S p i r i t ua l i t y S t u d i e s 2 - 2 Fa l l 2 0 1 6 1 3 Stanislav Grof seen as the causes and sources of psychotic phenomena can certainly play an important role as factors interfering with the ability to cope with perinatal and transpersonal experiences, as well as the capacity for successful integration and adequate grounding of such experiences. However, early childhood traumas cannot possibly create the often rich and intricate content of psychotic experiences, which is clearly transbiographical in nature. To account for it, we have to consider such concepts as the transpersonal domain of the psyche, the archetypal and historical realms of Jung’s collective unconscious, the Universal Mind (anima mundi), or cosmic consciousness. This has its parallel in the differences in the capacity of various people to integrate such experiences in psychedelic sessions. The administration of psychedelic substances can account for the emergence of unconscious material from the depth of the psyche, but not for the specific content of the resulting experiences. The complex and intricate experiential sequences in psychedelic sessions cannot be explained simply as toxic artifacts of the interaction between the psychedelic substances and the neurophysiological processes in the brain. However, while the content of the experiences by far transcends the biography of the individual, biographical factors can play a very important role in the final outcome of this process. Depending on the history of the individual and on the set and setting of the session, these experiences can lead to personality disintegration and long-term psychopathology, or to powerful spiritual opening and personality transformation. Such observations show that postnatal events are not the causes and sources of psychotic experiences, but important contributing factors. My observations of persons in non-ordinary states suggest that prenatal, natal, and early postnatal experiences encountered in regressive work have a distinctly numinous quality and freely merge with the elements from the archetypal and mystical realms. The memories of intrauterine life are not just episodes of primitive failure to perceive differences, as Ken suggests (Wilber 1995, 587), but are associated with profound mystical insights that reveal fundamental unity behind the world of separation. Similarly, the “no exit” stage of birth typically coincides with archetypal images of hell, the struggle in the birth canal is often accompanied by identification with archetypal figures representing death and rebirth, and the moment of birth and reunion with mother can take the form of divine epiphany, of an encounter with the Great Mother Goddess, or of mystical marriage. The presence of transpersonal elements on this level seems to be an integral part of this process, rather than a mysterious “infusion” of material from a remote part of the developmental spectrum. When this understanding is applied to clinical work, the distinction between mystical states with an evolutionary potential and various psychotic states with mystical features does not depend exclusively on the nature and content of the experiences themselves and their association with radically different fulcrums of consciousness evolution. It is also important to take into consideration the overall context, the person’s experiential style, and his or her ability to integrate the experiences into everyday life. In addition, the belief system of the surrounding culture and of the professionals treating the individuals involved should not be underestimated as factors that play a paramount role in shaping the nature of this process and its outcome. The therapeutic implications of this approach to mysticism and psychosis have been discussed in detail in publications specifically focused on the problem of spontaneous psychospiritual crises, or “spiritual emergencies” (Grof and Grof 1989, 1990). 5 The “Back-Door” and “Front-Door Entry” into the Spiritual Realms In his last book, Ken also addresses the problem of our disagreement concerning the “chronological order of the unconscious disclosures”. He points out that in my theoretical system the dividing line between the personal and transpersonal appears to be on the level of the perinatal matrices, whereas in his map it is at the level of the centaur. This naturally constitutes a problem, since on his linear spectrum, these two domains are far apart. Ken’s explanation for this discrepancy is that the observations on which my cartography is based come from regressive work. This process takes individuals from ordinary ego to Freudian childhood traumas and from there to the birth trauma and the intrauterine state. Ken suggests that at this point, “they may cease identifying with the physical body-mind altogether and thus fall into transpersonal, supra-individual states” (Wilber 1995, 587). He emphasizes that his own map is based primarily on “broad-scale growth and development patterns” and thus runs in the other direction; however, he points out that it covers essentially the same general territory. It reflects the order in which “these domains enter awareness as a stable adaptation and not as a temporary experience”. According to Ken, the work with NOSC forces its way to the transpersonal domain through the “backdoor”, whereas he describes spiritual evolution that leads there through the “front door” and is conducive to stable developmental patterns. The importance of distinguishing between temporary experiences and permanent structures was emphasized a long
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MzgxMzI=