Buddhist Psychology
 

I am interested in the viewpoint that Buddhism necessarily involves the study of mind and naturally through the process of meditation involves an increased awareness of the mind and how it operates. Therefore Buddhism offers great insight into psychology and in fact has many more years of study and practice of psychology than Western psychology. That it has a lot to teach Western psychology.

I am reading a book at the moment called: "The sanity we are born with - a buddhist approach to psychology" by Chogyam Trungpa.

I would like to share some pieces from this book and invite comment from people about their experiences, thoughts, insights in response to these. The first topic is our awareness of ignorance verses our awareness of the seed of enlightened awareness.

" Ignorance feels the other, the awakened, aspect of the polarity; therefore it does what it does. There is some subtle relationship ignorance is making with the basic intelligence of buddha nature. So ignorance in this case is not stupid, it is intelligent. The term for ignorance in Tibetan, marikpa, means "not seeing, not perceiving." That means deciding to not perceive, deciding to not see, deciding to not look. Ignorance makes certain decisions and, having already made a certain decision, it tries to maintain it no matter what. Often it faces a hard time keeping that decision constantly, because one act of ignorance cannot persist indefinitely, once and for all. Ignorance also is based on sparks or flashes of ignorance operating on some ground, and the space between two sparks of ignoring is the intelligence that this process of ignorance is operating on. It also happens occasionally that ignorance forgets to maintain its own quality, so that the awakened state comes through. So a meditative state of mind occurs spontaneously when, occasionally, the efficiency of ego's administration breaks down." pp 108

Maybe some discussion points could be:

* Do you relate to this?

* What occurs to you when reading this in relation to your own experiences?

* How do you utilise these experiences to assist yourself / others to decide to see, perceive, look?

* Or anything else that occurs you ...

I will have to think about this when I have more time.

Interesting.

http://www.buddhismwithoutboundaries...ilies/grin.gif

it interests me that you choose this excerpt in particular ... I can relate ... sometimes the words are hard to find to describe the type of experience that is being experienced ...? http://www.buddhismwithoutboundaries...ilies/grin.gif

Absolutly dear Blueseasparkling,

It is quite controversial and can cause some discomfort when in Zen the best way of knowledge is called Negemisho or silent learning thorugh sitting meditation or zazen. We do not get into intense argumentation so words are just used to stop the chattering mind that is all day with us thorug the Koan method.

This brings us the development of what is called "Right View" that is the core of our tradition and is supported by a deep commitment with the Four Noble Truths and the Eightfold Noble Path as direct teachings from Buddha and other suttas that concern only to the Zen Tradition.

http://www.buddhismwithoutboundaries...lies/hands.gif

I am going to go on a silent retreat later in the year - 10 days, and have never done this before, I am looking forward to it. I am curious though about the process and what evolves through it ... you speak of right view - can you describe this - is it peaceful clarity or do you also find answers to your own questions through the process - innate wisdom?

What I thought about in the reading above was - the space between flashes of ignorance, which gives both the perspective that notices ignorance and notices non ignorance inadvertently in this. That ignorant viewpoints are impermanent. Perhaps therefore to watch out more from a mindfulness perspective for the spaces in between where these can be noticed, and how in meditation these spaces grow more familiar and can grow in extent through practice over time.

Chogtyam Trungpa seems to have turned "Ignorance" into a homunculus. It is important to understand when reviewing this material that the Buddha did not teach in terms of dualism or non-dualism.

The Buddha did teach a psychology, and a very good one, in the form of paticcasamuppada. He taught that we tend to grasp at sense experience and fashion self-view to accord with that sense experience, and act according to that self view. He further taught that self-view is a house of cards, that we cling to experience and self-view and expect the world to conform to that view, and experience misery when the world does not conform. This is the effect of ignorance (not knowing, not seeing) on our perception of the world. Ignorance of what? That sense experience is impermanent, not "me" or "mine", and can bring suffering when we grasp it as "me" or "mine".

With the removal of this ignorance -- first through understanding, and, more gradually, through integrating this new understanding into our mental habits -- we learn to not crave for and cling to sense experience, and we do not experience misery over sense experience. We learn to not invest emotions, assumptions, and expectations in what we experience, and thus we become mentally stable. Misery and suffering die out for lack of feeding. This is the Buddha's psychology; it details the Second and Third Noble Truths of the cause and cessation of misery and suffering.

Thank you Stuka. I liked this part particularly:

"We learn to not invest emotions, assumptions, and expectations in what we experience, and thus we become mentally stable. Misery and suffering die out for lack of feeding."

Can you explain this more: "Chogtyam Trungpa seems to have turned "Ignorance" into a homunculus. It is important to understand when reviewing this material that the Buddha did not teach in terms of dualism or non-dualism."

This is the first of his writings that I have read and have yet to form an opinion about it. I have an open minded curiosity to different people's understandings at present, as within them, there could be water for the seed ...? You may have read much more of his writings ... is this an essential position and can you not identify with various parts of self operating that he describes here?

I also looked up pratityasamutpada thank you. There is a brief overview here for anyone else who is interested: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pratītyasamutpāda

Hi, Blue,

What I mean is that Chogyam "personifies" ignorance, talking about it like a TV preacher might talk about "the Devil", as if it were in control of us and thinking for itself.

The Buddha did not teach that all things are paradoxes or polarities. He spoke of his "Middle Way" that transcended extremes, mostly in the context of transcending black/white thinking fallacies: "Either there is reincarnation or there is not" -- each is a speculative view that the Buddha rendered irrelevant with his own teachings and practices. The Buddha also did not teach that we have an innate "Buddha Nature".

Do you know much about Chogyam Trungpa's life?

Wikipedia is not a reliable source to discover the teachings of the Buddha. The listings pertaining to Buddhism have been overrun and are controlled by adherents of the tibetan religion, and are skewed terribly with the worldviews of that religion, which bear little resemblance to, and have little in common with, what the Buddha taught.

If you wish to understand paticcasamuppada as the Buddha taught it, go to Phra P. A Payutto's analysis at http://www.buddhanet.net/cmdsg/coarise5.htm

Absoluty true dear stuka,

Even when I agree with what you stated, I just want to add some feedback to it.

As you may know I am Soto Zen practitoner and in our practice we have in high esteem the practice of the middel way with that same meaning: to avoid extreme postures that come through judgemental mind. Sometimes you can find this as "polarities" in the meaning that are those extreme postures.

I am aware that "Buddha Nature" probably was not teached by the Buddha but this term, at least in our case, is used by Soto Zen tradition, thorugh Dogen Zengi, to point to the fact that any kind of person can practice the Buddha teachings, that any kind of person is looking for true happiness in this life, here and now, but maybe in an unwisefull way... stained by that kind of Ignorance that make us run away form what we dislike and to attach what we like.

Also in Soto Zen, Buddha Nature is understood as "Fu" meaning a kind of inner strength or confidence so to the practice of the teachings.

Namaste dear stuka,

http://www.buddhismwithoutboundaries...lies/hands.gif

That is a great news Blueseasparkling,

In Soto Zen we have what is known as a Seshin. A seshin is the great chance we have to be concentrated like in a retreat for the practice of Zazen and between lagre periods of sitting meditation (za-Zen) we can have one or two teishos (a short speech form the experience of the roshi) in the Koan style.

It is important to say that the environment we have in a seshin is of an absolut and tight silence. And it is wonderfull. I realy enjoy that so much! So there is no room for speaking to each other even when we are washing dishes. Also there are no cafee brakes to speack. At the end of the seshin we have a time for a feed back of our experience and then we leave the dojo.

I was told that some time before, some new members go through what is like the process of drug detoxication... the first days they seem highly anxious... and uncomfortable... That is why a seshin is just recomended by the roshi by invitation only and after an intense and regular practice of zazen.

Now, a Koan (the essence of a Teisho) makes you stop your chattering, discursive and scattered mind so to make it silent and develop a direct insight or knowledge: this is the meaning of Negemisho or the way of silent teaching. This ]Here[/url] and here also you can find an exaple of what we mean by silent teaching.

Silent learning has to be achieved through the practice of zazen and bringing that into our daily life. A silent mind is that mind that has reached the state of dispasion through the practice of the middle way and zazen.

Zazen is the backbone of Soto Zen school. Silent learning comes with a deep awareness of the middel way so disspasion. We need seshins very much so to practice silence starting with not talking but to evolve as an insight so that with practice, even when you are speaking your mind is still, mindfull and dispasionate.

http://www.buddhismwithoutboundaries...lies/hands.gif

Right View is a core aspect to understand the Four Noble Truths and the Eightfold Noble Path. Both teachings are not realy separate if you understand the first, the second is understood. If you take over the second, the first is realized. Even when this teachings are taught as "steps", there are no such steps. Meditation helps to the development of Right View... The Noble Livelihood brings you Right View or in some other way, The Noble Viwe brings you a Right Livelihood, a Noble Mindfulness, Concentration and Wisdom.

Mindfulness and concetration are given by Zazen that in some way is like both, Vipasana and Samatha.

To understand Right View I take the statemente made by Stuka here:

So in this case, Right View is to "see" things, people, ideas, events... with out the veil of Ignorance. We "ignore" that clinging and running away are at the root of suffering.

As stuka told, paticcasamuppada or Dependent Origination complements or brings the understanding of the process that is to be understood so to develop Righ View.

Now, silent learning has a lot to do with this:

In Zen we devote very little to intelectual understanding and we go directly to the integration process through a very strict and intense practice of zazen that gives us the strenght (Gyoji) for develping this particular Zen attitude toward practice.

Namaste dear Blueseasparkling,

http://www.buddhismwithoutboundaries...lies/hands.gif

This is a good source for whats about right view here but also this one has some insightfull reflextions that maybe can result of a usefull guidance.

Namaste dear Blue,

http://www.buddhismwithoutboundaries...lies/hands.gif

This is surprising to me - not because I believed it was so but because I recall discussions saying exactly this. Could you please provide references that would clear up what Buddha did teach in regards to what, if anything, is innate for us humans?

BTW, I have trouble with the idea that a serial rapist has Buddha nature.

That statement was given by stuka, so it could be nice to see if he gives us some feedback about. About this, I just commented that:

because I do not have quick references for this. The ones "we" have are given by Dogen Zengi in his Koans...

http://www.buddhismwithoutboundaries...lies/hands.gif

A quick note here: this will not be the place to discuss Buddha Nature, as this is a thread to do with psychology.

The proper location will be a new thread entirely.

Thanissaro's description of "mundane" right view vs. "superior' right view falls along the lines of the abhidhammic/commentarial tradition that claims that both views are necessary for liberation, starting (and usually, for almost everyone) with karma and reincarnation, and only moving to the "superior" right view later, sometimes reserving this "superior" right view only for arhants.

Their is a serious misrepresentation going on here in the translation and exposition of the Buddha's teachings concerning "right view". Thanissaro is obviously relying a great deal on the Maha Cattarisaka Sutta ( http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipit....117.than.html ), in which the Buddha describes the two forms of "right view", and indeed illustrates one of these views - the one that is unique to him -- as superior.

In this sutta, the Buddha delineates several speculative views that preceded him: some of which he describes as wrong view, whose opposites he described as "right view with asavas", and his own sort of "right view", which he described as "without asavas". But what does this "asavas" mean? Does this mean "mundane"? What does "mundane" mean in this context, and does it mean what the Buddha meant?

There are several translations for "asava", including "taints", "fermentations", "defilements", "pollutants", "effluents" (from effluvium, which means "sewage"), and "outflows". What does this mean, "right view with defilements", "right view with taints, pollutants, sewage"?

We tend to see three or four qualities defined as "asava": sensuality (attachment to "sense pleasures"), speculative view, becoming (clinging to notions of "me" and "mine"), and ignorance.

So this "right view with asavas" is a "right view" (in that belief in it leads one toward ethical behavior), but it is "asava" because it is based in speculative view, attachment to sensuality and illusions of status and ownership, and ignorance. This is what Thanissaro is calling "mundane right view" and pushing as a compulsory precursor to "superior right view".

How does the Buddha define "superior right view"? He calls it "noble right view that is without asava, liberative, a factor of the path" (sammaditthi ariyo anasava lokuttara maggaphala) . Why is it called "noble"? It is the highest view the purest view. It is untainted by greed, aversion, and ignorance; the roots of sensuality, status and ownership, ignorance, and speculative view. It transcends superstition, greed, aversion and speculative view; these things are not necessary to hold together the Buddha's "right view", and it is a factor of the Noble Eightfold Path, the path to liberation as the Buddha defined it.

How does the Buddha define "noble right view"? He defines it in terms of discernment, in terms of what we can see and know for ourselves. He further states that "the ending of the effluents is for one who knows and sees, not for one who does not know and does not see."

Seeing and knowing what, he asks? Seeing and knowing paticcasamuppada in the here and now. Seeing and knowing the effect of ignorance and self-grasping on our perception of the world, and the connection between that influence of ignorance and self-grasping and misery and suffering that we cause for ourselves and others.

This is not a superstition-based right view, not a speculation-based right view, it is a right view based in seeing and knowing the relationships between intention, action, and consequence. It is very much based in an ethics of reciprocity, an expended form of what we know of today as the "Golden Rule". This is what makes the Buddha's "right view" far superior to the superstitions that preceded him, which he called "right view with defilements".

Thanks stuka, this is what I understand is the essence of a "Right View",

http://www.buddhismwithoutboundaries...lies/hands.gif

The Buddha often spoke of an "untaught, ordinary person, who has no regard for the noble ones" (has not heard the Dhamma). That person grows to crave for and cling to sense experience, unless he hears the Dhamma and becomes aware of that craving and clinging, and takes steps to eradicate it:


"Bhikkhus, that child grows and his faculties mature and he plays games that children play, such as playing with toy ploughs, turning somersaults, making toy wind mills with palm leaves, making small carts and bows. Bhikkhus, that child grows and his faculties mature [further] and the youth enjoys the five strands of sense pleasures; he lives enticed by pleasing and agreeable forms cognizable by eye consciousness, agreeable sounds cognizable by ear consciousness, agreeable smells cognizable by nose consciousness, agreeable tastes cognizable by tongue consciousness and agreeable touches cognizable by body consciousness.

"On seeing a form with the eye he becomes greedy for a pleasant form, or averse to a disagreeable form. He abides with mindfulness of the body not established and with a limited mind. He does not know the deliverance of mind nor the deliverance through wisdom as it really is, where unwholesome states cease completely. He follows the path of agreeing and disagreeing and experiences whatever feeling that arises - pleasant, unpleasant, or neither unpleasant nor pleasant. Delighted and pleased with those [pleasant] feelings he appropriates them. This arouses interest in those feelings. That interest for feelings is clinging. From clinging, there arises becoming, from becoming arises birth, from birth old age, sickness and death, grief, lament, unpleasantness, displeasure and distress. Thus arises the complete mass of dukkha.

"Hearing a sound with the ear...., (same as last paragraph)

"Smelling a smell with the nose,...

"Tasting a taste with the tongue,....

"Feeling a touch with the body,.....

"Thinking a thought with the mind, he becomes greedy for a pleasant experience, or averse to a disagreeable one. He abides with mindfulness of the body not established and with a limited mind. He does not know the deliverance of mind nor the deliverance through wisdom as it really is, where unwholesome states cease completely. He follows the path of agreeing and disagreeing and experiences whatever feeling that arises - pleasant, unpleasant, or neither unpleasant nor pleasant. Delighted and pleased with those [pleasant] feelings he appropriates them. This arouses interest in those feelings. That interest for feelings is clinging. From clinging, there arises becoming, from becoming arises birth, from birth old age [decay], sickness and death, grief, lament, unpleasantness, displeasure and distress. In short, the complete mass of dukkha."


-- MN 38, Maha Tanhasankhaya Sutta

Wonderfull...

Seems it's pointing at the Dependent Origination doctrine... http://www.buddhismwithoutboundaries...ilies/wink.gif

Thanks,

http://www.buddhismwithoutboundaries...lies/hands.gif

Exactly! http://www.buddhismwithoutboundaries...ilies/grin.gif