Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Buddha and the unconscious
Tavs
Leeds Explorer
Did the Buddha, in his own terms, ever talk about the unconscious ?
0
Comments
This is a good question. My own knowledge is lacking, I don't remember ever having learned about Buddhist ideas of consciousness in the modern context of the unconscious. I'd put the odds on yes, but can't give you anything.
My guess is @Jason would be able to up a sutta or two if he checks in sometime.
Did the Buddha? I don't know, but (some of his) descendants put together a theory of 8 consciousness and I would think the 8th, Alaya, sounds like subconscious but maybe not the same as modern psychologists conceive of it. I haven't looked into how these teachings started or if you could say that they came from or of "the Buddha".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight_Consciousnesses
I did a search for Buddhism and the unconscious and plenty of stuff came up, I didn't look deeply, but one summary of the page did mention the alaya like @Jeffrey pointed out.
Bearing in mind (pun intended) that the term “unconscious” is a modern psychological idea, one could say yes, the Buddha did speak about what we would now call the unconscious, because his understanding of the mind included every layer of mental activity, from what we’re clearly aware of to what lies deeply conditioned and unseen.
He may not have used the word “unconscious,” but he spoke of latent tendencies (anusaya) that stay hidden until they are stirred, mental formations (saṅkhāra) that shape how we think and act without our awareness, and ignorance (avijjā) as the root that keeps these patterns alive. In this way, the Buddha recognised both the seen and unseen workings of the mind, showing that liberation comes through understanding the whole of it, not just the surface.
Thank you everyone 🙏🙂
This might help you if you choose to dig deeper…
https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/handbook-of-indian-psychology/buddhist-theory-of-unconscious-mind-alayavijnana/F21F8A46B07057FDCD23368D7CE85EB9
Thanks Jeroen. I always like to dig deeper 🙂
My knowledge in this area used to be better, but I think like @Jeffrey said the Alaya is a later development and getting into this territory is where many of the Mahayana schools differ. I believe Thich Naht Hahn's tradition as well as Dogen's zen adhere to the 8 consciousnesses which is also known as the Yogacara school of emptiness. The Tibetan tradition largely follows the Madhyamika school, which itself has differing understandings and sects.
Sounds like there is no official census on the matter
If useful, we are the 'official'/'unofficial' consensus and 'it makes sense to me'
For example Yogacara always seems like intellectual waffle to me. I am too stoopid to engage in or with... Suits some in formal indoctrination curriculum's...
Yes you can speculate about abstract concepts forever but where does it get you?
This was why I liked Thich Nhat Hanh, he often laid the emphasis on experiencing, not on learning from books.
Yes it always comes back to learning from experience.
I am 95% sure that in one of his podcasts, Ajahn Sonna, abott of a Canadian Theravada Forrest Monastery, answers this very question and says the Buddha does not consider there is any 'unseen' unconcious beyond the concious workings od the mind (thoughts) and heart (feelings).
Even so, as @Shoshin1 has so eloquently stated, the Buddha clearly does take into account our various difficult-to-see conditionings, which we might be unaware of.
So maybe the difference is that western psychology posits a can-never-unearth unconcious, while the Buddha posits a can-unearth but with difficulty, practice and training unconconcious.
But I very well might be wrong on both counts.