Coalescing Realities
By Anika Munshi
The mind-body problem has confounded the theological scholarly and scientific communities alike for many centuries. The Western perspective has traditionally hinged upon two ontological positions: dualism and monism. Dualism divides the world into physical and non-physical entities and separates the mind and soul from the physical brain in the role of human cognition. Monism, on the other hand, believes in the interconnectedness of everything, and what the dualists maintain as a distinct mind or soul is simply part of the body, which is located and contained in the physical brain. This view on the connection between mind, body, and soul has shaped theological propositions regarding the journey of the soul, the nature of human beings, the definition of health and wellbeing, and the purpose of life itself.
Far from being obsolete, dualism and monism continue to be buried at the foundations of modern sciences. The fields of modern medicine and psychiatry are both founded upon reductionist views of the human being, and definitions of health that divide and dehumanize. Their application in the field of psychology seeks to conceptualize distorted expressions of self that redefine the ultimate goal of healing. Rather than seeing physical and metaphysical realities coalesce with one another, both theologians and the scientific community fixated on distinction or separation. In this paper, I will argue that dualism and nondualism are ontologically insufficient in understanding and treating the complexities of psychospiritual well-being while examining their influence and application in modern sciences. We will begin by reviewing the origins of the mind-body problem and modern discourses within the theological and scientific community, then go on to discuss the harmful remnants of dualism and nondualism in medicine, psychiatry, and psychology, ending with an alternative proposition.
History of the Mind-Body Problem in Western Philosophy
The origins of the problem in the West can be traced to ancient Greek philosophy and the discussions on the nature of the soul by the philosophers Plato (d. 348), and his student Aristotle (d. 322) in the fourth century. While Plato described the tripartite soul as journeying to different stations to arrive at its destination, Aristotle differed and noted that the soul cannot exist apart from, and perished along with the body. Despite the difference, both philosophers concluded that the soul was a separate entity that interacted with the physical body.
For the next 1500 years, the mind-body problem remained unchanged until René Descartes (d. 1650) created the discipline of philosophy of mind. According to Descartes’ ontological view, all of nature was divided into two discrete substances: thinking things (res cogitas) and things extended in space (res extensa). The human was therefore an extended body ruled by a non-extended, thinking mind (soul). The body was passive, flawed, fundamentally changeable, and therefore transitory, while the mind (soul) was active, and therefore immortal. Hence, his famous declaration “I think, therefore I am” (cogito ergo sum) signaled a shift in how mind and body were understood and became the preliminary basis not only to understand identity but our very existence. Cartesian dualism’s assumption that humans are essentially thinking beings gave rise to substance dualism and property dualism. The former asserts that there are two distinct substances — the non-physical (mind/consciousness/soul) and physical (brain) — and that the two interact with each other in a causal relationship. Whereas the latter maintains that the mind is a group of independent non-physical mental properties (such as thoughts, imagination, and memories) that exist in, or emerge from, and cannot be reduced to the physical brain. Unfortunately, much of this remains today, as modern neuroscience takes an interactionist perspective in understanding the causal relationship between the physical and non-physical.
With regards to monism, there are two broad categories within the discourse: (1) physicalist monism which asserts that the only existing substance is physical, namely the brain, leading to major advancements in cognitive neuroscience, and (2) non-physicalist monism, with the foremost being idealism, which asserts that consciousness is the origin of the material world and that reality is a mental construct. Nondualism, as will be discussed later, is a non-physical idealist monism that emphasizes the view that a unitary consciousness is the essence or meaning of a phenomenal reality, and is the basis of many mystic traditions.
The Principle of Soul in Traditional Sunni Kalām & Modern Neuroscience
Before the twelfth century CE (sixth century AH) the concepts of soul (al-nafs) and spirit (al-rūh) coalesced without much systematic differentiation. However, after the twelfth century, the concepts endured some separation with the rising influence of Aristotelianism and Neoplatonism within Sunni kalām. For example, earlier Sunni theologians such as Abū Ḥāmid al-Ghazālī (505/1111) compared the soul’s relationship to the physical body to the pervasiveness of rose water in the petals of a rose. Also, his descendants Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya (d. 751/1350) and Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728/1328) described it as the way oil circulates in an olive, or how fire circulates burning embers of coal. They believed that the rūh flows throughout the body, and that body and soul are interdependent of one another, in that the body is a vehicle for the soul. Ibn ‘Arabī (d. 543/1148), a Sufi mystic, also recognized the body and soul to be interdependent of one another, however, he believed the spiritual (soul) has an ontological primacy over the physical (body), requiring union with the Divine.
Today, the dominant positions regarding the positioning of the soul are (1) the “subtle body” position (jism laṭīf) and (2) the immaterial substance position (jawhar mujarrad). The former states that the physical locus of the soul is to be found somewhere in the body — traditionally thought to reside in the heart — whereas the latter states that the soul has more of an attachment relationship with the body. Jawhar mujarrad, or the position of attachment of an immaterial substance (soul) with a particular body, is one of the dominant positions on the soul within modern Islamic theology.
Modern neuroscience similarly presents the principle of the soul with varied theories about how consciousness interacts or binds with the body. Some models suggest that consciousness is attributed to specific regions of the brain, while others believe that consciousness is widely distributed throughout areas of the brain, coalescing to produce the unified experience of being conscious. Joseph Levine argues that physicalist theories will inevitably face difficulty in lending insight into the correlative subjective human experience. The persistence of an explanatory gap is indication itself that science needs to redefine the way the problem is framed.
Faisal Qazi et al. believe that this overlap with Western discourses provides a fruitful starting point for Muslims to engage with the mind-body problem. However, Jihad Hashim Brown argues that regardless of whether the soul is conceived of as an immaterial substance (jawhar mujarrad), a subtle body (jism laṭīf), or a single substance (jawhar fard), it is a substance nonetheless, possessing capacities (isti’dādāt) and faculties (quwwat) that exacerbate Cartesian dualism and Neoplatonism and cannot be construed in the same category of Sunni Islamic dualism. He believes the Sunni kalām conception of soul in the contemporary Western tradition has been reduced and absorbed into discussions on the “philosophy of mind”, and urges kalām theologians to demonstrate their awareness of the problem of reduction and their capacity to identify their cosmological assumptions.
A Necessary Islamic Dualism
The views of both interconnectedness and separateness between soul and body find their roots in verses of the Qur’ān (7:172-173) regarding a primordial covenant (mīthāq) and a gathering of souls before all of creation. Additionally, conceptualizing ‘life’ as the soul entering a body and ‘death’ as the soul departing a body further substantiates dualism at certain stages of the human life cycle. This corporeality suggests that the soul exists within the material world and is therefore accessible to the five empirical senses. Overall, it is crucial to note that Muslim theologians have debated the nature of the soul throughout the ages leading to a variety of different positions. These speculative discussions, however, recognize the fact that the Qur’ān (17:85) conveys that humans have been given little knowledge of the soul, rendering a prerequisite flexibility to any conclusive statements regarding the soul.
Mind-Body Dualism within the Modern Sciences
Dualism in Medicine
Mind-body dualism was a reformatory leap desperately sought during a time when prevalent Christian orthodox views thwarted the development of medical science. Before its advent, humans were seen as spiritual beings consisting of a unified body and soul. Diseases were attributed to nonmaterial forces such as personal/collective wrongdoing. With mind-body dualism, Descartes demythologizes the body and gives the scientific community freedom from religious prohibition to study the human body through dissection, and paves the way for progress in medical science. Dualism also lays the groundwork for positivism, making the objective realm the only legitimate domain of inquiry. Because humans were viewed as biological organisms (materialism) and understood by examining their constituent parts (reductionism) through the principles of anatomy, physiology, biochemistry, and physics, health was then defined as the absence of disease.
Today, our understanding of human beings has changed significantly and we see the body not as an object, but as experiential beings capable of constructing their own subjective realities. Humans live in complex ecological systems where the mind and body are in permanent interaction with their environment. Unfortunately, mind-body dualism persists, especially in the field of medicine where out-of-touch physicians purport a biomedical model with etiologies that isolate the mind’s role in the experience of health. J.R. Kriel mentions that part of the “dissatisfaction is also due to the disempowerment of patients and dehumanization of medical care’s cold, impersonal, technical style of clinical practice shaped by the notion that the body is a machine devoid of self.” An incomplete and distorted understanding of human beings has left no space for the spiritual aspects of human experience, and failure to understand the dynamic nature of human beings and their relationship with the environment has led to reductionist explanations of health. Medical practitioners continue to perpetuate mind-body dualism by being skeptical about nonbiological explanations for their illnesses, and viewing other explanations as unreal, illegitimate, and unscientific in nature.
Dualism in Psychiatry
In medicine, a diagnosis can explain a patient’s symptoms by specifying the pathology that is causing them. Diagnoses in psychiatry also pick out pathologies with a set of symptoms, however, current evidence suggests that diagnostic categories in psychiatry are largely heterogeneous and essentialist in nature. For example, Maung suggests that major depressive disorder (MDD) may not be associated with a single underlying pathological process, but with a range of causal pathways each involving complex interactions of various biological, psychological, and social factors. Haslam argues that the essentialization of psychiatric disorders encourages harmful stigma “because it represents sufferers as categorically abnormal, immutably afflicted, and essentially different”. Moreover, while in many cases drugs are necessary to overcome debilitating emotional problems, in other instances, they are used to supplant, not supplement, interpersonal therapy. The process of overcoming emotional obstacles through introspection and the attainment of self-knowledge is gradually being eroded via the gratuitous use of psychoactive medication in order to rapidly attain a release from the common problems that life inevitably presents us with. Glannon recognizes that psychiatry has failed to produce a comprehensive theoretical model of any major psychiatric disorder since diagnostic explanations contribute to the idea that we need to choose between characterizing psychiatric disorders as disorders of the brain or mind given that mind and brain influence each other and that no disorder can be truly understood within a vacuum.
Dualism in Psychology
In psychology, subject-object dualism refers to the structuring of experience and knowing in terms of a subject-object dichotomy, and to the fragmentation of experience into conceptual polarities such as self-other, us-them, good-bad, internal-external, and mind-body. According to Büber, the subject-object relationship, which he calls the I-It relationship, is one where the subject justifies the objectification and dehumanization of others as a means to an end. When the subject is at the center, truth is phenomenologically defined in relation to individual reasoning. In his article, Martin continues, saying
When an extreme I-It attitude becomes embedded in cultural patterns and human interactions, the result is greater objectification of others, exploitation of people and resources, and forms of prejudice that obscure the common humanity that unites us.
Žvelc, while studying adult interpersonal relationships noted that the subject-object relationship manifests as symbiotic merging, separation anxiety, social isolation, alienation, fear of engulfment, egocentrism, and narcissism. Regrettably, the subject-object relationship requires little explanation for anyone living within a cultural frame of tyranny, colonialism, slavery, racism, sexism, ethnocentrism, rape, bullying, domestic violence, sexual harassment, corporate corruption, consumerism, clergy misconduct, homophobia, and technological materialism. As a reaction to the inadequacies of dualism, nondual approaches have surfaced and will be further critiqued below.
The Complexities and Challenges of Nonduality
In the modern world, mystical states of consciousness are known through the terms awakening, enlightenment, moksha, nirvana, fanā, peak experience, unitive states, or void states. For the purposes of this essay, nonduality will be defined as states of experiencing reality as one and experiencing separation or multiplicity as an illusion. Historically, the pursuit of such experiences meant leaving the home and family to join a spiritual or monastic community, however, in recent times, nondual awareness has become a layperson’s pursuit. In the modern colloquial and scientific community, nondual awareness is a term that defines a foundational aspect of consciousness and is a non-conceptual, phenomenological knowing that does not structure experience into separate categories of subject and object. For modern researchers like Stephens, the real question is, does nondual awareness consist of a single state, multiple states, and/or a developmental process? Are lived experiences actually desirable as advertised by teachers? To what extent are studies of nondual experiences useful for informing the fields of psychology and psychiatry?
The Dualism within Monism
For proponents of monism, the ultimate goal is universal homogeneity. It is as Chapman states an embrace-extend-extinguish strategy that is an escapist’s fantasy. Whereas dualism fixates on differences and boundaries, monism fixates on sameness and connection. Monism sees everyone as having equal value and recognizes absolute unity as the ultimate aim. Chapman mentions that monism is at its very core an absolutist dualism. For example, mystical experiences often require separation from the body to the extent of annihilation as a means to unite with the Divine. In this sense, dualism and monism are mirror images, one that recognizes boundaries as objective and definite, and the other that recognizes that those boundaries are subjective and must be removed for a perfect union.
Nondual teacher Bonder, mentions that when individuals are trained to think in these terms, they are taught that once it happens, they are free forever and immune to all the chaos of being a human being and nothing can touch them. However, Stephens mentions that the process of and aftermath of the awakening experience may not live up to the superlative descriptions found in historical texts or the expectations put forth by nondual teachers.
The Necessary Ego in Development
The ultimate goal of nondual approaches is to not have a distinct sense of self or to not identify as being a doer, or agent in any fundamental way. Only then is the soul “purified” and other worldly attachments are annihilated. On the other hand, Western developmental psychology regards a fully formed ego and self-concept as the goal of a mature lifespan. Wilber suggests that consciousness develops relationally and requires a fully developed sense of self before that self can be integrated with the larger whole in a realization of nonduality. The solidification of the self is what aids the development of personal identity, object relations, and the ability to work with representational symbols. Even within the Western model, a fully formed sense of self is not to be equated to consciousness, as Engler explained:
The ‘self’ is literally constructed out of our object experience. What we take to be our ‘self’ and feel to be so present and real is actually an internalized image, a composite representation, constructed by a selective and imaginative “remembering” of past encounters with the object worlds.
To summarize, self-construction in childhood is necessary for an objective experience but is not the ultimate goal. Deconstruction during adulthood is necessary to develop subjective experiences and to uncover the self from distorted, unwanted, or inherited ideologies. It is at this point a person may begin seeking transcendent experiences in the pursuit of deeper truths leading to mystical experiences of nonduality. However, Stephens questions how those experiencing perpetual nondual awareness can continue to perform practical action and maintain rational thought processes, behaviors typically associated with a well-defined self. In other words, can we leave our ‘self’ behind?
Psychological Effects of Nondual Awareness
Martin did one of the largest studies on nonduality, and found that the highest states of nonduality showed that the stronger the perceptual shift into a state of nonduality, the more there was a loss of emotion, a reduction of memory, loss of a sense of agency, unexpected changes in interpersonal relationships, and feelings of emptiness. Some nondual experiencers had wound up unemployed or divorced, and many of them experienced a severe reduction in motivation; even though their levels of anxiety and depression had become reduced, they would not “trade away” nonduality. He found that the dissolution of the self did not produce immediate nor perpetual bliss or joy, but that psychological cleanup work needed to be done.
Bonder discusses how engagement with others can create many challenges in awakening, in that interacting with other people tends to trigger past emotional conditioning; but why would this be particularly challenging for people in nondual states? It may be that losing the sense of a separate self leads to the breakdown of identities that had previously served certain functions. What becomes triggered are things that were once integral to the self and have now become the irritating remnants of separation, now experienced as falsehood. At this point, Martin observed that due to such challenges, nondual people reach a point where they favor one direction or another: the path of freedom, marked by increased solitude, or the path of humanity, a lifestyle of continued engagement with others.
Greenwell describes awakening as a clear remembrance of being, one with all existence, but this state does not involve purity or sainthood, which is a common misconception. It does, however, involve a
“continual alignment with truth…plunging into the unknown mystery of transformation [and] rather than abandoning individual humanity, enlightenment is a lightening of it and includes compassion for the ways we become stuck in separateness”.
She discusses a post-awakening isolationism and the difficulty of finding a counselor who understands the state and offers strategies for working through the transformative nature of the process. One of the goals of this research in this area could help counselors to avoid misdiagnosing the challenges of spiritual awakening as a psychological disorder and teach counselors how to effectively help awakening people with spiritual emergencies.
Damaging Effects of Nondual Awareness
It is important to note that no discussion on nonduality can be complete without a mention of the scandals and abuses purported by nondual teachers. Exploitation should never be excused, and certainly not on the basis of special status or allowances conferred through awakening experiences. Self-abuse and neglect, disguised as sacrifice and seeking perfection, are unsustainable methods for maintaining healthy interpersonal relationships, and overall health.
It deserves mention that over the past two decades, mindfulness, as a response to corporate hegemony, has gone from being a fringe topic to being an occasional replacement for therapy. Misinformation and poor methodology have led consumers to be harmed, misled, and disappointed. In cases of serious trauma, perpetual meditation or achieving divine union as a form of self-medication, while ignoring real psychospiritual change, may, in reality, exacerbate symptoms and promote isolationism. In fact, long-term meditation has been shown in some studies to produce psychosis, anxiety, mania, and depersonalization. Rather than a blissful merging with God or a sudden flash of cosmic insight, such distorted views of awakening can normalize suicidality and wishing for death. In this state of living death, where the soul merely subsists within the body, how can we truly fulfill divine will?
Enmeshment & Personality Disorders
Dualism and monism, at their root, are ideas about boundaries, objects, and connections. In relationships, inappropriate boundaries and psychological enmeshment has been linked to the formation of personality disorders. Caregiver role corruption within an enmeshed dyad is often complemented with dynamics of parentification, and infantilization. Individuals within such family constellations may suffer from identity diffusion and disturbance at the risk of parental alienation or abandonment. For example, individuals with Borderline Personality Disorder may display a negative affect, such as anger or irritation, to reinforce the hostile interpersonal enmeshment that was learned in the parent-child relationship. Children who grow up with such poor interpersonal boundaries and unstable identities are unable to perform practical action and maintain rational thought processes as Stephens accurately predicted. Instead, it seems befitting to help those lacking a stable self to construct a well-formed identity, and to help those with rigidly defined selves to lean into deconstruction.
Integrative Approaches
Modern health approaches have increasingly adopted the “holistic wellness” approach, an integrated approach that rejects reductionistic medicine and secular psychology. An integrative approach challenges the overly physicalist assumptions of human nature in its assertion of the human being as an interconnected integral system composed of both metaphysical and physical aspects. Models such as Traditionally Islamically Integrated Psychotherapy, bridge several branches of knowledge (i.e. Islamic theology, spirituality, and behavioral science), to derive an Islamic conception of health. An integrative approach rooted in the Islamic tradition seems like a promising approach for Muslims living in the West and can encourage healing towards God.
Conclusion
In a post-awakening era, rather than searching for peak spiritual enrichment by virtue of an extreme separation of self, we will be better served by navigating the darkness within and growing inwardly and in between. Denying our humanity negates the wisdom of Allah’s ﷻ design and categorizes our essence as either intrinsically good or evil. We are ecological human beings, coalescing with body and soul, in constant interaction and interdependence with the world around us. As Muslims, we must detach from ourselves enough to see the reality of this life and secure our mission toward our final abode. Consciousness can serve as a path toward God when we remain actively engaged with our surroundings according to the will of Allah ﷻ. Rather than chasing myths and fantasies, we are better served by following the ways of our Prophet ﷺ and using frequenting dhikr or contemplation to maintain god-consciousness.
Reality can neither be understood in objective nor subjective terms, rather it is complex, indivisible, and diverse. The boundary between sameness and difference is nebulous, yet patterned. Overall, dualism and nondualism, are reductionist attempts at taming the chaos that defines our universe. Ontologically these ideologies are insufficient in understanding and treating the complexities of psychospiritual well-being and require us to reexamine the mind-body problem with broadened epistemes, for more accurate applications to modern health.
For the full paper, please email anika@sukooncounseling.com.
Bibliography
Badri, Malik. Abu Zayd al-Balkhi’s sustenance of the soul: The cognitive behavior therapy of a ninth-century physician. International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT), 2013.
Brown, Jihad Hashim. The Problem of Reductionism in Philosophy of Mind and Its Implications for Theism and the Principle of Soul Framing the Issue for Further Islamic Inquiry. Tabah Foundation, 2013.
Chapman, David. “Monism and Dualism Contain Each Other.” Meaningness, 5 Mar. 2016, https://meaningness.com/monism-dualism-recursion.
Engler, Jack. "Being somebody and being nobody: A reexamination of the understanding of self in psychoanalysis and Buddhism." Psychoanalysis and Buddhism: An unfolding dialogue (2003): 35-79, p. 118.
Garber, Benjamin D. "Parental alienation and the dynamics of the enmeshed parent–child dyad: Adultification, parentification, and infantilization." Family Court Review 49, no. 2 (2011): 322-335.
Glannon, Walter. "Mind-brain dualism in psychiatry: ethical implications." Frontiers in Psychiatry 11 (2020): 85.
Gruber, Howard E., and J. Jacques Vonèche, eds. The essential Piaget. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1977.
Haslam, N., H. Kincaid, and J. A. Sullivan. "Classifying psychopathology: Mental kinds and natural kinds." (2014): 11.
Khan, Fahad, Hooman Keshavarzi, and Abdallah Rothman. "The role of the TIIP therapist: Scope of practice and proposed competencies." In Applying Islamic Principles to Clinical Mental Health Care, pp. 38-66. Routledge, 2020.
Kim, Jaegwon. Philosophy of mind. Routledge, 2018.
Kriel, J. R. "Removing medicine’s Cartesian mask. The problem of humanizing medical education: Part I." Journal of Biblical Ethics in Medicine 3, no. 2 (2003): 18-22.
Maung, Hane Htut. "Diagnosis and causal explanation in psychiatry." Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 60 (2016): 15-24.
Martin, Matthew, and Eric W. Cowan. “Remembering Martin Buber and the I–Thou in Counseling.” Counseling Today, 13 May 2019, https://ct.counseling.org/2019/05/remembering-martin-buber-and-the-i-thou-in-counseling.
Mehta, Neeta. "Mind-body dualism: A critique from a health perspective." Mens sana monographs 9, no. 1 (2011): 202.
Stephens, Elizabeth. "Complexities and challenges of nonduality." Consciousness: Ideas and Research for the Twenty-First Century 6, no. 6 (2018): 3.
Qazi, Faisal, et al. “Framing the Mind–Body Problem in Contemporary Neuroscientific and Sunni Islamic Theological Discourse.” Applying Islamic Principles to Clinical Mental Health Care, 2020, pp. 96–114., https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003043331-7, p. 99.
Wilber, K., J. Engler, and D. Brown. "Transformations of consciousness: Conventional and contemplative perspectives on development." Boston: Shambhala (1986).
Žvelc, Gregor. "Object and subject relations in adulthood–towards an integrative model of interpersonal relationships." Psychiatria Danubina 22, no. 4. (2010): 498-508.
Chapman, David. “Monism and Dualism Contain Each Other.” Meaningness, 5 Mar. 2016, https://meaningness.com/monism-dualism-recursion.
