me a long time to admit even to myself that I'd been physically abused by my parents.

BTW, I was never turned away for inability to pay. The person I see now is top-notch- published author, teaches at Harvard, blah, blah, blah. He works out of a hospital in Boston, and when I had no insurance the hospital swallowed the cost.

I too wonder if talk of psychiatric professionals being money-hungry is independently verified or just 'common knowledge.'

Vincenzi

Imagine someone else just like this lady. But with less experience.
Choosing the couch instead of the cushion.
All of a sudden she is diagnosed with a laundry list of personality problems.
Years go by on therapies and perhaps drugs.
Wake up twenty years later wondering what would have happened if she had chosen the cushion over the couch.

Most psychiatrists are reputable and do not "all of a sudden" treat problems which are (as you seem to suggest) non-existent. Your scenario above is close to being imaginary.

I don't know how psychiatrists work where you are but it is different than where i am if what you are saying is true.

psychiatrists and psychologists will run an interview and try to see which psychological disorders the patient has (pretty much from a list that the doctor has memorized).

Usually ending up with a lengthy list (even for a "normal" person).

Somebody deep into meditation, into the dark nights of the soul stages of the first path perhaps, will very likely be "diagnosed" with some serious mental disorders.

so called mental health professionals should focus on eliminating (mental) suffering and, specially in psychiatry, have strong ethics derived from ahimsa.