From Steve Wyre's book Physical Mysticism: The Brain and Mystical Events.  To order the book click here.

Introduction

            For about 13 years, I have been perplexed by two beliefs that I have been unable to either prove or dismiss. I have believed that which is normally called “spiritual” is a real, tangible part of human reality. I have also believed this “spirituality,” or “spiritual realm” is, in reality, purely physical. I believe, and I plan to prove that both of these statements are true; that the aspects of human existence which are normally related to what is called “spirituality” are the result of perfectly normal functions of the human brain.

            I will approach this task by examining mysticism since I think itprovides the very best example of religious expressions of individuals encountering the realm of the spiritual. Any individual who takes an active part of any religion but has not had some sort of mystical experience is open to being swayed in his or her religious convictions. The person who has had a mystical experience, however, will most often hold the beliefs “revealed” through the experience even though all else fails. The mystical experience seems to leave indelible changes on a person’s beliefs that enable one to help shape all future religious beliefs and actions. Before I begin, itis important to define just what I mean by “mysticism” as well as a few other terms, as I will be using them.

            The “mystical experience” is defined as being an experience any individual has of becoming aware of a personal union with something “higher;” something more cosmic than his or her normal individuality. This definition will be fleshed out more as we progress through the argument. A mystic, then, is someone who has mystical experiences on some sort of regular basis, someone who holds the experience of this union as more normal or more real than the world of typical day-to-day existence.

            I will use “brain” to signify the actual physical organ and, while Isee the “mind” as a fully physical manifestation of the brain, I will use “mind” to refer to the experience of consciousness. This “consciousness” is the sensation one experiences of being sentient and, somehow, separate from other individuals. I say “experience” because I believe the sensation of consciousness must be, if it is simply a function of the brain, just like the experience of smell, vision, or any other sense. This is not as difficult to conceptualize at it might seem. I believe that saying “I smell fresh coffee” and “I have an idea” are the same as far asthe sensation of the “I” is concerned. This “I” is what I will be examining in relationship to the notion of saying such as “I have felt the presence of God” or “I have touched Nirvana.”

            Another term I need to define is “memory.” This is a very important concept for my argument as memories play a vital role in the formation of beliefs and in the processing of new sensory information after a memory is formed. It is vital that the reader remember I am only discussing long-term memories. While short-term memories may play a factor in how we process some information and sensation, there is clear evidence that long-term memories act as some sort of filters for new information and actively work to determine how we apply meaning to this new information. I will get into this in greater depth in Chapter One. Let me stress again that when one sees the term “memories” I am only referring to long-term memories.

            The argument I am making has nine parts:

1. An individual’s first memories are formed when sensory information is filtered through genetically (DNA) determined brain structures. This is simply saying that, human beings, qua human beings, have certain brain structures that have evolved to process certain kinds of information in certain ways.

2. The brain structure is organized in such a manner that in infancy and early childhood the brain’s design facilitates the construction of memories that determine a person’s initial beliefs. Most of these are factual memories about how the senses react to external stimulation: when this occurs, that results, or this is pleasurable and that is not.

            Note: Certainly, there must be some inherited structures that cause the brain to work in such a way to bend the forming person to develop memories in ways that reflect the personalities of his or her genetic contributors. If youhave ever had or raised children, youshould have noticed each one is different, special, but also that the growing child exhibits certain dispositions to react to certain stimulations. I will not be focusing on how these initial personalities are instilled (or installed). I will be concentrating my efforts on how memories are formed in a general way and how these memories work to make up a person’s general beliefs. I would like to believe that any personality can be open to a mystical experience, but this may not be true. I will leave this initial period and how genetics could determine the limits to beliefs to others.

            So, as you read points three through six below, please note I am dealing with the brain processes as a “big picture” and not with how a person’s initial memories are shaped by inherited factors. It is highly probable the “inheritance factor” is simply an expansion of this general theory.

3. Memories are, in point of fact, molecular structures in the brain and memory formation alters the whole structure of the brain. The memory formation processes alters the structure of the hardware of our brains.

4. The memories formed in one’s brain work together to form a person’s belief system. As the formation continues, a person’s personality (core behavior based on a belief system) works to determine how all future sensory information is processed.

5. As one develops a sense of “self,” some new memories are made as interest-selected sensory information is filtered through earlier memories. The “interest” is determined partly by genetics but mostly by prior memories. The brain uses prior memories to shore up or alter the individual’s belief system. This is why two individuals can read or hear the same information and derive very different understandings of the material.

6. Therefore, an individual often has little conscious control over the formulation of personal belief systems. While evolution and genetics determine the original condition, the environment provides all the sensory information. The individual’s brain selects, unconsciously, the initial base of beliefs which, when used as filters for future sensory information form an individual’s future beliefs.

            Certainly as individuals mature, the range of beliefs widens, and there is the “appearance” that one is consciously selecting to believe or not believe certain ideas that embrace a particular ideology. I think that for the most part this choice is illusory – based on past memories and the information one is receiving, and the parts of that information the brain finds interesting (also something somewhat determined by the structures put in place by formed memories), a person has little choice but to “believe” what he or she believes.

            I must note that I do hold a person may be able to “change” his or her beliefs. This is accomplished by the person contemplating his or her storehouse of memories, including those normally perceived as less than interesting or focusing the attention on ideas and information that contradict one’s belief system. In this way, the brain is “forced,” if you will, to alter the memories that make up the belief system and a person can “change her or his mind.”  Considering individuals who experience sudden religious conversion or suddenly “switch sides” on some issue, we would have an example of how this occurs. Still, though, if this theory is correct, it may be that this conversion was inevitable as well. There would be no way to tell without accessing the full storehouse of memories and understanding how each one works on the whole. There is a fine line between love and hate, and perhaps both are present all the time requiring only one or two bits of information to “tip the scales” in one direction or the other.

            If you have ever dealt with alcoholics or people who seem overly stubborn or otherwise “locked” into self-destructive behavior, you have a good example of my point. These individuals can often tell you the right answers; they can say why they do what they do and even that they need to change and yet go right on in their pattern of behavior. The problem is they do not believe what they are saying. The statements come from the storehouse of memories, but there are too many deep seated contradicting memories to allow the individuals to believe they, themselves, can actually change.

7. If we look at human beings, worldwide, and detect similarities in beliefs, we must assume one or more of the following is true: a) That human beings share a similar structure in their brains such that certain ideas or beliefs are inevitable in normal individuals; b) That human beings share similar environmental features which tend to be processed the same way; or c) That both are somehow involved. In this argument, I will be asserting that ‘c’ is the correct assumption.

8. Worldwide, as far back as records go, human beings have expressed a propensity toward mysticism, and in these expressions certain motifs have perpetual recurrence. In this study, we will look at the following universally recurring beliefs:

            a). That human beings once existed in a state “higher” than they currently experience and that in this earlier state a relationship existed between human beings and some sort of Supreme Power which is no longer available to individuals unless they, somehow, alter their actions or perceptions from those necessary for day-to-day living.

            b). That some human beings are able to reconnect or reestablish that primal divine connection.

            c). This connection is the experience of ultimate reality and all which is perceived as part of the normal world, or part of the “less than spiritual” world, is seen as being less real.

            d). This connection is achieved through physical and/or mental actions by which the sensation of the surrounding physical world is circumvented to allow an experience of this spiritual realm which is always present but, somehow, hidden to normal perception.

9. My theory is that the experience of this spiritual realm is as normal as the experience of tasting chocolate, feeling warmth, seeing the beauty in a Dali painting, or hearing the beauty in a Mozart composition. While most mystics contend, and it is certainly a possibility that this higher reality is, somehow, more real than the normally perceived world, it must be asserted the mystical experience is no less real than any other experience. [“Reality” here is a matter of inclusion: It may be possible the normally perceived world is contained in this higher reality but not that the higher is contained in the normal. This will be fleshed out in Chapter Ten.]

            The mystical experience is as much a part of being human as the ability to ask second order questions (explained in Chapter One). One has a mystical experience when the right sensory stimulation is combined with the right prior memories and processed through the right parts of the brain.

            In Chapter One, I will give you a quick examination of what is now known as the factual workings of the human brain. I will be focusing exclusively on the aspect of vision and how the brain manipulates visual stimulation to offer us a view of the world around us. I will be demonstrating how the brain seems to “have a mind of its own” in many instances of processing what is coming into the brain through the eyes and how we often have little choice but to see what we see even if there is no external reality to support that picture. The underlying assumption, one that is verified through the brain studies of the authors cited, is that the brain processed other information in basically the same way as visual information. It should be noted as well that when we read, even though we are processing language it is nothing more than visual stimulation which utilizesvarious parts of the brain dedicated to such tasks. The bottom line is that the printed text is no different from any other visual stimulation. We have just told ourselves that ascribing meaning to text is different from ascribing meaning to any other object we see.

            This first chapter will cover the first six of my points and will reveal that these points are not really   my conjecture by empirical facts about the way we are as human beings. Please note that I am condensing a massive wealth of information into relatively few pages. This is not meant to be a detailed examination of how the brain works. As such, I will be referring to a number of notable works to which a person could turn to gain more information and much more details about the workings of the brain. What I am saying is factual, just not all the facts.

            In Chapters Two through Eight, I will be focusing on points 7 and 8 by examining mystical currents in our world’s major religions. I will start with a look at Shamanism, as it is believed to be a representation of the earliest held mystical beliefs. In this belief system, we will see all the motifs that will recur in literally every other later mystical expression. Then I will look at the traditional Chinese religions of Confucianism and Taoism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, in that order, to see how those beliefs resurface to form the foundational beliefs for the mystical experience. I will look not only at the mystical expressions of each religion but the history and beliefs of the non-mystical expressions for each religion as well. The reason for this is that often the mystical and non-mystical currents in each religion are opposed to each other but this opposition is a vital part of survival of the religion as a whole.

            In Chapter Nine, I will return to explore how the brain works in relationship to religious beliefs. I will examine the latest research using brain imaging and chemicals to reveal just where and how mystical and religious experiences are occurring in the brain. These studies support my ninth and final point about how mystical experiences are a direct result of how our brain processes certain sensory information.

            In Chapter Ten, I will examine a number of philosophical implications that result from this new information and from my theory. In this final chapter, I will provide more questions than I provide answers but I find it beneficial to ponder other hypotheses. My hope is that this work will be the information that tips the scales for those human beings, especially those in academia, who are teetering on the edge of accepting spirituality as a very real part of our reality and a part of who we are as human beings. Secondarily, my hope is that those who are already amenable to the reality of spirituality will be swayed to accept the perfectly natural source of their union with the Ultimate Reality, and they will be less inclined to view science and scientists with skepticism.