Psychology of Buddhism. Monograph

Having spent 10 years in the sangha and having acquired a certain amount of knowledge, a diligent Buddhist monk is given an appropriate degree, which has different names in different Buddhist countries. The higher degree is given in another 10 years.

According to the tradition, Buddhist monks are not allowed to participate in social, economical and political life. This rule has been observed for more than 2500 years. Unlike in other religious systems, where power and religion, politicians and the clergy form a single whole (sometimes the clergy being the most powerful of the two, for example, in the Christian Middle Ages), the main duty of Buddhist monks is spiritual life and practice.

And it is quite right, as paramita (Sanskrit “crossing”, “means of salvation”) is absolutely impossible in real social life. Achieving Arhatship is like climbing upstairs: one has to make a lot of steps towards perfection. Paramita consists of 10 elements: generosity (dana), virtue, morality (sila), renunciation (nekkhamma), transcendental wisdom, insight (panna), energy, diligence (viriya), patience, tolerance (khanti), truthfulness, honesty (sacca), determination (adhitthana), loving-kindness (metta) and equanimity (upekkha).

Thus, the traditional method of studying Buddhism, which involves immersion into the socio-cultural environment (the Sangha) is either impossible (especially for women) or poses a lot of problems, connected with monastic rules and monastic way of life.

Living in the Sangha, one faces considerable cognitive and motivational difficulties. There seems to be no sense in learning Pali and Sanskrit, when everything has already been translated into modern languages. It is also not clear why memorizing huge amount of texts is necessary, when there are a lot of other ways of capturing and transferring knowledge. All this makes monastic service in many ways absurd.

However, the most difficult is the necessity to sacrifice one’s Ego, unique personality, life, methods of adaptation and self-realization, to limit one’s personality to the

227 rules for the sake of the ephemeral state of samadhi or nirvana.

Nowadays it is highly undesirable to adopt the strategy of the “weak Ego”, which consists in “giving oneself up” to the tradition, in delegating one’s will, way of thinking, choice, freedom and values to it.

Such strategy allows people:

-to introject existential meanings inherent in the tradition,

-to introject the values and the worldview of the tradition,

51

- to take advantage of the strength that one gains when he or she becomes a part of the community.

But if we are not ready to give up our will, consciousness, our unique way of feeling, understanding reality and interacting with life to the Procrustean bed of the tradition, we have to find another way. We have to find our own understanding of Buddhism, we have to learn to live according to the Buddhist tradition and at the same time to keep to our own strength, decisions and ideas.

We will have to let ourselves understand Buddhism without putting on white or yellow robes, as Nagarjuna, Ananda, Kashyapa, Padmasamphava, Asanga, Bodhidharma or Dalai Lama have done. Being critical and independent in our thoughts, we will ask ourselves:

- What did the Buddha mean when he said...

In this book we will proceed from the fact that we are free to interpret Buddhism and try to base our research on modern psychological science. In my opinion, the whole history of Buddhism was an attempt to understand what Buddha was talking about when he delivered his sermons.

We would also like to understand what he was keeping silent about. And why he was keeping silent about it.

2.3 Peculiarities of Buddhist Psychology

As we have already mentioned above, there has never been such science as psychology in Buddhism itself.

But there is a way of thinking that could be designated as psychology, though it is extremely complex and controversial. This is due to the fact that Buddha Shakyamuni provided us with a lot of different teachings.

He performed many deeds, but the principal one was the turning of the wheel of Dharma. If Buddha had achieved enlightenment, solved his koan and stopped at that point, it would have done no good to other people. His greatest act was the decision to share his teaching with other people, to tell them about his spiritual achievements. He opened the gates

to enlightenment for other living beings.

52

But Buddha never pushed people into these gates. They always had to make the first step themselves. With all his potential, Buddha could not wash off the desecration and could not transplant his own achievements, psychic states and insights into us. The only thing he could do to help every human being was to share his teaching.

Buddha’s teachings can be grouped in different ways. There are classifications based on time, audience, orientation, etc. For example, they can be divided into the Three Baskets (the Tripitaka): the Vinaya Pitaka is about monastic discipline, the Sutra Pitaka is about concentration and the Abhidharma Pitaka is about wisdom.

In terms of time, it is divided into the Three Turnings of the Wheel of Dharma. The First Turning includes the teaching about the Four Noble Truths. The Second Turning is about “marklessness” (emptiness, the absolute reality), the third one is the so-called “Wheel of Good Discrimination”. The First Turning belongs to the Hinayana, while the Second and the Third Turning - to the Mahayana School.

During the First Turning of the Wheel of Dharma Buddha preached the Four Noble Truths to those disciples who sought individual enlightenment and Arhatship and not Buddhahood, i.e. to those who chose the path of the Hinayana.

The Four Noble Truths consist of the truth about the Nature of Suffering, the truth about the Origin of Suffering, the truth about the Cessation of Suffering and the truth about the Path Leading to the Cessation of Suffering.

When Buddha preached the Four Noble Truths, he did not touch upon the concept of the depth of reality, or the absolute reality, as his disciples were not able to grasp it. They sought to stop the wheel of karma and put an end to suffering. While explaining his doctrine, Buddha always kept in mind motivation, potential and abilities of his pupils.

He did not speak about the emptiness (or voidness) on the level of the “Low Vehicle”. His disciples were either not able to believe in the truth about Sunyata, or were not able to grasp it. So he gave them what was essential for achieving individual enlightenment.

In the First Wheel of the Teaching all things exist in reality. There is no “Self”, but there are skandhas, the outside world, objects of perception, subjects of perception and the process of perception. There is a path, there is achievement and there are things to be discarded and things to be cultivated, the Noble Eightfold Path with prajna, sila and samadhi, the concept

of the absence of one’s own individual “Self”.

53

The second turning of the Wheel happened at Vulture Peak Mountain in Rajagriha, not far from Bodhgaya. This time Buddha’s audience comprised bodhisattvas and those who sought to become bodhisattvas, to achieve the ultimate enlightenment, the state of Buddha. Achieving Buddha (or Buddhahood) involves comprehension of the absolute truth in all its details and aspects, which are given in the Mahayana.

Here Buddha gave the teaching that was lately grouped into the so-called Prajnaparamita Sutras (prajna is wisdom comprehending the absolute reality; paramitas are perfections; thus, Prajnaparamita Sutras means “Sutras about the Perfection of Wisdom”).

Their principal idea is that there is nothing real, there is no path, no steps, no bodhisattvas, no buddhas, there is no this, no that, there is nothing at all. At first sight, it may seem that Buddha talks about the complete denial of everything (though he does not state the denial itself).

The third turning of the Wheel took place in Vaishali. It is called the “Wheel of Good Discrimination”. It you compare the first turning with the second one, you will find that they contradict one another, which is rather confusing. Buddha’s disciples could not understand what exactly was going on, either Buddha contradicted himself, or there was some hidden sense in what he did, when at first he said that everything existed and then asserted that there was nothing at all. In the third turning he explained that all phenomena could be divided into three groups:

-Limited phenomena. It concerns the limitations of the six types of consciousness due to the incorrect concept of the true and independent existence.

-Dependent phenomena. Awareness of the Basis of Everything, in which impressions are kept like seeds, and other aspects of consciousness exist as a continuum of similar moments, constantly influencing each other in the form of cause and effect. Perception of external objects is separated from the inner perceiving mind, which develops ambivalent attachment. (These two characteristics constitute relative truth. The absolute truth is the third aspect of existence).

54

-The absolute presence. Mind is simple (not compound) and free from limited and dependent phenomena. It is called the “nonconceptual awareness free from duality”.

In the third turning Buddha explained that the first turning was shaped for those to whom it was given, it was not his final intent. And when in the second turning he said that nothing existed he meant that the non-existing phenomena were the phenomena of the absolute presence, but that absolute reality did exist. Thus he divided the existing and the non-existing phenomena. That is why the third turning is called the “Wheel of Good Discrimination”.

So, we see that there are three degrees of complexity aiming at three different audiences.

In Varnasi Buddha turned the wheel of Dharma and preached the doctrine of the Four Noble Truths to shravakas, followers of the spiritual tradition of hearers.

The doctrine of the second turning, which took place in Gridhrakuta, was oriented towards people with high mental abilities, the followers of the Mahayana spiritual tradition.

In the third turning in Vaishali his audience consisted of the Mahayana followers with middle and low mental ability. He preached the doctrine of the existing and nonexisting phenomena, appeared in the aspect of Vajradhara and set forth the Tantric Buddhism (the Vajrayana Buddhism).

If we look at Buddhist texts translated into the rough and primitive modern language, we will see that there are three languages and three audiences:

-the language designed for shravakas, who have inner readiness to take in Buddhism, its morality and ontology, those who would like to escape from suffering and to learn about the concept of cause and effect. It is the language of the Hinayana or the “Theravada”.

-the language designed for monks, who chose the path of sadhana, those who wanted to do more than others, to gain knowledge about compassion and wisdom. It is the language of the “Mahayana”.

-the language designed for “advanced” Buddhists (Arhats, bodhisattvas), for those who place great trust in Buddhahood, Buddha nature and in their own

nature. It is the language of the “Vajrayana”.

55

It is evident that if we analyze Buddha’s audience, we will not find there professional psychologists, philosophers, teachers, psychiatrists or experts in culture. We do not see ourselves as shravakas, monks or bodhisattvas.

So the question is: which of the turnings of the Wheel is subject to psychological study? Which of them is closer to reality?

Even among Buddhists there are those who do not accept the third turning as the ultimate one, thinking that Buddha’s final word was in the second turning, and the third one was made only for particular disciples. Mahayana researchers argue about what teachings are subject to further interpretation and what teachings are not. Most Tibetan scholars believe that the Madhyamaka is based on the second turning, i.e. on the Prajnyaparamita Sutras.

Many think that the first turning, as well as the second one, is not Buddha’s final intent and therefore may undergo further interpretation. However, the followers of the Hinayana, whose views are based on the first turning, do not consider the last two turnings to be Buddha’s teachings at all.

If we leave aside Buddhist schools and look at the Buddhist tradition from the point of view of Buddhist authorities, we will face a similar confusing situation.

From the point of view of Nagarjuna, those sutras that focus on the description of the absolute truth (i.e. the second turning of the Wheel of Dharma) are not subject to further interpretation, in other words, they represent Buddha’s final teaching. Meanwhile, the sutras which speak about the relative truth (steps, morality, meditation practices, etc.) are subject to interpretation.

Another Buddhist authority, Asanga by name, believed that the third turning was not subject to interpretation, as he recognized the concept of phenomena division. According to him, the other turnings were subject to interpretation.

As we can see, even the two great experts in Buddhism are not able to clarify the situation and explain what Buddha meant by giving the three different teachings.

For these reasons, we will recognize all of the three Turnings of the Wheel of

Dharma as Buddha’s teaching, subject to analysis and interpretation.

Thus, the object of our study is the Buddhist tradition, particularly texts which help to clarify the basic categories of modern psychology, to supplement and expand their content

and interpretation.

56

The subject of our study is Buddhist psychology. More precisely, the part of the Buddhist teaching which from the European point of view is relative to psychology.

2.4. Some Remarks on the Noble Truths and the Middle Path

The path leading to enlightenment is called the “Middle Path”. Historically, the term can be explained as follows: the “path” really lies in the middle between two extremes,

Vedic religion with cults, rituals and sacrificial offerings at one extreme and ascetics and hermits of ancient India, practicing self-torturing in search for the truth at the other extreme.

Prince Siddhartha realized at an early age that such categories as good and evil, love and hatred, conscience and dishonesty are relative.

As you know, Gautama formulated the principle of the Middle Path even before his enlightenment. It happened after a period of extreme asceticism, which brought him very close to death.

In Buddhist scriptures the principle is represented as a kind of a system, free from extremes of indulgence and self-torturing. Extreme asceticism made Gautama come to the conclusion, that the Middle Path “could not be achieved by the one who had lost his strength”. “These two extremes ought not to be practiced by the one who has gone forth from household life. There is addiction to indulging in sense-pleasures, which is low and coarse, the way of ordinary people, unworthy, and unprofitable; and there is addiction to selfmortification, which is painful, unworthy and unprofitable... The Middle Path gives vision, knowledge, leads to calm insight, enlightenment and nirvana. It is the Noble Eightfold path, and nothing else. Namely: right understanding, right thought, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness and right concentration”.

If we let our understanding of the Middle Path go beyond the notions of asceticism, emotional involvement and passion, we will see that it concerns avoiding the extremes of nihilism and permanence, and the extremes of non-existence and existence.

Buddhism as a philosophy adheres to the principle of the Middle Path, while nonBuddhist schools either fall into the extremes of nihilism, or the extremes of permanence. Some schools claim that there is a permanent Creator, the one who has made the world come

into being. Thus, they fall into the extreme of permanence, as according to the Buddhist

57

teaching, there are no permanent phenomena. Everything changes every moment of time. Even the lowest Buddhist philosophical schools admit that there is nothing permanent.

Thus, every school, which claims the existence of the Creator, the permanent absolute, the sanctity of truth, the existence of philosophy of the eternal, the unchangeability of character and temperament, fall into the extremes of permanence.

All nihilistic doctrines, asserting that nothing exists, that phenomena appear without any reason, by themselves, that results are not necessarily caused by something, fall into the extremes of nihilism.

Buddhism, in philosophical, psychological and psychotechnical terms, is a path free from the extremes of nihilism and permanence.

The Middle Path also implies orientation towards the states existing outside samsara, outside the external world, towards the achievement of nirvana.

The Middle Path is also associated with a consciousness that faces inwards. It claims that man is a separate world, self-generating, self-destructing or self-saving.

The Middle Path is you, and you alone, - your consciousness, destiny, fate, suffering, passion and liberation.

In this sense, it is totally different from the path of the European Ego-consciousness. Moreover, any modern non-buddhist, whose consciousness is directed outwards, towards the worldly existence, the external expansion, for fame, money, sex, material possession and power, etc.

According to Buddhism, the Middle Path is the only way to achieve nirvana and to stop the wheel of karma. Psychoanalysis, psychosynthesis or Hesychasm do not lead to overcoming samsara, as they also fall into the extremes of nihilism and permanence.

All modern psychological, philosophical, pedagogical, psychological and theological systems recognize the existence of “Self”. There are big, small, unique, mediocre, material, social, bodily, mental, etc. selves. In Buddhism, “Self” does not exist.

And while modern culture is person-oriented, we cannot even speak about any

“path”. Even if we talk about it, it will not become knowledge or understanding of the true state of things. While there is “Self”, there is no path.

58

Unlike other religions and philosophical systems, Buddhism does not recognize the presence of God. Nobody, except for ourselves, creates the world. While all intellectual European speculations talk about the eternal soul, Buddhism denies its existence.

According to Buddhism, the only way to eliminate desecration lies through the knowledge of the absence of “Self”, God, Creator or soul, through cultivating the absence of these permanent phenomena. And without eliminating desecration one cannot achieve nirvana.

Thus, the most sophisticated concepts of personal growth and transformation, developed by Freud, Jung, Adler, Assagioli, Perls, Grof, Roger, make no sense at all. Nowadays there is nothing but increasing absurdity and uselessness, as nobody understands the true meaning of the Middle Path.

Now let us turn to the concept of “noble”. The Four Truths and the Eightfold Path are of “noble birth”. Buddha’s dharma is an ancient path, based on the venerable tradition of the Upanishads philosophy and psychotechnical culture of shramanas, the great yogis. The Four Noble Truths are as noble, as noble people, metals and stones are rare.

It does not mean that we are not able to read or learn Buddhist scriptures. We can learn them as easily as the Lord’s Prayer. But even if we read mantras for a thousand times, if we sing sacred texts or read them as sermons to others, it will not change our life.

The Four Truths and the Eightfold Path are noble, because their understanding is extremely rare.

To understand them means to change oneself.

To understand them means to transform one’s view of the world completely.

To understand them means to wake up and to look at people, at the animate and inanimate world with Buddha’s eyes.

If it does not happen, there is no understanding.

I am writing this text in the hotel “Krasnii Kholm”. Outside it is late autumn night, full of darkness, sleet and grayness.

Understanding the Four Noble Truths is like going out and finding a diamond of 500 carats on wet asphalt.

Which is difficult, impossible or almost impossible.

As difficult as to understand the Noble Truths.

59

Not because we are stupid.

But because it is difficult to wake up and leave your shelter, your ordinary life with wife, children, a comfortable apartment, donuts that you eat before going to sleep and a fast car.

2.5. Psychological Content of the Four Noble Truths

The Four Noble Truths, formulated by Buddha in his first sermon, represent the essence of Buddhism.

2.5.1. The First Truth – “There Is Suffering”

The concept of “suffering” in Buddhist philosophy is not a simple psychological category, which usually represents unpleasant emotional experience. Suffering is the only valid evidence of any form of existence (“sabbe sankhara dukkha” – all things are filled with suffering).

As you know, Rene Descartes founded his philosophy on the proposition “I think therefore I am”.

In Buddhism existence is associated with a more universal empirical principle inherent in all living beings - suffering.

It is rather difficult to see and analyze reality through the category of suffering, as our binary thinking, based on its empirical experience, always finds the opposite of suffering - pleasure.

According to Buddhist scriptures, every living being inevitably endures suffering. Every life is full of suffering: birth is suffering, aging is suffering, illness is suffering, death is suffering; sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief and despair is suffering; union with what is unpleasant is suffering; separation from what is pleasant is suffering; not to get what one wants is suffering.

Unlike Buddhism, the European way of thinking always looks for opposites. The concept of pleasure, inevitably experienced by every living being, is inherent in the

consciousness of modern people. Thus, every life is a chance to get pleasure: birth is

60