Early Buddhist Philosophy of Mind
Вставка
- Опубліковано 28 лип 2024
- What was the philosophy of mind in early Buddhism? I'll look at several different aspects of the Buddha's analysis of the mind, including a couple of topics that are important in a Western philosophical context but that the Buddha didn't discuss.
📙 Check out my new book, A Handbook of Early Buddhist Wisdom, with a Foreword by Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi: books2read.com/buddhisthandbook
🧡 If you find this material useful, check out my Patreon page and get fun benefits like exclusive videos, audio-only versions, and extensive show notes: / dougsseculardharma
🧡 You can also make donations through: paypal.me/dougsdharma
☸️ Free mini-course at the Online Dharma Institute: onlinedharma.org.
🎙Check out my podcast with Jon Aaron, Diggin' the Dharma: digginthedharma.com/
✅ Videos mentioned:
Mind and Body: What's the Difference? - • Mind and Body: What's ...
The Buddha and Free Will - • The Buddha and Free Will
✅ Suttas mentioned:
suttacentral.net/dn2/en/sujato
suttacentral.net/mn19/en/sujato
✅ Other material:
Calvin and Hobbes cartoon: www.gocomics.com/calvinandhob...
Webpage: www.dougsdharma.com/
Facebook: / onlinedharmainstitute
Mastodon: mindly.social/@dougsdharma
Twitter: / dougsdharma
❤️ Thanks to Patreon Patrons:
Anonymous (2)
DunJing
John Oborne
Scarlett Farrow
Jimmy Maa
Debbie Mattison Fine Art
Steve H.
Ron Peat
Matthew Smith
JC
Shantha Wengappuli
Karma_CAC
Jorge Seguel
Christopher Apostolof
GailJM
Brett Merritt
David Bell
T Pham
VCR
Upayadhi
Andi and Erik
ATGuerrero686
Michael Scherrer
khobe schofield
Alex Perdomo
Benji Forsyth
Blaze Way
Sonny Flink
Steve Marlor
Joy L Lee
Andrew Tom
Anthony Tucker
Karlee R
Ethan M
Billy in Singapore
Olivia Otter
Carl Lennartson
xiao mao
Jeff Harvey
Andrew Ingrouille
Kenneth Grandchamp
Doug Fonner
Rene Gariepy
Russell Needham
Smoggyrob
Mac Roja
Bernardo
Clémence Ortega Douville
Kwan Alex
Scott Johnston
Richard J Beninger
Nathanael O. Arnquist
SaturnianMandala
Trin P
Letesa Isler
Dorien Izel
Robert Paterson
Jake Tobiason
Louvenia Ortega
Steve S.
Richard Rappuhn
Sarah Kress
Miri F Fairchild
John Aaron
Paul Niklewski
Kong Ing Kai
Dave Gorman
00:00 Intro
01:32 The mind-body problem
03:47 The structure of the mind
08:32 The causal structure of the mind
13:36 The non-self mind
17:06 Free will
20:05 The Buddha’s philosophy of mind generally
Note: as an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. Amazon links are affiliate links where I will earn a very small commission on purchases you make, at no additional cost to you. This goes a tiny way towards defraying the costs of making these videos. Thank you!
🧡 If you find benefit in my videos, consider supporting the channel by joining us on Patreon and get fun extras like exclusive videos, ad-free audio-only versions, and extensive show notes: www.patreon.com/dougsseculardharma 🙂
📙 You can find my book here: books2read.com/buddhisthandbook
Thank you for clarifying this subject. As I've delved deeper into early Buddhism, with the help of your videos and book on Buddhist Wisdom, I have come to see the Buddha as the preeminent psychologist. There have been attempts in depth psychology to come up with a systematic formulation that can encompass the complete development of being. The closest they have come is in realizing that there is a growth hierarchy. But none have provided a methodology for achieving this growth. Buddhism covers the complete range. When looked at from this perspective, the Buddha's teachings become a universal source that can enrich any view of human development because of its practicality.
🙏
Just some Days Ago I have seen the Holy Relics of the Buddha, it was literally his burnt Bones, and i was feeling like I am seeing the Buddha Himself as if he was himself there, It was a very emotional Moment for me, because His contribution to the Mankind aren't next to anyone.
I don't want to prick your joy, but if those bones were his, they only constitute those atoms that were there at the end of his life. Actually the atoms in the bones are continually cycled - that is why we need to eat certain foods which contain calcium. So there is no permanent thing that was the Buddha, we are all changing. See the link below about calcium homeostasis from the NIH. If this upsets you, you may find joy again that it is almost certain you have one atom of calcium that once was actually part of the Buddha's body. I find that very interesting.
ods.od.nih.gov/factsheets/Calcium-HealthProfessional/
Thank you Doug for another lovely lesson. We have a lot less control over our minds than most typically imagine. Meditation and mindfulness practice reveal this. I've caught myself numerous times in the exact arising of a new thought or sensation I have absolutely no free will/control over.
Yes absolutely! 😄
I am from Sri Lanka. Thanks for your great effort.
So nice of you. 🙏
Emgaging and thorough, one of my favorites recently. Wonderfully clear but concise. Thank you, Doug, well done!
Awesome, thank you!
Thanks so much, Doug! You are very masterful at explaining this practice in an accessible and practical way. Looking forward to 💸 as well!
You're very welcome!
100K congrats!
Thank you!!
Thank you Doug! You always make really neato videos
My pleasure!
Chris Kaplan says: "Wonderfully clear but concise." I couldn't agree more. Thanks, Doug! 🐱🙏
Good day Xiao Mao, wishing you well this fine morning. 🙏
@@chriskaplan6109
Thanks! Same to you, my friend! 🙏
Thanks so much for both of your comments! 🙏😊
Doug, could you consider compiling a video that synthesizes contemporary research into human psychology and Buddha's teachings?
For example, the book thinking fast and slow by Daniel Kahneman discusses a structure of the mind and even touches upon happiness and dukkha in some ways.
I have a strong intuition that many of these theses are intertwined and early Buddhist teachings (+your interpretation of them) have been a succinct synthesis of all of them.
Once again, thank you for your videos, I have learnt a lot of things from you and hope to continue doing so.
Thanks, it's something I'll keep in mind. I am familiar with Kahneman's work, but it's not something I've quite got my head around just yet.
Thank you 👍
🙏😊
what a great Calvin and Hobbes! profound.
Yes, there are so many good ones!
The text I have been working on is highly related to the Yogacara school (a.k.a. cittamatra, or jnanapada) sometimes dubbed the "mind-only" school. Alex Weyman points out that the specific Buddha quote from which that term derives does not mean, "everything is mind," but rather, "everything flows (descends or inherits) from mind". So it would seem to believe that the mind is the origin and the body comes from there.
But in what is usually considered her "explanation of Buddhist embryology," Yogini Cinta creates the body-mind from vasanas becoming skandhas becoming the kalala (which is roughly zygote). Further, she says "Prtvi starts this and the others gather" (presence of female deities in chaitya/stupa art pre-dates depiction of Buddha in statues). Prtvi is associated with rupa (form). But it's more complex than just that, because she does a long section on the indriya (senses) and indriyagrama (sense organs). Where ignorance, desire, anger, etc. come in is that inability to hold the mind still when being blown around by the forces of samsara is caused by not being able to remain detached from the traces (vasana) of these distractions.
She does use the phrases associated with Yogacara's everything flowing from mind. That makes that realm of thought much more complicated than it is usually given to be.
Wonderful 🙏🏼
Thank you! 🙏
It was a very good touch using the Calvin and Hobbes strip to illustrate your point in this video. It is so very effective. Many of the comic strips are funny, innocent, sophisticated and philosophical all at the same time. This particular one humorously illustrates the constant conflicts within one's mind, that is, common sense vs desire. We usually know the risks we are taking when doing things (such as wanting to have fun in the comic strip) yet we are often tempted to just say "what the heck!"
Yes exactly! It's what makes Calvin and Hobbes so much fun to read. 😄
"What is mind ? It doesn't matter ... What is matter ?... I don't mind" 😅
Never mind-it dosn't matter😎
Legendary !! 🙂
@@DipayanPyne94 👍😉
😄😄
Interesting thanks
Thanks for watching!
This was really useful thank you! I'm about to start my third viewing to try and fill a few gaps that I may have adhd-ed out on and didn't quite fully grasp. The concept of viewing the products of the mind as a sort of 6th sense, not physic but rather like the other 5, just makes sense to me.
It is an interesting way to look at it. However the objects of that sense are quite different from those of the other five.
@@DougsDharma right, I didn't mean they are identical. My sense of smell is drastically different than my sense of hearing, just as an example. My sense of morality is drastically different than my sense of time. The way in which the products of the mind are similar to the other senses is that we largely have no control over it. I have little to no control over what I see or smell, or the fact that I automagically label everything and just like I largely have no control over if I feel like something was wrong in the moral sense of the word. In that example, I saw or heard an action and the reaction was a feeling that could be given a label like "that was morally wrong" just sort of happened without any effort on my part in a similar way as if I had smelled something disgusting. I also have little to no control over my sense of time just as another example. These things just sort of happen to us and some we have more and some less or no influence on/over
*edit* I was looking at a research paper not that long ago that suggested that there is a strong link between a person's sense moral wrong and their sense of disgust(as in rotten food). Meaning the same region in the brain shows elevated activation during the both disgust and moral wrong
Mind n mind, the great confusion for beginners. Self and self in Hinduism. Unless it's pointed out to people this could cause great confusion. But, as Mind and mind, Self n self are one and the same, the confusion falls away eventually.
Thank you :)
My pleasure. 😊
Fantastic video Doug! I have personally come to understand the 5 aggregates best as an understanding of the personality distinguished in 5 states. We could say vision, cognition, perception, emotion, and action which mirrors the 5 states of being, thinking, perceiving, feeling & doing. One thing i find interesting is that it may be possible that Buddhas disciples misunderstood his teaching on the 5 aggregates. Lets use the analogy of a car. If you ask me to describe a car in 5 parts i could say engine, steering wheel, windows, exhaust, & tires. It wouldnt make sense if i said engine, steering wheel, windows, exhaust, & car. The car is what were distinguishing into 5 parts. In that same way, personality IS form so it doesnt make sense to include form as the 5th aggregate because form is what we are breaking down or distinguishing into 5 parts. A human being is a form of life and each form consists of a brain/body complex which is what is described as the 5 aggregates in buddhism. 4 parts of the brain & the 5th part the body. As far as the mind body problem goes, the body is just a thought in the mind as far as Indian philosophy goes. The mind is the universe in indian philosophy which is life itself. So the mind materializes as the body and the universe in the “dream of life” called idealism where youre everyone and everything. Life exists independent of form but forms exist dependent on life. Therefore the mind exists independent of the body & the body is either dependent on or interdependent with the mind. The mind is independent of thoughts but thoughts are dependent on the mind which is the nature of emptiness or selflessness. When we are born, we would say life has come into form which is the conception, crucifixion, and resurrection where the mind is nailed to the body in the infinite transformation of energy where birth is death in eternal life forever here & now; the kingdom of heaven as the state of being(I AM) which is our self as the self life itself, our metaphysical immortality. 🙏☮️❤️
the view that persons and the mind were emergent properties of the body/organs/form was a position held by charvakas during the time of the buddha, who were explicitly rebuked. you should stop your revisionism.
🙏
🙏😊
sādhu sādhu sadhu
🙏
Thank you. Probably, a Citta/mind arises during an existing moment of a matter unit while producing Cittaja Rupa (mindly matter), depending on the formations of the material unit called Rupa Kalapa/Zone. And then, the vanishing moment of a matter unit would host the existing moment of the Citta/mind moment. The existing moment of the Citta/mind is not material, and it belongs to the immaterial category called Nama/Name. The Citta vanishes during the next arising moment of the matter unit. The next arising moment of the Citta/mind can happen during the existing moment of the same matter unit until the Citta/mind arises on another matter unit during its fist existing moment. The previous Citta/mind moment could vanish during the arising moment of the new matter unit. I explained it based on Tripitaka and its commentaries.
Yes perhaps so, in this video I'm discussing early Buddhism via the suttas rather than the later abhidhamma method.
@@DougsDharma, There are no texts of early Buddhism without abhidhamma. It says, Abhidhamma was in Suttas.
@@smlanka4uthe sautrantika which have an extremely more sophisticated comprehension of the dharma assert the abhidharma texts were written by arhats as teachings aids to assist ppl into achieving sautrantika mental labeling.
without it, one remains in the dustbin of theravada etc, forever asserting negations as functioning things, asserting impermanence and universals as positive momentary phenomenon.... all because they cannot reach sautrantika vipassana realising mental labeling, granting comprehension of how negations can be objects of knowledge wo being functioning things, etc.
I disagree with you that the Buddha was not concerned with the mind-body problem. He defined the mind-body system and called it name-form, a nidana in dependent origination in SN12.1 and SN12.2. Consciousness also serves as a mind-body connection (consciousness between name and form) in the Seamstress Sutta. Also the inter-dependency between consciousness and name-form in the Two Sheaves of Reed Sutta.
There is definitely a kind of interdependency; the Buddha believed in minds and bodies. The "mind-body problem" is the ontological question of which one is primary, or whether both exist independently of one another. I did an earlier video on the question here: ua-cam.com/video/WlAVNOiNj8g/v-deo.html
So the mind is real, but it cannot be taken as a solid entity that can be viewed as the self
How can you call it real if it has no solid entity and no self existence?
@@saralamuni I meant it figuratively not literally. More like how the mind is not an illusion
@@sonamtshering194 how is it not an illusion exactly?
@@saralamuni Because we are able to reflect on the past, think on the present and plan for the future. It also shows its presence in the form of intuition when sometimes we just know something without being able to explain it. All of which shows that the mind influences our experiences and actions.
@@sonamtshering194 it’s all in your head
It's pretty silly to ignore the fact that human behavior is largely driven by irrational, unconscious motives.
dharma assumes you have or will soon get shamata, at which point the subconscious and unconscious become obvious. in other words your folk introspection has been irrelevant in Indian thought for 5000yrs min. before it began increasingly degenerating.
Early Buddhism is the hard way. the small vehicle as it is known, mostly spreading to south east Asia or Myanmar and Thailand and combodia today, Lao as well. The great vehicle is the northern, such as china, then spreading to vietnam, korea and japan. It is more intellectual way like the Chan and the easiest methods are Pureland. I perfer practice Chan buddhism and pureland, It is so easy to understand and most things can be used in practice informally, simple and practical. I find the Thailand and myanmar etc, they have too many layers of their culture traditions adding to it. But buddhism has 84000 methods... so it is fair , not everyone like easiest methods or the smartest methods. early buddhism is basic levels.
Not "small", not "hard", not "basic" but rather "foundational".
Theravada or the teachings of the Elders or Early Buddhism is the *FOUNDATION* for all other traditions which evolved later.