The Healing Potentials of Buddhist Philosophy in a Modern Therapeutic Environment

By Scott Menasco, Ph.D.

Editors’ Note: Dr. Scott Menasco specializes in applying transformative psychology to support clients in personal growth, recovery from shame, low self-esteem, and trauma. He helps individuals learn to relate to their symptoms and emotions as expressions of inner wisdom, guiding them toward healing and integration.

Abstract: Buddhism is a Path of Healing

Isa Gucciardi, Ph.D., lead teacher in the Applied Buddhist Psychology program at the Foundation of the Sacred Stream, a school for consciousness studies in Berkeley, California, addresses the question, “What is Buddhism?” by emphasizing that first and foremost, Buddhism is a path of healing.

What is happening at the Sacred Stream is a remarkable unification of these two: A pathway through relationship to awakening and a pathway through awakening to relationship. This is really a unique orientation. Sacred Stream offers an imminent-relational path that emphasizes the living transcendent transmission of Dharma as it is expressed in the context of relationship.

How can we reconcile contemporary psychotherapeutic methods with Buddhism?

What attracted me to the Sacred Stream was its unique combination of earth-based wisdom, authentic Buddhist practice, and its orientation towards relational and transpersonal psychologies. As far as I can tell, this is a rare offering, one that I had not seen any facsimile of in any capacity. In this society, typically one must go to distinct places to receive separate teachings on this material. For myself, I had been grappling with how to reconcile contemporary psychotherapeutic methods with Buddhist methods for some time.

I began practicing psychotherapy in my early-mid 20s. As I was studying to become a psychotherapist, I also explored Buddhist philosophy and practice, primarily in a non-traditional format. During this time, I took a nondual teacher and therapist training program with a former Buddhist monk. Shortly thereafter I began an intensive internship in a psychotherapy program focused mainly on recovery from shame and its many iterations—including emphasis on inner child work.

This was a distinctive process; to be training both in a very personal and relational form of psychology which, although was transpersonally-minded, focused very much on inner-and-outer relational dynamics while facilitating a transpersonal process with the intent of recognizing awareness-as-it-is and resting there.

For the longest time, I had tremendous difficulty reconciling these two approaches. I simply thought of them as distinct processes with different aims and different methods. While that
perspective has truth to it, I continued to seek a way to somehow reconcile these approaches. I even focused my doctoral research on how core ideas in Buddhist philosophy could impact the understanding of the concept of mental health.

In my doctoral process I encountered research in the field of consciousness studies which further cemented my compartmentalization of these ideas. This research asserted that the process of spiritual development as exemplified by the persistence of certain kinds of non-ordinary states of consciousness was distinct from the development of someone’s personality structure. In other words, we might say that spiritual development is its own category of development, while relational, emotional, and psychological development are in a ‘separate’ category. One does not necessarily guarantee the other.

In other words, someone could be highly awakened, or relatively stabilized in expanded states of consciousness but not sophisticated relationally. A yogi in a cave is not necessarily learning
specific relational skills the way that someone might if they were in a marriage and dedicated towards developing emotional and relational capacities. Similarly, someone who has explored
their psychological history in the context of therapy has not necessarily developed the capacity to have persistent spiritual experience nor the framework in which to do so.

What is happening at the Sacred Stream is a remarkable unification of these two: A pathway through relationship to awakening and a pathway through awakening to relationship. This is really a unique orientation among those that I have seen. It is highly culturally appropriate in terms of the transmission of Buddhism to this society. In the ‘West’ both heritage and non-heritage practitioners are predominately laity oriented, which means that if we want to practice Dharma effectively, we must develop skillful means that we can apply in the relational contexts within which we live day-to-day. Sacred Stream offers a methodology wherein one can simultaneously work in each of these pathways; their relational patterning and psychology and the transcendent psychology of Buddhist practice. Furthermore, the coursework offers conceptual or epistemological frameworks so one can see how these processes are inter-related and not just entirely separate lines of development. Thus, Sacred Stream offers an imminent-relational path that emphasizes the living transcendent transmission of Dharma as it is expressed in the context of relationship.

Buddhism and the Sacred Stream

What is Buddhism? The historical Buddha is called “The Great Physician,” because he articulated the Four Noble Truths in the manner of a doctor of his time would treat an illness. Isa Gucciardi, Ph.D., lead teacher in the Applied Buddhist Psychology program at the Foundation of the Sacred Stream, a school for consciousness studies in Berkeley, California, addresses the question, “What is Buddhism?” by emphasizing that first and foremost, Buddhism is a path of healing.

Why is this significant? Let us say we are approaching Buddhism as only a cultural or religious expression. To be sure, cultural and religious expressions are vital and have been vital in the
lifeblood of Buddhist practice. Without denigrating any such expression, if we approach Buddhism as solely a cultural or even religious expression, we might miss the alive transmission of Buddhism that is beyond the expression of culture and religion. In modern society, this alive transmission translates best through the language of psychology.

On the other hand, if we try to strip Buddhism entirely of its cultural or religious expression, or to try to sterilize it by trying to fit teachings into an appealing package for us, we are at risk of losing what is most valuable. That is, if we misappropriate these teachings, and we interpret or apply them without the living transmission, without the full potentiality of what Dharma is, then we are liable to simply perpetuate whatever dissatisfaction we came in with. We are liable to perpetuate a modernistic psychology of selfhood that is inherently dis-satisfying in nature. In introducing these topics in a society where they have been historically categorized as ‘foreign,’ there can be difficulty in balancing both making them accessible to newcomers while retaining the authenticity and the living transmission of the teachings. A swing too far to the side of accessibility and the power of the living transmission of Dharma is lost. Contrarily, within the context of authenticity, it is also possible that the more culturally authentic expression, the less diversity of individuals can access this profound orientation towards healing.

In articulating Buddhism primarily as a path of healing, Isa makes the living transmission of Buddhism accessible to individuals with diverse cultural backgrounds. The teachings at the Sacred Stream have combined accessibility and authenticity of Buddhist practice in a way that does not require a rigidity of cultural expression, and does not sacrifice the authenticity of a living Dharma tradition. This is a tremendous contribution to all who desire to deepen their understanding of the practice of Buddhism but have been uncertain at how they can practice genuinely, without appropriation, and without forcing themselves into unfamiliar cultural practices. This has been tremendously supportive of myself personally, as I have spent many hours contemplating how to navigate this dichotomy with authenticity. To have a community where there is genuine opportunity for refuge, that is accessible, that does not necessarily require us to adopt a cultural expression that is foreign to us… Well, it’s hard to express the profundity of that.

Lastly, very often in this society, speaking specifically of the United States but it theoretically could apply to other societies as well, Dharma teachings can become commodified. Although there is some element of that in many religious traditions as they negotiate their continuance or survival over time, the risk of this in the context of Buddhism in this society is that we can find a process of diluting the potency of the teachings. We can find ourselves practicing mindfulness so that our productivity increases at work, or so we can become a more perfect version of ourselves. This is not what Dharma really is about, and these practices are likely to reinforce patterns of dissatisfaction. So, it is significant that the Sacred Stream provides a truly accessible form of Dharma, and one that upholds the true potency of Dharma practice.

The Problem of Ontology in Psychotherapy

In no way would I want to dissuade someone from pursuing therapy. I have seen firsthand how powerful it can be. However, one of the problems with therapy in a transpersonal context is that because most forms of therapy try to remain neutral, they can reinforce whatever dominant cultural conception of Selfhood, existence, and being one has. Typically, these categories are associated with ontology in philosophy.

What is problematic about this? Imagine for a minute that you ascribe to a dominant cultural perspective that your Self is really real. You might already be thinking, well of course my Self is really real. If we prescribe to this notion and if our therapist prescribes to this notion, how can we ever address the potential that our conditioning to believe that our Self is really real actually causes us tremendous dissatisfaction and pain?

In psychotherapeutic settings we do not typically address this or other metaphysical assumptions because it can be problematic for therapists to impose their beliefs on clients. However, what if our dominant cultural beliefs about the nature of selfhood, existence, and being are actually problematic, or worse unhealthy? There are very few psychotherapeutic approaches that can help with this because in therapy, worldview and metaphysics remain implicit, or opaque. Very often, clients struggle through their own fusion with the dominant cultural worldview of selfhood which is narrow and ultimately dissatisfying.

While the opacity of worldview from the side of the therapist can play an important role in the therapeutic process, namely, to protect the client and to foster security for the client with the
therapist, it handcuffs the therapeutic process to being culturally syntonic, or reinforcing of dominant cultural worldviews which may promulgate personal and social malaise. That is, without offering a different metaphysic, there is really no scaffolding to transpersonal orientations and transpersonal states of consciousness. We are mired in mirroring a consensual reality that is quite visibly imbalanced and unhealthy.

The Sacred Stream offers several methodologies which counter-act this process directly. For example in Depth Hypnosis, the spiritual counseling process which is at the heart of the teachings at the Sacred Stream, the client familiarizes themselves with their own interiority. Through relationship with internal guidance, they establish their own scaffolding to transpersonal states including new perceptions of selfhood. This does not require imposition of belief by the clinician themselves, other than in that of the structure of hypnosis wherein one can establish a relationship with ‘internal’ guiding parts, whether they are symbolic representations or actual ontological guides.

Through other classes, in particular the classes on relationship, including Relationship and Karma and Relationship and Power, the student can also learn through an explication of relevant ontological ideas how they can relate to and transform personal and dominant cultural iterations of malaise. There is not the opacity that permits the reinforcement of collective amnesia and malaise. Rather there are direct and clear passageways through which transformation of Self and understandings of Selfhood are not only possible, but very likely if they are engaged with intention and heart.

These reflections emerge from over a decade of research, study, and my practice as a psychotherapist, an interdisciplinary scholar, and a non-traditional Buddhist practitioner. I have spent a tremendous amount of effort trying to reconcile differences between Western psychology and the little I understand about Buddhist psychology. I have most often failed miserably at this. Therefore, what I am expressing in this article is genuine revelation at the extraordinary skillful means in bridging the gap between traditional psychotherapy and Buddhist philosophy that Isa’s teachings provide.

May you continue to water your own Dharma heart. May this heart grow over short and long strands of time. May this heart be a doorway to the timeless clear light that infuses all experience.