The
following article is based on a presentation made during the Second International
Conference on Integral Psychology, held at Pondicherry (India), 4-7 January
2001. The text has been published in:
Cornelissen, Matthijs (Ed.) (2001) Consciousness and Its Transformation,
Pondicherry: SAICE
Contextual approach to
meditation and
integral psychology
S. K. Kiran Kumar
Introduction
In the past few decades
meditation and yoga have become household terms all over the world. Many
meditation and yoga centres, big and small, have been established. National
and international yoga competitions are held. Many researches on the physiological
and psychological benefits of meditation and yoga have been conducted.
In the process meditation and yoga are viewed by some as a panacea for
many modern maladies of mind and body. The spiritual dimension is pushed
into the background.
Secondly, the terms
meditation and yoga have been used loosely to refer to many practices
without due regard for the overall connotations of what they involve and
for what they are intended. While for a common man these things are not
a matter of concern, for serious practitioners as well as researchers
they are crucial. For practitioners it is the means of personal growth
and evolution and they acquire the right understanding through traditional
means, i.e. studying the scriptures, following a particular guru and a
path. For a researcher it is a matter of understanding what yoga and meditation
are as psycho-physiological and spiritual phenomena. For him the understanding
of meditation and yoga comes through studies conducted on the basis of
scientific paradigms. The primary assumptive framework and methodology
guide what comes out of research. Thus in contemporary research on meditation
and yoga, depending on the perspective adhered to by the researcher, different
models of meditation have been put forth.
In contemporary psychological
literature meditation is used as a broad and generic term, which refers
to all those spiritual practices prevalent in traditions like Buddhism,
Christianity, Hinduism, Jewish Kabalah, Taoism, etc. Further it is used
to refer to many other mental devices or techniques developed by researchers,
for example, Clinically Standardized Meditation (Carrington, 1987). Thus,
the term is a “conglomerate word” and under this conceptual umbrella a
number of “different techniques and intents” are grouped (Carrington,
1987). They include sitting quietly, relaxing, closing the eyes, breathing
deliberately, focusing attention on an object or image non-analytically,
observing the thought process without judging, repeating sounds mentally,
rhythmic moving of the body as in Sufi dervish dance, and so on.
Naranjo and Ornstein
(1971) have categorised all the different meditative practices into three
types viz., the way of forms (concentration, absorption, union, outer
directed, Apollonian), the expressive way (freedom, transparency, surrender,
inner directed, Dionysian) and the negative way (elimination, detachment,
emptiness, centred, the “middle way”). Goleman (1977) has grouped them
into two types viz., “concentration” and “opening up” meditation. Carrington
(1987) distinguishes “centering” techniques from “meditation”.
Some of the important
objectives of meditation as conceived by different researchers include:
(a) heightening of awareness of physiological and psychological processes
leading to their voluntary control; (b) inducing psycho-biological and
psychotherapeutic effects; (c) effecting changes in different aspects
of mental functioning and personality; (d) and inducing changes in interpersonal
and social behaviour (Carrington, 1987; Johnson, 1982; Naranjo & Ornstein
1971; Shapiro & Walsh, 1984; Walsh, 1980; 1983; West, 1987). Development
of insight into the nature of mental functioning, identity, consciousness,
and reality are the final aims of these practices (Walsh, 1983).
The goal, to achieve
for which meditation is practised, also forms a basis of classification
besides the underlying psychological processes. Carrington (1987) speaks
of “practical” and “spiritual” meditation. Spiritual meditation is historic
embedded in centuries-old religious traditions. Practical meditation is
contemporary and frequently practised in the West. The objective of spiritual
meditation is to attain spiritual development, through a process of deepening
the range of the human spirit and changing the entire life of a human
being. Practical meditation affects the practitioner’s life in certain
practical ways, without changing their lives in an essential fashion.
The objective of practical meditation is to enrich the experience of the
average Westerner who continues to function within the framework of ordinary
society. Other researchers have also referred to such distinctions (Johnson,
1982; Rao, 1989; West, 1986).
Such distinctions as
mentioned above arise from the need to be theoretically and methodologically
specific in examining meditation as a subject of scientific scrutiny.
They have steered the course of contemporary research by allowing value
choices between the two and the research strategy adopted. The majority
of published research articles and books deal with practical meditation.
The effort is (a) to tease out the underlying technique from its traditional
context; (b) to understand the underlying psychological mechanisms, and
(c) to test its uses and benefits in a variety of life situations. Comprehensive
overviews and reviews of such studies can be found in Murphy & Donovan
(1997), Rao (1989), Shapiro & Walsh (1984), Vigne (1997), and West
(1987). Understanding meditation as an integral aspect of spiritual traditions,
but against the background of modern psychological perspectives can be
found in Brown, Engler & Wilber (1986), Naranjo & Ornstein (1971),
Ornstein (1972), Tart (1975a, 1989), Walsh (1980, 1999), and West (1986).
Notwithstanding the
demonstrated benefits of meditation practices from research studies, many
theoretical and methodological issues are controversial. One of them is
researchers’ greater preoccupation with practical or secular meditation
and relative neglect of spiritual meditation. The following observation
of Michael West, who reviewed hundreds of research articles on practical
meditation, illustrates this. “Why has meditation therefore been practised
for thousands of years in a variety of cultures and religious and philosophical
contexts if this is all 1 that it accomplishes?” (1986, p. 250).
That is, if meditation is used only for reduction of anxiety, stress,
depression, etc., then the original intent and purpose are lost and West
(1986) urges us to go back to the original or Eastern context of meditation.
Second, there is an
overemphasis on practising and defining meditation as technique, thereby
focusing on the operational aspect without sufficient consideration for
contextual aspects. Walsh (1999) has observed that in the Western culture,
though Asian disciplines, such as meditation and yoga, have significant
cultural, religious, contemplative and intellectual effects, their practice
and understanding of these disciplines are partial. Practitioners use
a single technique divorced from the comprehensive framework or context.
For example, practising asana or pranayama without bothering about yama and niyama, or prathyahara and other aspects of ashtanga yoga. Further,
Walsh (1999) is of the opinion that though such techniques in themselves
are beneficial for psychosomatic and psychological problems as demonstrated
by many studies (Murphy & Donovan, 1997), something vital will be
lost in this piecemeal approach. This partial approach to yoga is not
limited to Western countries. It exists even in India. Now-a-days asana and pranayama are
practised more as physical exercises by many, and we find many yoga competitions
held just like any other athletic event.
Third, there exists
a tendency to redefine meditation within the framework of existing modern
psychological theories. A number of psychologists with different theoretical
orientations—behaviourist, constructivist, cognitive, humanistic, and
psychoanalytical—are actively investigating the phenomenon (Delmonte,
1987) without due consideration for the original religio-spiritual, theoretical
or conceptual framework. Such contemporary theoretical approaches to meditation
are characterized as predominantly atheoretical for this reason (West,
1987). The point West is arguing is that the current approaches to meditation
do not utilise effectively existing Eastern psychological theories to
generate intelligent methodologies, explain results, and develop theory
further. He also indicates that there are appropriate Western psychological
theories, which are more directly relevant to the concerns of meditation
such as, identity and self-concept, awareness and self-awareness, interpersonal
relations, and relationship between individuals and social systems, which
can be utilised.
On the other hand, the
transpersonal group has been more responsive to the original context of
meditation than others. These include Brown (1986), Engler (1986), Goleman
(1977), Kornfield (1979), Ram Dass (1990), Shapiro (1990), Tart (1989)
Walsh (1980, 1999) and West (1986). However, the difference lies in their
attempt to integrate the knowledge of the ancient spiritual traditions
with that of modern psychology. Even these attempts are limited in their
scope because the dominant framework of modern science governs them. Thus,
they may fail to take into account the logical limits of human possibilities
suggested in spiritual traditions.
Consequently, there
exists a certain amount of conceptual and methodological confusion. Many
questions like whether meditation has any intrinsic goal or is everything
extrinsic to it; whether meditation refers to a particular practice or
to a whole set of practices; whether meditation can be defined generically
or not; and what research and strategies are appropriate to study it have
been raised. Rao (1989) notes that the conceptual confusion stems from
the failure to distinguish between meditation as a state and as a technique;
a lack of adequate criteria to identify it; and from the simplistic notion
that sitting quietly and chanting a mantra is qualitatively
the same as practising the rigorous discipline as advocated by the classical
meditative traditions. Methodologically, most experimental studies of
meditation suffer from the use of the same subject designs, in which each
subject is his own control, and the failure to control for individual
differences in personality, attitudes, expectations, training, and the
length and quality of meditation of the subjects tested.
Such problems of a conceptual
and methodological nature, and atheoretical approaches in the psychology
of meditation have originated partly due to the very complex nature of
the process itself, which is an internal event. More than that the problem
is also due to socio-cultural factors and paradigmatic reasons, which
are interdependent and have codetermined the direction of meditation research.
The Western socio-cultural ethos in which the majority of the studies
on meditation have been carried out is widely acknowledged to be materialistic
in outlook and scientific in orientation. As a natural corollary meditation
is practised from a practical viewpoint to facilitate achieving material
goals and is also studied with a view to effectively exploit meditation’s
potentials as mental technology. These compulsions led investigators to
define meditation in non-cultic context free terms (Carrington, 1987;
Johnson, 1982).
Contextual approach
to meditation
Taking stock of the
progress of meditation research and the course it has taken, Shapiro (1990,
1994) observes that it is possible to identify two distinct stages, and
compares them to an “hourglass”. The first stage is narrowing of the hourglass.
Here meditation research has focused on seeking precision and refinement.
The attempt is to define meditation in non-cultic and context-free terms;
to explore its utility in a variety of clinical and health care settings;
to document its subjective and phenomenological validity; and to determine
its mediating mechanisms and component parts. This is the classical reductionist
approach of modern psychology. In Shapiro’s view it was a necessary and
critical stage in meditation research that yielded impressive results.
However, Shapiro believes that a stage has come in meditation research
when one has to “widen the hourglass”. That is, contextual aspects of
meditation have to be re-considered. Shapiro argues that there is always
a specific belief system, goal, and particular framework (whether psychological,
scientific, and/or spiritual) within which meditation is utilised and
studied and hence there is no such thing as a context-free investigation.
According to Shapiro
(1990), there are two possible consequences if one does not consciously
specify the context. First, the research on meditation may become methodology
driven. That is, it gets limited to the tools we have to examine. Second,
without an explicit framework of values, just as other behaviour strategies
like biofeedback, or behavioural self- control, meditation may become
an amoral technology to serve the often unexamined values and cultural
assumptions of the larger society, as Nolan (1972) suggested. Then the
culture in which the technique is used becomes by fiat the context. So
he strongly holds that the premise that we can develop and study a generic
context-free meditation is a chimera. Therefore, the agenda for future
research according to Shapiro is to systematically articulate and study
the context of meditation rather than to create a context-free study of
meditation, which is impossible, in his view. In other words, he advocates
a contextual approach to meditation.
A study conducted against
this background explored the role of certain personality and socio-cultural
variables in meditation practice and experience.2 The findings
suggest that meditation is a multivariate dynamic phenomenon, in contrast
to a univariate static phenomenon. In such a phenomenon, more so than
the particular type/technique of meditation, it is the person as a changing context, which determines the nature and effects of his/her
own practice. Hence it is the person or the meditator (not the type/technique
of meditation) who is the independent variable. A “person-centred” or
“meditator-centred” strategy rather than “technique centred” strategy
may throw more light on the phenomenon of meditation.
Further, the results
indicate that proper understanding of the phenomenon of meditation requires
three categories (factors in the statistical sense) viz., nature, influencing
factors, and effects.3 These interact in different ways to
determine the course and outcome of meditation. All the existing research
on meditation addresses one or more of these facets. The first two categories
interact to create a context and lead to certain experiences and effects.
They in turn, have the capacity to alter one or more of the variables
(properties and their dimensions) which operated initially leading to
a new mental set or context. In the process the person has changed. Thus
the beginning meditator is not the same as he (she) progresses in meditation
over a period of time. This is the dynamic context.
Integral psychology
as a contextual variable
Within the framework
of a contextual approach to the study of meditation, integral psychology
serves as an influencing factor (Category II) especially under belief
systems and goals (table 1). Belief system refers to an individual’s worldview
and value orientations as distinguished from ethnoepistemology, which
refers to cultural belief system. The latter significantly shapes the
former, but an individual may transcend its influence and expand his belief
system. Shapiro (1990) has enumerated ten different aspects of personal
belief systems in relation to meditation practice. 1) A person’s belief
about the ultimate nature of the universe. 2) The factors which contributed
to the development of a belief system and components within that belief
system. 3) Belief as an independent variable. 4) Belief as a dependent
variable. 4) Intensity of beliefs. 5) Relation between beliefs and values.
6) Congruence between beliefs and behaviour or action. 7) Our attachment
to our belief as well as the specific language, symbol, and form in which
it is contexted. 8) How the questions of evil, duality, self-other dichotomy,
non-human caused childhood disease and death, earthquakes and other natural
catastrophes are addressed by those with a belief in an ultimate, unifying
universe (at the deepest level of reality). 9) The potential negative
implications and consequences of beliefs.
Integral psychology
having its basis in the integral vision of Sri Aurobindo about human and
planetary/cosmic evolution, offers a unique and comprehensive belief system
to a meditator. It addresses many of the issues delineated above. As Herman
(1983)4 has rightly pointed out Sri Aurobindo used the word
“integral” as equivalent to the Sanskrit word “purna”, which
means holistic or full. His view “has the unique distinction of being
considered in India a modern orthodox (astika) school
of traditional Vedanta…purna advaita Vedanta (integral non-dual Vedanta). Yet at the same time it claims to be a universal
doctrine relevant to the critical concerns of the whole planet, and therefore
beyond any particular religious tradition, including Hinduism itself”
(p. 95).
It is noteworthy that Herman (1983) emphasizes that Sri Aurobindo’s
thought did not develop in a vacuum and it was typical of the Indian cultural
renaissance that took place during the period from 1875 to 1950. Others
who thought on similar lines include H.S. Olcott, H.P. Blavatsky, Annie
Besant and the Theosophical Society; Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa and Swami
Vivekananda; Rabindranath Tagore, Mohandas K. Gandhi, Sri Ramana Maharshi,
and S. Radhakrishnan. Further Herman points out that there are significant
common elements in the teachings of the theosophical movement, the Ramakrishna
movement and the writings of Sri Aurobindo and Radhakrishnan. They include
most importantly, a universal perspective, an evolutionary outlook, concern
for social integration and justice, and a multidimensional view of human
consciousness and cosmic structure (p. 96).
According to Herman
(1983), Haridas Chaudhuri, a distinguished disciple of Sri Aurobindo who
founded the Asian Institute of Integral Studies5 at San Francisco,
used the word “integral” in a much broader sense, to include not only
the contributions of all significant members of the Indian cultural renaissance
but even those of Western thinkers. Therefore, Chaudhuri’s conception
of integral psychology is not limited by any particular tradition but
at the same time can hold in itself each of the different valid traditions
like Hinduism, Buddhism, Sufism, etc. Hence, Chaudhuri’s vision of integral
psychology as stated by Herman is that it “should be open-ended, flexible,
able to transform itself according to the demands of the fast-paced evolution
of contemporary culture. In expression it must also remain as global as
possible, avoiding over-identification with Indian metaphysical modes
of discourse” (p. 96). Ken Wilber’s many writings can be viewed as an
example of such a vision being concretized, though it has its limitations.
Since integral psychology
concerns itself with all phases of human existence, which includes physical,
emotional, instinctual, mental, moral, social and spiritual aspects, it
looks upon them as equally valid and contributing for human evolution
(Chaudhuri, 1977). For this reason integral psychology seeks to be practical
and applicable to concerns of everyday life and at the same time to facilitate
the spiritual growth of those who are ready to take off to a different
realm (Herman, 1983).
Thus, integral psychology
as a contextual variable develops expectations (property 1) about physical,
psychological and spiritual outcomes (dimensions). It develops motivation
(property 2) for information gathering and learning new techniques (dimensions).
And it insists on adherence (property 3) to practice as part of life and
as a movement toward a spiritual goal (table 2).
In view of its multidimensional
emphasis integral psychology has implications for the nature of meditation
(category I) (table 1). Referring to “integral meditation” as conceived
by Chaudhuri in his Integral Yoga, The Philosophy of Meditation and other writings, Herman (1983) describes it as
follows: “Chaudhuri discusses meditation as a psychological approach to
the authentic values of one’s life. Meditation is an exploration of the
whole psyche in order to amplify self-understanding” (p. 99). Integral
meditation operates at two levels. On one level it “serves as a process
of mental housecleaning, removing clutter and debris to allow the light
of Being to be reflected inside” (p. 99). At another level “by inquiring
into the essence of our selfhood we gain insight into the mystery of universal
Being” (p. 99).
According to Chaudhuri
in integral meditation the need for growth of inner consciousness is more
important than any particular method or technique per se. So the integral
view supports many techniques for different psychological types and stages
of development. In Integral Yoga, Chaudhuri describes thirteen different
methods of meditation, which range from simple to complex mental processes.
They facilitate the actualization of the five fundamental principles of
integral yoga as delineated by Chaudhuri: dynamic self-offering to the
cosmic reality; psychic self-exploration; self-energizing; critical evaluation;
and existential experience (McKay, 1980).
In conclusion, from
the point of view of a contextual approach to meditation, it can be said
that integral psychology as a theoretical framework along with “integral
meditation” offers a broad and comprehensive context and variety of techniques
for a meditator, beginner as well as advanced, for sadhana. Nevertheless,
there is a possible danger. The orthodox schools, which exclusively associate
dhyana with God-realization and Self-realization, discourage a sadhaka even from psychical self-exploration lest he or she
may stray away from the goal. On the other hand, integral psychology with
its affirmation of all aspects of human existence may keep a sadhaka moving in circles in a horizontal plane without vertical
movement. A guru’s guidance is indispensable to avoid this pitfall.
APPENDIX6
Category I Category II Category III
Nature Influencing
factors Effects
Properties
Properties Properties
(a) Perceptions
(a) Goals (a) Stress relief
(b) Practice
(b) Belief system (b)Attitudinal change
(c) Process
(c) Society (c) Dependency
(d) Faith community
(e) Personality
traits
(f) Facilitative
factors
(g) Disturbing
factors
Table 1. Categories of meditation
The properties listed
under each category are not exhaustive and are derived and limited by
the data obtained on a particular sample. The different definitions of
meditation currently available in scientific literature seem to focus
on different categories. For example, Goleman’s (1978) distinction between
“concentration” and “opening up” meditation defined in terms of attention
strategies, emphasise on the nature of meditation (Category I). Much discussion
has taken place about the relation between the procedure one adopts and
the experiences one undergoes during meditation (Goleman, 1978; Naranjo
& Ornstein, 1971). Similarly, Carrington’s (1987) distinction between
“spiritual meditation” and “practical meditation”, and Johnson’s (1982)
distinction between “intrinsic” and “extrinsic”
goals are definitions which emphasise the influencing factors (Category
II). Defining meditation as a means of inducing altered states of consciousness
or as a self-regulation strategy (Shapiro & Giber, 1978), as relaxation
response (Benson, 1975) are examples of Category III related to effects.
One can suggest that the three categories represent a three-factor model of meditation.
The various properties of the three categories interact with each other
resulting in a variety of meditative experiences.
Property 1 Property 2 Property 3
Expectations Motivations Adherence
Dimensions
Physical:
Information gathering
Part of life movement
Relieving stress
Learning new techniques
toward spiritual goal
Gaining more energy
Overcoming illness
Psychological:
Resolving emotional conflicts
Resolving identity problems
Experiencing calmness
Experiencing awareness
Spiritual:
God-realisation
Self-realisation
Table 2. Goals of meditation
Properties
American society Indian
society
Place of spirituality Least valued Highly valued
in the hierarchy
of values
Social acceptance
Neutral to rejection/
Positive acceptance
of meditative
practices negative evaluation
Supportiveness
of Non-supportive
Supportive
environment
Faith factor
Less More
Availability
of opportu- Less More
nities to learn
meditation
Availability
of Little
Much
information
and models
Table 3. Socio-cultural properties related to meditation
Liturgic Interactional Environmental
Rituals conducted Interaction
between Physical
surroundings
the teacher and the
Chanting hymns taught—verbal
and Serenity and
experiential quiet
atmosphere
Singing devotional
songs
Interaction between Holiness
attached
the group
members— to the place
verbal and experiential
Sharing
experiences
with others
Group meditations
Table 4. Properties involved in faith community
Internal External
Relaxed
state
Quiet and peaceful
atmosphere
Satisfaction
in work
and
enjoying the same
Lack of problems
in family and work
Few external demands
Constant
practice and
persistence
Value
attached to the goal
and practice
Table 5. Facilitative factors
Internal
External
Worry
Travel
Conflicts
Work schedules
Tensions
Family commitment
Tiredness
Physical environment
Lack
of discipline
Sporadic life style
Attitude
towards meditation Problems
in work
Table 6. Disturbing Factors
It is interesting
to note that for one participant meditation practice itself came in the
way as a disturbing factor because her attitude towards her practice was
very rigid. As she reported she took her practice very seriously and started
“judging” her meditation practice. Her attitude, I think I never do it right, was nagging her leading to frustration.
Notes
1 Italics
author’s for emphasis
2 For details
refer to author’s Psychology of meditation: A contextual approach Concept Publishing Company, New Delhi, India. I also
thank the publishers for permitting me to reproduce some ideas from the
book.
3 For details
refer to Tables 1 to 6 provided in the Appendix.
4 I am indebted
to Paul Herman for giving me some of his and others’ papers on Integral
Psychology.
5 Now California
Institute of Integral Studies
6 The tables
are reproduced from my Post-Doctoral research report “Culture, Context
and Meditation”.
References
Brown D. P. (1986).
“The stages of meditation in cross-cultural perspective”, in K. Wilber,
J. Engler, & D. P. Brown, Transformations of consciousness: Conventional and contemplative
perspectives on development (pp. 17-52). Shambala, Boston & London: New Science Library.
Carrington, P. (1987).
Freedom in meditation.
Kendall Park NJ: Pace Educational Systems (3rd Ed.).
Chaudhuri, H. (1977).
Integral evolution
of consciousness. Wheaton
Hill, Ill. Theosophical Publishing House.
Delmonte, M. M. (1987).
“Contemporary theoretical approaches to meditation”. in. M. A. West (Ed.),
On the psychology
of meditation. Oxford, England:
Clarendon Press.
Engler, J. (1986).
“Therapeutic aims in psychotherapy and meditation”, in K. Wilber, J. Engler,
& D. P. Brown, Transformations of consciousness: Conventional and contemplative
perspectives on development (pp. 17-52). Shambala, Boston & London: New Science Library.
Goleman, D. (1977).
The varieties of meditative
experiences. New York: Dutton.
Herman, P (1983).
“Integral psychology”, in Haddick, Vern (Ed.) Transcendence and transformation. Lanham, Md. University Press of America.
Johnson, W. (1982).
Riding the Ox home:
A history of meditation from shamanism to science. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
Kornfield, J. (1979).
“Intensive insight meditation: A phenomenological study”. The Journal of Transpersonal
Psychology, 11(1), 41-59.
McKay, J. (1980).
What does Chaudhuri’s
view of “integral meditation” contribute to growth work with clients?
Master’s in Integral Psychology Seminar Paper. San Francisco: California
Institute of Integral Studies (Unpublished).
Murphy, M., &
Donovan, S. (1997). The physical and psychological effects of meditation. Sausalito, CA: Institute of Noetic Sciences.
Naranjo, C., &
Ornstein, R. E. (1971). On the psychology of meditation. New York: Viking Press.
Nolan, D. (1972).
“Freedom and dignity: A functional analysis”. American Psychologist, 29, 157-160.
Ornstein, R. E. (1972).
The psychology of
consciousness. San Francisco:
W. H. Freeman & Co.
Ram Dass, (1990).
Journey of awakening:
A meditator’s guide book.
New York: Bantam Books.
Rao, K. R. (1989).
“Meditation: Sacred and secular—A review and assessment of some recent
research”. Journal of the Indian
Academy of Applied Psychology, 15(2), 51-74.
Shapiro, D. H. (1990).
“Meditation, self-control, and control by a benevolent other: Issues of
content and context”, in Maurits G. T. Kwee (Ed.) Psychotherapy, meditation, and health:
A cognitive-behavioural perspective
(pp. 67-121). London/The Hague: East-West Publications.
Shapiro, D. H. (1994).
“Examining the content and context of meditation: A challenge of psychology
in the areas of stress management, psychotherapy, and religion/values”.
Journal of Humanistic
Psychology, 34, 4, 101-135.
Shapiro, D. H., &
Walsh, R. (Eds.) (1984). Meditation: Classic and contemporary perspectives. New York: Aldine.
Tart C. T. (1975).
Transpersonal psychologies.
San Francisco: Harper & Row.
Tart C. T. (1989).
Open mind, discriminating
mind: Reflections on human possibilities. San Francisco: Harper & Row.
Vigne, J. (1997).
Meditation and mental health. Indian Journal of Clinical Psychology, 24, 1, 46-51.
Walsh, R. (1980).
“The consciousness disciplines and the behavioural sciences”. American Journal of
Psychiatry, 137, 663-673.
Walsh, R. (1983).
Meditation practice and research. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 23(1), 18-50.
Walsh, R. (1999).
“Asian contemplative disciplines: Common practices, clinical applications,
and research findings”. The Journal of Transpersonal Psychology, 31, 2, 83-107.
West, M. A. (1986).
“Meditation: Psychology and human experience”, in G. L. Claxton (Ed.),
Beyond Therapy: The
impact of Eastern religions on psychological theory and practice (pp.
244-267). London: Wisdom Publications.
Wilber, K., Engler,
J., & Brown, D. P. (1986). Transformations of consciousness: Conventional and contemplative
perspectives on development. Shambala, Boston & London: New Science Library.