Per my previous post, “Incorporating Zen Buddhism Into Traditional Practices of Western Medicine: Part I,” in today’s world, these conflicting viewpoints have resulted in a disconnect between the physical and mental, or spiritual, worlds. “Instead of approaching healthcare, especially mental healthcare, in … a holistic fashion … traditional medicine treats the body like a machine and splits off the mind, especially in regard to what is meant by the spirit.”[i] These differing views have only further complicated the “increasingly interdisciplinary nature” of such healthcare professions as physicians, therapists, psychologists, and administrators.[ii] For one, health care professions in general experience a high stress and burnout rate. Compounded with this problem and the fact that ”medical practitioners are trained primarily in biological therapies … psychologists [are] primarily trained in psychological therapies … they may all work with similar types of clients or problems, each tends to learn different (and sometimes conflicting) theoretical views … and certain (as well as sometimes opposing) preferences in terms of how to go about helping others.” [iii]
As should be expected, it is helpful to have an interdisciplinary approach, which facilitates better communication between practitioners in the field and it is also helpful in forming better relationships with clients and patients. There are times, though, when traditional approaches show no positive changes in a person. It is in times like these when “basic Zen principles may complement traditional therapeutic practices that are based on more scientific research,” and it may be possible to look toward Zen as the “ ‘middle path’ between science, religion, and philosophy.”[iv]
Ch’an or Zen emphasizes meditation as “the central practice to be vigorously pursued to reach enlightenment.”[v] There are four good reasons why incorporating Zen as a complement to traditional western approaches is beneficial, not only for the mental healthcare practitioner, but for the patient or client, as well. First, “Zen does not force us to believe in or dispute a particular version of God, which means that therapists and teachers are not forced to deal with religious dogmas while treating others.” This is extremely important because it complements the scientific ideology of studying our world without being tied into one specific belief system. Second, “Zen is practical … the only thing that Zen does require from us is a willingness to be open to experience and meditation … by focusing on Zen as the Middle Path instead of seeing it as a formal religious or philosophical system,” we can stay away from the debate of how much of the wisdom of Zen should be integrated by the practitioner or how much we should influence a person’s life toward incorporating such a belief themselves. Third, the “middle path” that Zen advocates extols the virtues of morality and compassion toward another person through the Noble Eightfold Path, which stresses right views, right concentration, right action, right mindfulness, right thought, right effort, right speech, and right livelihood. Fourth, “although all of these have not been supported by controlled studies to the extent that evidence-based therapy might demand, they have passed the test of time that Western techniques would be hard pressed to match.”[vi]
Even though there are various fundamental differences between Zen and Western approaches, they do have a couple of similarities. For one, “they share certain common goals and values: both are concerned with reducing human suffering as compassionately as possible.” Secondly, both Zen and Western approaches to healing “emphasize individual freedom from the tyranny of suffering, whether it takes the form of the emptiness of a materialistic culture, interpersonal conflict, or personal distress.”[vii]
Although there are a multitude of nontraditional approaches that address the various mental issues that arise in society, Zen focuses on inner transformation that doesn’t necessarily have to involve any religious or ideological belief systems. The Dalai Lama has said that ”although the fundamental aspiration in Buddhism is to seek enlightenment and perfection, to overcome the negative tendencies of the human mind and enhance the positive potential, Buddhism would not discourage exploring and understanding the mechanisms of the negative processes. Spiritual endeavor in Buddhism involves understanding the negative processes and taking a stand against them consciously and knowingly, rather than giving into them or merely wishing them away.”[viii]
The wisdom of Zen focuses on teaching an individual to strive toward understanding themselves as a whole and not just a part of a whole through the practice of meditation and compassion. In recognizing themselves as a whole entity, they will be better equipped with finding a balance between the body and spirit. This philosophy stands in stark contrast toward attaining “scientific enlightenment” as pointed out by the Dalai Lama, “atomic scientists who had done research to develop the atomic bomb” knew of the unquestionable devastation that this type of weapon could produce, but “continued busily with it even when the need was not immediate, because that was their life.”[ix] This kind of conflict is evident in the way Western science goes about treating individuals with psychological issues. Once Zen is fully adopted as a complement to traditional Western science, issues relating to “cold clinicians and alienating conditions…” will be alleviated and both the practitioner and patient will benefit through an increased sense of inner balance and personal liberation from suffering.[x]
[i] Mruk, 36
[ii] Mruk, 1
[iii] Mruk, 3
[iv] Mruk, 4, 42
[v] Ludwig, 174
[vi] Mruk, 42-44
[vii] Mruk, 44
[viii] Davidson, 84
[ix] Davidson, 84
[x] Mruk, 15
Works Cited
Davidson, Richard J. and Anne Harrington eds. Visions of Compassion: Western Scientists and Tibetan Buddhists Examine Human Nature. New York: Oxford UP, 2002.
Ludwig, Theodore M. The Sacred Paths of the East 2nd ed. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 2001.
Mruk, Chrisopher J. with Joan Hartzell. Zen and Psychotherapy: Integrating Traditional and Nontraditional Approaches. New York: Spring Publishing Company, 2003.
