Thoughts On "A New Earth": Does Enlightenment = Neurogenesis? (Part One)

So. I’ve made it most of the way through Eckhart Tolle’s “A New Earth”, as promised. I’m still maintaining an open, if discerning, mind - also as promised. And I still don’t hate it.
Oh, I did grit my teeth a few times, and sort of sputtered into my Diet Coke at least once.

But I’ll get to all that in another post. *This* post is about an honest insight I had while reading the first chapter.

First up, some definitions.

Neurogenesis / Neuroplasticity: Both terms refer to the brain’s ability to physically develop and rewire itself according to need. Even adult brains can create new connections between neurons, reroute tasks to different parts of the brain and in some situations, even produce new cells. It’s hard science, measurable and measured.

Enlightenment: In a spiritual context, enlightenment refers to a permanent state of higher wisdom, perception or understanding. Depending on the person talking, and the tradition they’re influenced by, it can mean anything from a simple awareness of their own nature, to the more complex realizations of truth vs illusion, the nature of perception, observation of the complexity of interconnected relationships, and the nature of consciousness itself. Enlightenment is philosophy, and as such is neither measurable nor measured by science.

So what do the two have to do with each other?

Maybe a lot.

When Tibetian Buddhist adepts (who spend their lives working towards Enlightenment) have their brains scanned, poked, prodded and measured, the results are interesting.

The monk’s brains behave *differently* than an ordinary persons. The areas of their brains wired for happiness and compassion were much more active. Their brainwaves were better organized, more consistant, and showed high levels of gamma waves, a brainwave state associated with making connections between different parts of the brain, seeing patterns, and so on. (“Train Your Mind, Change Your Brain” is a fascinating look at the topic. I’ve misplaced my copy or I’d find the studies and cite them)

In other words?

The monk’s brains shows neuroplasticity in action… their brains changed, physically, in response to their practices.

But more importantly (for the purposes of this post, at least) these scientifically observed changes to their brains fit with the monks own associations with of “enlightenment”: increased compassion, increased focus and awareness, a better grasp of the patterns in the world around them, the ability to see through misleading patterns, a deeper sense of contentment, etc.

So being “enlightened” might be more than just spiritual woo or philosophical jargon. It may just be a real, observable, tangible thing - maybe the experience of awakening to enlightenment is a period of neurogenesis.

But before anyone jumps on me for reducing mysticism to a few random chemicals and brainwave graphs, this post isn’t about whether consciousness is or isn’t limited to the physical body. Maybe consciousness is the result of the processes within the brain - or maybe consciousness molds the brain to its needs. Those are philosophical questions I wont even begin to tackle, especially not here.

What I am addressing is the idea that the process known in English as “spiritual awakening”, and the result known in English as “enlightenment” may have measurable, permanent effects on the brain.

And Next Up… Part Two? My personal experience with the enlightenment process. I’m a bit squircky about discussing it, to be honest, but I think there are some useful bits of information there. It should be up tomorrow, baring any neural implosions on my part