[echocassidyde]

As someone who studies the cognitive sciences formally, I certainly see parallels between psychology and the Buddha's teachings. The obvious would be the origin and cessation of suffering, which the Buddha claimed to be the pinnacle of his teachings.

Simsapa Sutta (SN 56.31)

"And what have I taught? 'This is stress... This is the origination of stress... This is the cessation of stress... This is the path of practice leading to the cessation of stress': This is what I have taught. And why have I taught these things? Because they are connected with the goal, relate to the rudiments of the holy life, and lead to disenchantment, to dispassion, to cessation, to calm, to direct knowledge, to self-awakening, to Unbinding. This is why I have taught them.

"Therefore your duty is the contemplation, 'This is stress... This is the origination of stress... This is the cessation of stress.' Your duty is the contemplation, 'This is the path of practice leading to the cessation of stress.'"

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipit....031.than.html Buddhist teachings are also replete with social psychology. The very notion of kamma/karma is a reflection on one's conduct. One intends by acts of body, speech, and mind. Of these, mind is the most elusive.

Assutava Sutta (SN 12.61)

Just as a monkey, swinging through a forest wilderness, grabs a branch. Letting go of it, it grabs another branch. Letting go of that, it grabs another one. Letting go of that, it grabs another one. In the same way, what's called 'mind,' 'intellect,' or 'consciousness' by day and by night arises as one thing and ceases as another.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipit....061.than.html
By way of the mind's habits, we imagine there to be some persistent entity called "me". The sense of self is a construct of the mind. This again overlaps with modern psychology.

Samanupassana Sutta (SN 22.47)

Now, there is the intellect, there are ideas (mental qualities), there is the property of ignorance. To an uninstructed run-of-the-mill person, touched by experience born of the contact of ignorance, there occur (the thoughts): 'I am,' 'I am thus,' 'I shall be,' 'I shall not be,' 'I shall be possessed of form,' 'I shall be formless,' 'I shall be percipient (conscious),' 'I shall be non-percipient,' or 'I shall be neither percipient nor non-percipient.'

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipit....047.than.html Much of the Buddha's teachings can be compared to the findings of cognitive psychology, a field I work within.

For instance, according to both the Buddha and cognitive researchers, consciousness cannot exist without an object or some content. The Buddha taught that there arises a new consciousness at each moment due to the interruption of contact. Only sustained contact produces sustained consciousness. For this reason, there can be no such thing as a disembodied consciousness. Consciousness requires an object to be conscious of. The various forms of phenomenal consciousness are eye-consciousness, ear-consciousness, nose-consciousness, tongue-consciousness, body-consciousness, and mind-consciousness. Dependent on an object of sight there arises eye-consciousness. Dependent on audible sounds there arises ear-consciousness. The nose is conscious of scents, the tongue of tastes, the body of tactile sensations, and the mind of thought formations. An interruption of consciousness, a separation of the eye from a visual form, causes that consciousness to perish and re-arise through contact with another visual form.

This is my understanding as a student of neuropsychology.



Abhaya