Marxist Critique of the Four Noble Truths - Part 1
1) The Noble Truth of Suffering (i.e. dissatisfaction), (Dukkha Ariya Sacca)
Philosophical Premise: The First Noble Truth states that life is ‘dukkha’. The Pali term ‘dukkha’ is often translated as ‘suffering’, and is the logical counter-part to the term ‘sukha’ which denotes the positive states of happiness, ease, and comfort. Dukkha is a negative term that refers to the experience of obvious pain and suffering in the world, but is used by the Buddha in a far broader context which conveys a distinct and profound lack of satisfactoriness that permeates the entirety of existence. This means that the Buddhist term ‘dukkha’ is not limited to the literal meaning of ‘suffering’ in its most obvious and basic sense (i.e. ‘this hurts’), but is expanded to incorporate states of mind and body experience that would normally be referred to as ‘happy’ (sukha). This means that the dualistic experience of suffering and pleasure is automatically transcended through the agency of Buddhist dukkha, which advocates that all experience, whether good, neutral or bad, is fundamentality flawed whilst the human mind inhabits a deluded state. This deluded state can be defined as a mind that is unaware of its own psychological functioning and historical conditionality. In the deluded state the mind clings to what it considers to be good experiences (thus developing attachments), and pushes away experiences that it considers to be bad (thus developing rejections). The Buddha states that as the deluded mind does not understand the true nature of perception, it falsely accepts and rejects experiences, without acknowledging the fundamental nature of those experiences. In this distinctly Buddhist sense, all misunderstood experience, by its very nature, is dissatisfactory and therefore considered ‘dukkha’. Misunderstood experience is considered dukkha in the broad Buddhist sense because it is permeated by the following negative states:
1) Imperfection
2) Impermanence
3) Emptiness
4) Insubstantiality
These states are integrated with suffering in the ordinary sense, but it is important to understand that Buddhist dukkha is a philosophical term that far transcends the basic and everyday use of the term dukkha. In this sense, Buddhist dukkha is a transcendent philosophical term that defines reality as being profoundly insubstantial, and not necessarily as being continuously an experience of ordinary suffering. The Buddha states clearly that there is the experience of pleasure, and that many pleasures exist, (proving that life is not ‘dukkha’ or ‘suffering’ in the ordinary sense), but that all experience, whether pleasurable or unpleasant, is fundamentally flawed because it is mediated through a mind that lacks a genuine understanding of reality – this is Buddhist dukkha. Just as the Buddha transformed irrational Brahmanism into rational Buddhism, through his advanced and progressive mind, he transformed the ordinary use of the word ‘dukkha’, into an expression of a profound philosophical truth. Within the First Noble Truth, dukkha is defined in three distinct ways:
a) Dukkha as ordinary suffering in life (dukkha-dukkhata)
b) Dukkha produced by change and impermanence (viparinama-dukkhata)
c) Dukkha produced by conditioned states of being (samkhara-dukkhata)
Through these three definitions of dukkha, the Buddha establishes the First Noble Truth, and further clarifies these definitions as:
i) Dukkha as ordinary suffering in life (dukkha-dukkhata) denotes psychological and physical suffering associated with the experiences of birth, aging, disease, and death, as well as association with the unloved, or undesired (and unpleasant) condition, disassociation with the loved, or desired (pleasant) condition; not getting what one wants or desires, grief, lamentation, distress, and any and all forms of psychological and physical suffering and pain that are universally recognised as ordinary or common suffering.
ii) Dukkha produced by change and impermanence (viparinama-dukkhata) denotes the psychological and physical experience of suffering due to impermanence and change. Nothing that is currently good will last in that state, and sooner or later the conditions will change. Good experiences transition into their opposites; therefore what was viewed as good has the tendency to suddenly become painful, unhappy and full of suffering. This is the cycle of change and impermanence causing suffering due to dissatisfaction. The conditions experienced as ‘good’ are not really good because this implies a permanent state that does not exist. Not being aware of the nature of change and impermanence is itself a state of mind full of suffering.
iii) Dukkha produced by conditioned states of being (samkhara-dukkhata) denotes a philosophical statement regarding the experience of psychological and physical suffering due to the unsatisfactoriness of conditioned states. The Buddha teaches that an individual is comprised of the five aggregates (or conditioned states) of matter, sensations, perception, mental formation, and consciousness. Matter is the basis of the physical universe, whilst matter combined with the other four aggregates constitutes a sentient being. This is how the Buddha explains the interaction of a conscious mind and physical body living within a material world. A physical being and the material world are in a constant state of flux and there is no stability or regulated stasis. The five aggregates are continuously changing and never permanent, as is the material basis of the physical world. The Buddha admits that there are various forms of happiness – so Buddhism is not pessimistic – but he teaches that any form of happiness (even exalted states of bliss acquired through extensive meditation), are all impermanent, and subject to change and decay. Suffering is inherent in conditioned states of being because those states are conditioned to continuously change. There exist no conditioned states that are permanent.
The Buddha conceives of a human being as being comprised of physical matter (i.e. a living body), and four psychological attributes (i.e. the mind). These five aggregates are conditioned by history and forever in a state of flux. A human being is a spontaneously functioning mind and body (nama-rupa), but the Buddha does not fall into the trap of reducing the existence of the mind and body to the theory of monism (i.e. the idea that the mind and body are identical at source), or to the theory of dualism (which asserts that the mind and body are separate and exist in opposition to one another).[1] Karl Marx, in his These on Feuerbach, states that he does not hold with the notion of gross materialism (or metaphysical theory that advocates that all that exists is physical matter in the universe), but states that a conscious mind exists that is aware of the physical world, the understanding of which can grow through education. Without a mind that becomes aware of its own conditioning and functioning, it can not develop a true sense of itself and evolve, through dialectic activity, toward the state of Socialism and Communism. Marx states:
‘The materialist doctrine that men are products of circumstances and upbringing, and that, therefore, changed men are products of other circumstances and changed upbringing, forget that it is men who change circumstances and that the educator must himself be educated. Hence, this doctrine is bound to divide society into two parts, one of which is superior to society (in Robert Owen, for example). The coincidence of the changing of circumstances and of human activity can be conceived and rationally understood only as revolutionary practice.’ [2]
It is the general habit of Buddhist texts, (once the First Noble truth has been established), to examine the five aggregates in detail, as the Buddha’s entire philosophical view of the world is contained therein. This is because the correct interpretation of the first truth, (and the other three), is dependent upon an understanding of these aggregates, or constituents that comprise a living being. As this is a logical presentation, its convention will be followed in this Marxist critique. Without defining the terms of his philosophical, (i.e. non-faith based) understanding, the Buddha could not have proceeded to establish the foundation of his teaching.
The Five Aggregates (Pancakkhanda)
The five aggregates are:
1) Matter (Rupakkhandha)
2) Sensation (Vedanakkhandha)
3) Perception (Sannakkhandha)
4) Mental Formation (Samkharakkhandha)
5) Consciousness (Vinnanakkhandha)
(Note: The Pali term ‘Khandha’, [which is suffixed to all five constituents], carries the possible meaning of ‘group’, ‘aggregate’, and ‘heap’, and is used to denote a particular type of thing, attribute or substance, when used within the context of Buddhist philosophical terminology. The five ‘khandha’ are the only valid building blocks of existence as far as the Buddha is concerned.)
I) Aggregate of Matter (Rupakkhandha). Matter represents the physical universe in its entirety. This includes not only the environment, but also the physical body and its organs. The physical universe and the physical body represent distinct aspects of the same materiality. Matter is the basis of reality and existence. The English term ‘matter’ is used to translate the Pali term ‘Rupakkhanda’ because ‘matter’ derives from the Latin ‘mater’, which is used to refer to the concept of ‘mother’, or that which gives birth to, and sustains all living things. It is significant that within Buddhism, the concept of ‘matter’ is placed first in the list of the five aggregates; with the other four aggregates that comprise the purely psychological components being placed in a secondary position. This implies that within the early Buddhist scheme of things, the concept of ‘matter’ definitely precedes that of ‘mind’. This arrangement implies that the Buddha does not accept the idealist notion that suggests that the physical, material universe is created through the agency of ‘mind’ (citta), as such a suggestion is merely the secular interpretation of the creationist theory as interpreted through the rubric of Brahmanic theology. However, in the modern West, which was dominated by the theology of the Judeo-Christian tradition for over a thousand years, the creationist habit of interpretation has proven difficult to break, (even in secular times), and has seeped into the English translations of a number of early Pali Buddhist texts, with a particular emphasis upon the Dhammapada. The misinterpretation of the first two lines of Pali (in English) gives the false impression that the Buddha is stating that the physical universe manifests from out of the inner mind – appearing around the individual as if by magic. This kind of misunderstanding can be seen in many English language Dhammapada translations. A ‘first cause’ is hinted at in the following work of Juan Mascaro and Harischandra Kaviratna, when it is stated:
‘What we are today comes from our thoughts of yesterday, and our present thoughts build our life of tomorrow: our life is the creation of our mind. If a man speaks or acts with an impure mind, suffering follows him as the wheel of the cart follows the beast that draws the cart.’[3]
‘All the phenomena of existence have mind as their precursor, mind as their supreme leader, and of mind are they made. If with an impure mind one speaks or acts, suffering follows him in the same way as the wheel follows the foot of the drawer (of the chariot).’[4]
Each of these extracts is a translation of the Chapter 1, Verse 1, of Pali text of the Dhammapada which states:
Manopubbangama Dhamma manosettha manomaya manasa ce padutthena bhasati va karoti va tato nam dukkhamanveti cakkamva vahato padam.[5]
However, the English translation of the same section of Pali text given by the renowned Buddhist monk and scholar – Ven, Dr Walpola Rahula – and the eminent Indian academic Eknath Easwaran, give a rendering much closer to the original (and intended) Buddhist meaning when it is stated that:
‘All mental states have mind as their forerunner, mind as their chief, and they are mind-made. If one speaks or acts, with a defiled mind, then suffering follows one even as the wheel follows the hoof of the draught-ox.’[6]
‘Our life is shaped by our mind; we become what we think. Suffering follows an evil thought as the wheels of a cart follow the oxen that draw it.’[7]
It is clear that in the original Pali that the Buddha is stating that it is passing ‘mental states’ that are created by the mind, and in no way is he making a case for the creationist notion that the agency of mind (as god) creates the world (of humanity) out of nothing, as there is no ‘first cause’ within Buddhist thinking. The mind is responsible for the psychological states that it both generates and experiences, but is not responsible for the creation of the physical world of matter. This interpretation is confirmed by the English translation of the Dhammapada provided by the Ven. Narada Thera when he translates the same above lines in question as:
‘Mind is the forerunner of (all evil) states. Mind is chief; mind-made are they. If one speaks or acts with a wicked mind, because of that, suffering follows one, even as the wheel follows the hoof of the draught-ox.’[8]
After-all, the Buddha teaches time and again that the human mind, as an ongoing process, is the product of material conditioning, or experiences received from the outer world. As the mind emanates from the brain, and given the fact that the brain is comprised of physical matter – the Buddhist view is that mind and matter are inter-related, and mutually conditioning, but for reasons explained above, the Buddha stops short of confirming that the mind and body are of ‘one substance’, or indeed comprised of ‘different substances’, no doubt treading the middle path between extreme philosophical positions. The important point to be understood is that the concept of ‘mind’ within Buddhism does stand outside, or in opposition to, the physical world of matter. Mind may not be identical with matter, but neither is it different to matter, which suggests that a developed ‘third way’, (premised upon a developed superior insight into the nature of the psycho-physical state), is required to truly understand reality as it is, free of the taint of human misperception. Furthermore, it is likely that matter is placed first in the list of the five aggregates due to its inherent relationship with the Buddhist concept of ‘mind’ (chitta). Prof. NV Banerjee explains:
‘The Pali word “chitta” may be translated into the English word “mind”, subject to the proviso that the latter be not understood in the sense of something non-material which it is usually taken to mean. For “chitta”, according to both the Hindu and Buddhist ways of thinking, is not non-material, but belongs to the side of matter, however, rarefied it may be.’[9]
Matter in its entirety, as defined within Buddhist philosophy, is comprised of the Four Great Elements (Cattari Mahabhutani). The Four Great Elements of matter are:
a) Solidity (Pathavi)
b) Fluidity (Apo)
c) Heat (Tejo)
d) Motion (Vayo)
In the Abhidhamma, that part of the Buddhist canon of the Theravada School that contains the record of developed knowledge and wisdom gathered many generations after the passing of the Buddha, there are listed more elements than in the usual doctrinal list conveyed above.[10] Matter is also defined by the Derivatives (Upadaya-rupa) of the Four Great Elements which include the five material sense organs, (the eye, ear, nose, tongue, and body), and their corresponding sense objects in the physical world which are visual form, sound, smell, taste, and tangible objects, as well as certain thoughts, ideas, or conceptions which exist within the realm of mind-objects (Dharmayatana). Therefore, the entire physical universe, (together with certain types of cognitive mind function) is included in the Aggregate of Matter.[11] Within early Buddhism the mind (in part) is certainly enmeshed within physical matter and can not be separated from it in either definition or function. According to the Buddha’s schematic, aggregate of matter is itself comprised of distinct phases of being:
a) Solidity (Pathavi) is the element of extension and expansion. Solid physical matter expands through, and occupies the empty space of the universe. Solid matter is the foundation of the various objects that occupy and extend through empty space. It is these objects which are perceived by a living being. Once solid objects are perceived as existing, they are named and categorised by the human mind. The element of solidity refers to all physically existing phenomena that extend throughout the universe, regardless of the hardness or softness of its structure. The ocean stretches out over a long and wide distance when perceived, and so water within this context, is as much a product of solid extension as is a diamond or a stone. This principle also applies to the weight of objects – be they heavy or light in mass. Something that is heavy, generally speaking, extends further in physical presence (i.e. takes up more room), than something which is relatively lighter, and which extends to a lesser extent (i.e. takes up less room).
b) Fluidity (Apo) is the element of cohesion. Within Buddhist philosophy, the element of fluidity represents the mechanism through which molecules are ‘heaped’ together to form objects and physical states of being, and as such is the ‘cohesive’ force that prevents molecules from scattering. Liquids are flexible and adaptable, in other words, generally speaking, a flowing liquid, dependent upon the force of its flow, will go round, under, over an obstacle rather than become stuck and static. If the flow of the liquid is powerful, then the obstacle might well be swept out of way, or even broken-up with no structural detriment to the liquid. This is because the cohesive force between the molecules of a liquid is far stronger than between the molecules of a solid (i.e. non-fluid) object. When separated, molecules of a liquid easily reunite and coalesce, whereas once a rock, for instance, is broken, the molecules will not come back together. However, should the rock be heated to an appropriate temperature, the structure of the rock becomes liquefied, and the molecules reunite easily. A physical object that extends and occupies a specific space, can only be perceived as existing due to the cohesive force that holds its molecules together. Like the nature of a liquid, this cohesive force flows through all physical matter in the universe without exception.
c) Heat (Tejo) is the element of temperature. This element affects the other three elements by imparting heat to their functionality. This impartation assists in the processes of maturation and intensification. Appropriate levels of heat transference are responsible for maintaining and preserving physical life including plants, etc. All objects comprised of molecules of physical matter extend through space (and time), and have, to a lesser or greater extent, a certain amount of heat present in their structures. Although one object may feel cold when compared to another, in reality it is the case that the apparently ‘cold’ object simply has less heat present, than the apparently ‘hot’ object. As many objects feel cold to the touch, it is because those objects have a temperature lower than that of the body that is doing the touching and sensing. However, the element of heat also includes the state of ‘coldness’, which is in reality merely a state of lower heat content, rather than representative of a complete lack of heat energy.
d) Motion (Vayo) is the element of movement. This represents the concept of displacement or the movement of an object from one place to another. All apparent movement is relative, and dependent upon an unmoving point of observation. However, as there is no such thing as a completely ‘still’ observation point in the universe, all apparent ‘stability’ is itself in a state of motion, albeit perhaps moving at a slower rate than that which is being observed. All movement is dependent upon the presence of heat. Heat represents the presence of life and is produced through the vibrations of atoms. If atoms did not vibrate, there would be no heat, no life, and no movement.
II) Aggregate of Sensation (Vedanakkhandha). Sensation represents all human feeling. Although feelings appear diverse, obscure, and confusing to the unenlightened mind, the Buddha defined all feeling into three logical categories:
a) Pleasant
b) Unpleasant
c) Neutral
Within Buddhist philosophy, sensations or feelings do not go beyond these three categories of interpretation and an aspiring Buddhist must first learn to discipline his or her mind by learning to correctly analyse their feelings as they arise in an objective manner, and to place each sensation into the appropriate category. This disciplined process creates a non-attached attitude of mind that is able to distance itself from its own experience of feelings and sensations. All sensation is produced through the contact of a sense organ with a sense object; a process which gives rise to the conscious awareness of the presence of an object. There are six types of consciously aware contact sensations:
1) Eye + visible form = Eye consciousness
2) Ear + sound = Ear consciousness
3) Nose + odour = Nose consciousness
4) Tongue + taste = Tongue consciousness
5) Body + tangible objects = Body consciousness
6) Mind + mental-objects, (i.e. thoughts) = Mind consciousness
It is as if a vigorous polarity exists between the process of a sense organ making contact with its sense object, that produces an instantaneous energy (flowing between both poles), which is conscious awareness. For sensation to occur, a sense organ must make contact with its sense object, and conscious awareness must be the result. Having established the aggregate of sensation, which is really the mechanism of how human beings experience feeling, it is important to point out that not all people experience exactly the same feeling reaction to the same set of stimuli. Due to the diversity of psychological and physical programming within society, individuals will inevitably development a disparate set of opinions, attitudes, and reactions that reflect their own personal histories. This difference in conditioning equals the difference in perception and interpretation of sensation. What might be pleasurable for one person might well be neutral or painful for another. The Buddhist interpretation of sensation holds because it is not premised upon a deterministic paradigm.
III) Aggregate of Perception (Sannakkhandha). Perception is defined within Buddhist philosophy as the function of ‘recognition’ (samjanana). Perception is caused by contact of the sense organs with their respective sense objects. There are six types of perception linked to the senses:
1) Eye + visible form = Visible form perception
2) Ear + sound = Sound perception
3) Nose + odour = Odour perception
4) Tongue + taste = Taste perception
5) Body + tangible objects = Tangible object perception
6) Mind + mental-objects, (i.e. thoughts) = Mental object perception
Perception distinguishes between the different types of available sensory stimulus. A visible form, for instance, is distinct from an audial stimulus, which is different to taste, etc. Perception is the fundamental ability to make sense of the six different sensory stimulations through distinguishing correctly between the six corresponding sense objects. Perception is the ability to recognise a visual object, an audial object, a smell object, a taste object, a body object, and a mind object; whilst simultaneously discerning the difference between each category. However, although the human mind correctly performs this function of categorisation, it does not follow that everything the mind perceives is correct. Identifying a sense category and correctly distinguishing it from other sense categories, does not suggest that reality is viewed correctly. Perceptions of body and mind often deceive the human mind and create false impressions, even if they are cognitively registered into their correct and essential categories of origination. This is because perception conditions memory and the more frequent a perception is experienced which is coupled with an incorrect understanding (i.e. mind objects or thought formations), the associated misunderstanding becomes a habit that grows stronger the more it is experienced. This is why the Buddha often refers to ‘perception’ in general as a ‘mirage’. In the unenlightened state, the function of ‘perception’ to organise all sensory stimulus into its correct categories, does not mean that this knowledge is then used correctly. It is only in the enlightened state that perception loses all delusional quality. Perception that separates and distinguishes sense-objects into categories, in and of itself is philosophically ‘neutral’. However, as this information is fed through a system of conditioned mental-object formation (i.e. thought generation), its content is distorted and used to reinforce an already existant ignorance, that continues to obscures reality. Perception is closely associated with ‘consciousness’ (vijanana). Whereas ‘perception’ distinguishes between sense-object categories, ‘consciousness’ is the bare awareness of the presence of an uncategorised object, a function that occurs a split second prior to perception, even thought both ‘consciousness’ and ‘perception’ appear to manifest instantaneously. For ‘perception’ to function, the ‘consciousness’ of the presence of an object must first be present.
IV) Aggregate of Mental Formation (Samkharakkhandha). Mental formations, or the generation of thought in the mind, covers all volitional actions, either good or bad, and is directly linked to the Buddhist notion of karma. This is an important association that clearly describes and explains how the Buddha re-interpreted the Brahmanic teachings with regard to karma. Instead of karma being influenced by the will and whim of divine beings, the Buddha made it clear that karma is directly linked to ‘volition’, or ‘will power’ (cetana), which is generated within the human mind and the thought patterns it produces due to historical conditioning. The Buddha stated:
‘Bhikkhu, the world is led by thought, (citta). By thought is it drawn along. When thought has arisen, it goes under its sway.’[12]
The Buddha defines volition as mental construction, and mental activity. The function of volition is to manifest the historical conditioning of the mind in the direction of good, bad, or neutral activity. This model assumes a correlation between ‘thought’ in the head, and ‘actions’ in the body. Good and bad actions generate good and bad karma, whilst neutral actions create neutral karma. Volition is of six types:
1) Eye + visible form = Visual volition
2) Ear + sound = Audial volition
3) Nose + odour = Odour volition
4) Tongue + taste = Taste volition
5) Body + tangible objects = Tangible object volition
6) Mind + mental-objects, (i.e. thoughts) = Mental object volition
The Buddha states that as an individual thinks (in the head), so will he act (in the external environment). However, within Buddhist teaching, it is only volitional activities that create karma, volitional activities such as:
a) Attention (manasikara)
b) Will (chanda)
c) Determination (adhimokkha)
d) Confidence (saddha)
e) Concentration (samadhi)
f) Wisdom (pañña)
g) Energy (Virya)
h) Desire (raga)
i) Hate (patigha)
j) Ignorance (Avijja)
k) Conceit (mana)
l) Idea of self (sakkaya-ditthi)
Over-all, there are 52 such mental activities which constitute the aggregate of mental formations. It is interesting to note that sensation and perception – although included in the 52 activities - are not considered karma producing entities, as they are naturally conditioned responses that are not generated through an act of will. It is clear that the Buddha considered thought and the world of matter to be inherently linked, whilst avoiding the dual trap of pure idealism and pure materialism. This is to say that the mind that thinks can not exist separately from the world it thinks about, and that the world of physical matter does not exist as a closed system separate from the mind that perceives it. Will is the agency within Buddhist thinking that transforms both the mind that generates it, and physical world it operates upon. The Buddha appears to be advocating nothing less than a total mental and physical revolution achieved through the timely application of correct and appropriate action. The mind, through the discipline of meditation, (or ‘mental culture’), changes the type of thoughts it has hitherto generated due to its historical conditioning. In this regard, meditation breaks the cycle of historical conditioning, and eradicates old habits of behaviour together with associated attitudes and ideas. Just as the type of thought generation is transformed, so are the resultant actions in the physical world. Through the use of the will, and the recognition of its centrality within human existence, mind and behaviour are thoroughly transformed. It is the aggregate of mental formations that is trained in the Buddhist system, so that the understanding of all other aggregates is thoroughly transformed. This explains the inner and outer revolutionary value of Buddhist philosophy.
V) Aggregate of Consciousness (Vinnanakkhandha). Within Buddhist philosophy, consciousness is the product of the interaction between the six senses and the six sense objects. Therefore the arising of consciousness is of six types:
1) Eye + visible form = Visual consciousness
2) Ear + sound = Audial consciousness
3) Nose + odour = Odour consciousness
4) Tongue + taste = Taste consciousness
5) Body + tangible objects = Tangible object consciousness
6) Mind + mental-objects, (i.e. thoughts) = Mental object consciousness
Consciousness, however, does not recognise an object, as it is only an ‘awareness’ of the presence of a type of object, nothing more. Furthermore, consciousness is not only associated with the mental objects of the mind, but is also associated with the other five aggregates. Consciousness serves as a ‘bridge’ between the bodily senses and the mind, and their sensory objects. Without consciousness being present, there can be neither sensation, nor perception, but consciousness in this context does not constitute a ‘spirit’ that exists in opposition to the world of physical ‘matter’. The Buddha clearly rejects this duality that is prominent in the West due to the historical influence of Judeo-Christian theology. Consciousness only exists in relation to a sense organ making contact with its corresponding sense object – when this condition no longer exists, consciousness does not arise. Consciousness exists as an important link in the chain of perception and cognition, but does not constitute a permanent ‘soul’ or ‘spiritual’ entity. When this is understood, consciousness should not be interpreted as that which survives physical death and transmigrates. Buddhist consciousness is not a theistic spirit.
Consciousness is the foundation of the 52 mental activities, and without its presence, no mental factors are available. The five physical senses cognise the five sense objects existentially – that is in the present moment – and can only experience their own particular function; but the mind can sense not only its own thoughts, but also the sensory data collected by the other senses simultaneously. The mind can remember the past, and imagine the future, whilst living in the present. The mind faculty is far more adaptable than the other five senses it co-ordinates and controls. Mind consciousness is the product of the mental organ sensing mental objects or formations (i.e. ‘thoughts’). Mind consciousness, which is dependent and conditioned by circumstance, can think in three dimensions, (i.e. past, present, and future), whilst the other five bodily senses can only sense one type of sensory data, and only in the present moment. As the mind faculty (manidriya) possesses this all round sensory ability, the Buddha referred to it as possessing the quality ‘indriya’, or being the ‘chief’ or ‘lord’ amongst the other five senses.
This article continues with: Marxist Critique of the Four Noble Truths - Part 2
©opyright: Adrian Chan-Wyles (ShiDaDao) 2014.
[1] Jayatilleke, KN, The Message of the Buddha, George Allen & Unwin Ltd, (1975), Chapter 12, The Case for the Buddhist Theory of Karma and Karma and Survival: Page 165 for a very astute and logical appraisal of the relationship of the conscious mind to the physical environment it inhabits. Jayatilleke states ‘…the mind and personality grow and change always in conjunction with environmental influences as the body grows and changes.’ but implies that as the mind is able, through meditation, to reduce and negate negative sense impressions received from a bad environment, the dedicated Buddhist is able to break free of environmental influences at the higher levels of meditational attainment.
[2] Marx, Karl, The German Ideology, Prometheus Books, (1998), which contains two versions of Marx’s short text entitled ‘Theses on Feuerbach’, both of which are dated to spring 1845 (Brussels). The first version is the original (Pages 569-571) as it appeared from the pen of Marx, but the above quote is from the second ‘developed’ version (Pages 572-574) which was edited by Engels to add clarity.
[3] Mascaro, Juan, The Dhammapada – the Path of Freedom’, Penguin Books, (1988), Chapter 1, Contrary Ways, Verse 1, Page 35.
[4] Kaviratna, Harischandra, Dhammapada – Wisdom of the Buddha, English-Pali Edition, Theosophical University Press, (2001), The Twin Verses, Canto 1, Verse 1, Page 5.
[5] Ibid, Page 4.
[6] Rahula, Walpola, Sri, What the Buddha Taught, Gordon Fraser, (1978), The Words of Truth – Selections from the Dhammapada - Page 125.
[7] Easwaran, Eknath, The Dhammapada, Arkana, (1987), Chapter 1, Verse 1, Twin Verses, Page 78.
[8] Thera, Narada, The Dhammapada – Pali Text and Translation with Stories in Brief and Notes, The Corporate Body of the Buddha Educational Foundation, (1993), Chapter 1, Yamaka Vagga, The Twin Verses, Verse 1, Page 1.
[9] Banerjee, Nikunja, Vihari, The Dhammapada, Munshiram Manoharlal, (2000), Page 95.
[10] Thera, Piyadassi, The Buddha’s Ancient Path, Munshiram Manoharlal, (2005), Chapter 3, The Central Conception of Buddhism (The four Noble Truths), the First Noble Truth; Dukkha: Suffering, Pages 44-45.
[11] Rahula, Walpola, Sri, What the Buddha Taught, Gordon Fraser, (1978), Pages 20-21.
[12] Rahula, Walpola, Zen& the Taming of the Bull – Towards the Definition of Buddhist Thought, Gordon Fraser, (1978), Page 82 – Footnote 14 Anguttara-nikaya, II (PTS).
Philosophical Premise: The First Noble Truth states that life is ‘dukkha’. The Pali term ‘dukkha’ is often translated as ‘suffering’, and is the logical counter-part to the term ‘sukha’ which denotes the positive states of happiness, ease, and comfort. Dukkha is a negative term that refers to the experience of obvious pain and suffering in the world, but is used by the Buddha in a far broader context which conveys a distinct and profound lack of satisfactoriness that permeates the entirety of existence. This means that the Buddhist term ‘dukkha’ is not limited to the literal meaning of ‘suffering’ in its most obvious and basic sense (i.e. ‘this hurts’), but is expanded to incorporate states of mind and body experience that would normally be referred to as ‘happy’ (sukha). This means that the dualistic experience of suffering and pleasure is automatically transcended through the agency of Buddhist dukkha, which advocates that all experience, whether good, neutral or bad, is fundamentality flawed whilst the human mind inhabits a deluded state. This deluded state can be defined as a mind that is unaware of its own psychological functioning and historical conditionality. In the deluded state the mind clings to what it considers to be good experiences (thus developing attachments), and pushes away experiences that it considers to be bad (thus developing rejections). The Buddha states that as the deluded mind does not understand the true nature of perception, it falsely accepts and rejects experiences, without acknowledging the fundamental nature of those experiences. In this distinctly Buddhist sense, all misunderstood experience, by its very nature, is dissatisfactory and therefore considered ‘dukkha’. Misunderstood experience is considered dukkha in the broad Buddhist sense because it is permeated by the following negative states:
1) Imperfection
2) Impermanence
3) Emptiness
4) Insubstantiality
These states are integrated with suffering in the ordinary sense, but it is important to understand that Buddhist dukkha is a philosophical term that far transcends the basic and everyday use of the term dukkha. In this sense, Buddhist dukkha is a transcendent philosophical term that defines reality as being profoundly insubstantial, and not necessarily as being continuously an experience of ordinary suffering. The Buddha states clearly that there is the experience of pleasure, and that many pleasures exist, (proving that life is not ‘dukkha’ or ‘suffering’ in the ordinary sense), but that all experience, whether pleasurable or unpleasant, is fundamentally flawed because it is mediated through a mind that lacks a genuine understanding of reality – this is Buddhist dukkha. Just as the Buddha transformed irrational Brahmanism into rational Buddhism, through his advanced and progressive mind, he transformed the ordinary use of the word ‘dukkha’, into an expression of a profound philosophical truth. Within the First Noble Truth, dukkha is defined in three distinct ways:
a) Dukkha as ordinary suffering in life (dukkha-dukkhata)
b) Dukkha produced by change and impermanence (viparinama-dukkhata)
c) Dukkha produced by conditioned states of being (samkhara-dukkhata)
Through these three definitions of dukkha, the Buddha establishes the First Noble Truth, and further clarifies these definitions as:
i) Dukkha as ordinary suffering in life (dukkha-dukkhata) denotes psychological and physical suffering associated with the experiences of birth, aging, disease, and death, as well as association with the unloved, or undesired (and unpleasant) condition, disassociation with the loved, or desired (pleasant) condition; not getting what one wants or desires, grief, lamentation, distress, and any and all forms of psychological and physical suffering and pain that are universally recognised as ordinary or common suffering.
ii) Dukkha produced by change and impermanence (viparinama-dukkhata) denotes the psychological and physical experience of suffering due to impermanence and change. Nothing that is currently good will last in that state, and sooner or later the conditions will change. Good experiences transition into their opposites; therefore what was viewed as good has the tendency to suddenly become painful, unhappy and full of suffering. This is the cycle of change and impermanence causing suffering due to dissatisfaction. The conditions experienced as ‘good’ are not really good because this implies a permanent state that does not exist. Not being aware of the nature of change and impermanence is itself a state of mind full of suffering.
iii) Dukkha produced by conditioned states of being (samkhara-dukkhata) denotes a philosophical statement regarding the experience of psychological and physical suffering due to the unsatisfactoriness of conditioned states. The Buddha teaches that an individual is comprised of the five aggregates (or conditioned states) of matter, sensations, perception, mental formation, and consciousness. Matter is the basis of the physical universe, whilst matter combined with the other four aggregates constitutes a sentient being. This is how the Buddha explains the interaction of a conscious mind and physical body living within a material world. A physical being and the material world are in a constant state of flux and there is no stability or regulated stasis. The five aggregates are continuously changing and never permanent, as is the material basis of the physical world. The Buddha admits that there are various forms of happiness – so Buddhism is not pessimistic – but he teaches that any form of happiness (even exalted states of bliss acquired through extensive meditation), are all impermanent, and subject to change and decay. Suffering is inherent in conditioned states of being because those states are conditioned to continuously change. There exist no conditioned states that are permanent.
The Buddha conceives of a human being as being comprised of physical matter (i.e. a living body), and four psychological attributes (i.e. the mind). These five aggregates are conditioned by history and forever in a state of flux. A human being is a spontaneously functioning mind and body (nama-rupa), but the Buddha does not fall into the trap of reducing the existence of the mind and body to the theory of monism (i.e. the idea that the mind and body are identical at source), or to the theory of dualism (which asserts that the mind and body are separate and exist in opposition to one another).[1] Karl Marx, in his These on Feuerbach, states that he does not hold with the notion of gross materialism (or metaphysical theory that advocates that all that exists is physical matter in the universe), but states that a conscious mind exists that is aware of the physical world, the understanding of which can grow through education. Without a mind that becomes aware of its own conditioning and functioning, it can not develop a true sense of itself and evolve, through dialectic activity, toward the state of Socialism and Communism. Marx states:
‘The materialist doctrine that men are products of circumstances and upbringing, and that, therefore, changed men are products of other circumstances and changed upbringing, forget that it is men who change circumstances and that the educator must himself be educated. Hence, this doctrine is bound to divide society into two parts, one of which is superior to society (in Robert Owen, for example). The coincidence of the changing of circumstances and of human activity can be conceived and rationally understood only as revolutionary practice.’ [2]
It is the general habit of Buddhist texts, (once the First Noble truth has been established), to examine the five aggregates in detail, as the Buddha’s entire philosophical view of the world is contained therein. This is because the correct interpretation of the first truth, (and the other three), is dependent upon an understanding of these aggregates, or constituents that comprise a living being. As this is a logical presentation, its convention will be followed in this Marxist critique. Without defining the terms of his philosophical, (i.e. non-faith based) understanding, the Buddha could not have proceeded to establish the foundation of his teaching.
The Five Aggregates (Pancakkhanda)
The five aggregates are:
1) Matter (Rupakkhandha)
2) Sensation (Vedanakkhandha)
3) Perception (Sannakkhandha)
4) Mental Formation (Samkharakkhandha)
5) Consciousness (Vinnanakkhandha)
(Note: The Pali term ‘Khandha’, [which is suffixed to all five constituents], carries the possible meaning of ‘group’, ‘aggregate’, and ‘heap’, and is used to denote a particular type of thing, attribute or substance, when used within the context of Buddhist philosophical terminology. The five ‘khandha’ are the only valid building blocks of existence as far as the Buddha is concerned.)
I) Aggregate of Matter (Rupakkhandha). Matter represents the physical universe in its entirety. This includes not only the environment, but also the physical body and its organs. The physical universe and the physical body represent distinct aspects of the same materiality. Matter is the basis of reality and existence. The English term ‘matter’ is used to translate the Pali term ‘Rupakkhanda’ because ‘matter’ derives from the Latin ‘mater’, which is used to refer to the concept of ‘mother’, or that which gives birth to, and sustains all living things. It is significant that within Buddhism, the concept of ‘matter’ is placed first in the list of the five aggregates; with the other four aggregates that comprise the purely psychological components being placed in a secondary position. This implies that within the early Buddhist scheme of things, the concept of ‘matter’ definitely precedes that of ‘mind’. This arrangement implies that the Buddha does not accept the idealist notion that suggests that the physical, material universe is created through the agency of ‘mind’ (citta), as such a suggestion is merely the secular interpretation of the creationist theory as interpreted through the rubric of Brahmanic theology. However, in the modern West, which was dominated by the theology of the Judeo-Christian tradition for over a thousand years, the creationist habit of interpretation has proven difficult to break, (even in secular times), and has seeped into the English translations of a number of early Pali Buddhist texts, with a particular emphasis upon the Dhammapada. The misinterpretation of the first two lines of Pali (in English) gives the false impression that the Buddha is stating that the physical universe manifests from out of the inner mind – appearing around the individual as if by magic. This kind of misunderstanding can be seen in many English language Dhammapada translations. A ‘first cause’ is hinted at in the following work of Juan Mascaro and Harischandra Kaviratna, when it is stated:
‘What we are today comes from our thoughts of yesterday, and our present thoughts build our life of tomorrow: our life is the creation of our mind. If a man speaks or acts with an impure mind, suffering follows him as the wheel of the cart follows the beast that draws the cart.’[3]
‘All the phenomena of existence have mind as their precursor, mind as their supreme leader, and of mind are they made. If with an impure mind one speaks or acts, suffering follows him in the same way as the wheel follows the foot of the drawer (of the chariot).’[4]
Each of these extracts is a translation of the Chapter 1, Verse 1, of Pali text of the Dhammapada which states:
Manopubbangama Dhamma manosettha manomaya manasa ce padutthena bhasati va karoti va tato nam dukkhamanveti cakkamva vahato padam.[5]
However, the English translation of the same section of Pali text given by the renowned Buddhist monk and scholar – Ven, Dr Walpola Rahula – and the eminent Indian academic Eknath Easwaran, give a rendering much closer to the original (and intended) Buddhist meaning when it is stated that:
‘All mental states have mind as their forerunner, mind as their chief, and they are mind-made. If one speaks or acts, with a defiled mind, then suffering follows one even as the wheel follows the hoof of the draught-ox.’[6]
‘Our life is shaped by our mind; we become what we think. Suffering follows an evil thought as the wheels of a cart follow the oxen that draw it.’[7]
It is clear that in the original Pali that the Buddha is stating that it is passing ‘mental states’ that are created by the mind, and in no way is he making a case for the creationist notion that the agency of mind (as god) creates the world (of humanity) out of nothing, as there is no ‘first cause’ within Buddhist thinking. The mind is responsible for the psychological states that it both generates and experiences, but is not responsible for the creation of the physical world of matter. This interpretation is confirmed by the English translation of the Dhammapada provided by the Ven. Narada Thera when he translates the same above lines in question as:
‘Mind is the forerunner of (all evil) states. Mind is chief; mind-made are they. If one speaks or acts with a wicked mind, because of that, suffering follows one, even as the wheel follows the hoof of the draught-ox.’[8]
After-all, the Buddha teaches time and again that the human mind, as an ongoing process, is the product of material conditioning, or experiences received from the outer world. As the mind emanates from the brain, and given the fact that the brain is comprised of physical matter – the Buddhist view is that mind and matter are inter-related, and mutually conditioning, but for reasons explained above, the Buddha stops short of confirming that the mind and body are of ‘one substance’, or indeed comprised of ‘different substances’, no doubt treading the middle path between extreme philosophical positions. The important point to be understood is that the concept of ‘mind’ within Buddhism does stand outside, or in opposition to, the physical world of matter. Mind may not be identical with matter, but neither is it different to matter, which suggests that a developed ‘third way’, (premised upon a developed superior insight into the nature of the psycho-physical state), is required to truly understand reality as it is, free of the taint of human misperception. Furthermore, it is likely that matter is placed first in the list of the five aggregates due to its inherent relationship with the Buddhist concept of ‘mind’ (chitta). Prof. NV Banerjee explains:
‘The Pali word “chitta” may be translated into the English word “mind”, subject to the proviso that the latter be not understood in the sense of something non-material which it is usually taken to mean. For “chitta”, according to both the Hindu and Buddhist ways of thinking, is not non-material, but belongs to the side of matter, however, rarefied it may be.’[9]
Matter in its entirety, as defined within Buddhist philosophy, is comprised of the Four Great Elements (Cattari Mahabhutani). The Four Great Elements of matter are:
a) Solidity (Pathavi)
b) Fluidity (Apo)
c) Heat (Tejo)
d) Motion (Vayo)
In the Abhidhamma, that part of the Buddhist canon of the Theravada School that contains the record of developed knowledge and wisdom gathered many generations after the passing of the Buddha, there are listed more elements than in the usual doctrinal list conveyed above.[10] Matter is also defined by the Derivatives (Upadaya-rupa) of the Four Great Elements which include the five material sense organs, (the eye, ear, nose, tongue, and body), and their corresponding sense objects in the physical world which are visual form, sound, smell, taste, and tangible objects, as well as certain thoughts, ideas, or conceptions which exist within the realm of mind-objects (Dharmayatana). Therefore, the entire physical universe, (together with certain types of cognitive mind function) is included in the Aggregate of Matter.[11] Within early Buddhism the mind (in part) is certainly enmeshed within physical matter and can not be separated from it in either definition or function. According to the Buddha’s schematic, aggregate of matter is itself comprised of distinct phases of being:
a) Solidity (Pathavi) is the element of extension and expansion. Solid physical matter expands through, and occupies the empty space of the universe. Solid matter is the foundation of the various objects that occupy and extend through empty space. It is these objects which are perceived by a living being. Once solid objects are perceived as existing, they are named and categorised by the human mind. The element of solidity refers to all physically existing phenomena that extend throughout the universe, regardless of the hardness or softness of its structure. The ocean stretches out over a long and wide distance when perceived, and so water within this context, is as much a product of solid extension as is a diamond or a stone. This principle also applies to the weight of objects – be they heavy or light in mass. Something that is heavy, generally speaking, extends further in physical presence (i.e. takes up more room), than something which is relatively lighter, and which extends to a lesser extent (i.e. takes up less room).
b) Fluidity (Apo) is the element of cohesion. Within Buddhist philosophy, the element of fluidity represents the mechanism through which molecules are ‘heaped’ together to form objects and physical states of being, and as such is the ‘cohesive’ force that prevents molecules from scattering. Liquids are flexible and adaptable, in other words, generally speaking, a flowing liquid, dependent upon the force of its flow, will go round, under, over an obstacle rather than become stuck and static. If the flow of the liquid is powerful, then the obstacle might well be swept out of way, or even broken-up with no structural detriment to the liquid. This is because the cohesive force between the molecules of a liquid is far stronger than between the molecules of a solid (i.e. non-fluid) object. When separated, molecules of a liquid easily reunite and coalesce, whereas once a rock, for instance, is broken, the molecules will not come back together. However, should the rock be heated to an appropriate temperature, the structure of the rock becomes liquefied, and the molecules reunite easily. A physical object that extends and occupies a specific space, can only be perceived as existing due to the cohesive force that holds its molecules together. Like the nature of a liquid, this cohesive force flows through all physical matter in the universe without exception.
c) Heat (Tejo) is the element of temperature. This element affects the other three elements by imparting heat to their functionality. This impartation assists in the processes of maturation and intensification. Appropriate levels of heat transference are responsible for maintaining and preserving physical life including plants, etc. All objects comprised of molecules of physical matter extend through space (and time), and have, to a lesser or greater extent, a certain amount of heat present in their structures. Although one object may feel cold when compared to another, in reality it is the case that the apparently ‘cold’ object simply has less heat present, than the apparently ‘hot’ object. As many objects feel cold to the touch, it is because those objects have a temperature lower than that of the body that is doing the touching and sensing. However, the element of heat also includes the state of ‘coldness’, which is in reality merely a state of lower heat content, rather than representative of a complete lack of heat energy.
d) Motion (Vayo) is the element of movement. This represents the concept of displacement or the movement of an object from one place to another. All apparent movement is relative, and dependent upon an unmoving point of observation. However, as there is no such thing as a completely ‘still’ observation point in the universe, all apparent ‘stability’ is itself in a state of motion, albeit perhaps moving at a slower rate than that which is being observed. All movement is dependent upon the presence of heat. Heat represents the presence of life and is produced through the vibrations of atoms. If atoms did not vibrate, there would be no heat, no life, and no movement.
II) Aggregate of Sensation (Vedanakkhandha). Sensation represents all human feeling. Although feelings appear diverse, obscure, and confusing to the unenlightened mind, the Buddha defined all feeling into three logical categories:
a) Pleasant
b) Unpleasant
c) Neutral
Within Buddhist philosophy, sensations or feelings do not go beyond these three categories of interpretation and an aspiring Buddhist must first learn to discipline his or her mind by learning to correctly analyse their feelings as they arise in an objective manner, and to place each sensation into the appropriate category. This disciplined process creates a non-attached attitude of mind that is able to distance itself from its own experience of feelings and sensations. All sensation is produced through the contact of a sense organ with a sense object; a process which gives rise to the conscious awareness of the presence of an object. There are six types of consciously aware contact sensations:
1) Eye + visible form = Eye consciousness
2) Ear + sound = Ear consciousness
3) Nose + odour = Nose consciousness
4) Tongue + taste = Tongue consciousness
5) Body + tangible objects = Body consciousness
6) Mind + mental-objects, (i.e. thoughts) = Mind consciousness
It is as if a vigorous polarity exists between the process of a sense organ making contact with its sense object, that produces an instantaneous energy (flowing between both poles), which is conscious awareness. For sensation to occur, a sense organ must make contact with its sense object, and conscious awareness must be the result. Having established the aggregate of sensation, which is really the mechanism of how human beings experience feeling, it is important to point out that not all people experience exactly the same feeling reaction to the same set of stimuli. Due to the diversity of psychological and physical programming within society, individuals will inevitably development a disparate set of opinions, attitudes, and reactions that reflect their own personal histories. This difference in conditioning equals the difference in perception and interpretation of sensation. What might be pleasurable for one person might well be neutral or painful for another. The Buddhist interpretation of sensation holds because it is not premised upon a deterministic paradigm.
III) Aggregate of Perception (Sannakkhandha). Perception is defined within Buddhist philosophy as the function of ‘recognition’ (samjanana). Perception is caused by contact of the sense organs with their respective sense objects. There are six types of perception linked to the senses:
1) Eye + visible form = Visible form perception
2) Ear + sound = Sound perception
3) Nose + odour = Odour perception
4) Tongue + taste = Taste perception
5) Body + tangible objects = Tangible object perception
6) Mind + mental-objects, (i.e. thoughts) = Mental object perception
Perception distinguishes between the different types of available sensory stimulus. A visible form, for instance, is distinct from an audial stimulus, which is different to taste, etc. Perception is the fundamental ability to make sense of the six different sensory stimulations through distinguishing correctly between the six corresponding sense objects. Perception is the ability to recognise a visual object, an audial object, a smell object, a taste object, a body object, and a mind object; whilst simultaneously discerning the difference between each category. However, although the human mind correctly performs this function of categorisation, it does not follow that everything the mind perceives is correct. Identifying a sense category and correctly distinguishing it from other sense categories, does not suggest that reality is viewed correctly. Perceptions of body and mind often deceive the human mind and create false impressions, even if they are cognitively registered into their correct and essential categories of origination. This is because perception conditions memory and the more frequent a perception is experienced which is coupled with an incorrect understanding (i.e. mind objects or thought formations), the associated misunderstanding becomes a habit that grows stronger the more it is experienced. This is why the Buddha often refers to ‘perception’ in general as a ‘mirage’. In the unenlightened state, the function of ‘perception’ to organise all sensory stimulus into its correct categories, does not mean that this knowledge is then used correctly. It is only in the enlightened state that perception loses all delusional quality. Perception that separates and distinguishes sense-objects into categories, in and of itself is philosophically ‘neutral’. However, as this information is fed through a system of conditioned mental-object formation (i.e. thought generation), its content is distorted and used to reinforce an already existant ignorance, that continues to obscures reality. Perception is closely associated with ‘consciousness’ (vijanana). Whereas ‘perception’ distinguishes between sense-object categories, ‘consciousness’ is the bare awareness of the presence of an uncategorised object, a function that occurs a split second prior to perception, even thought both ‘consciousness’ and ‘perception’ appear to manifest instantaneously. For ‘perception’ to function, the ‘consciousness’ of the presence of an object must first be present.
IV) Aggregate of Mental Formation (Samkharakkhandha). Mental formations, or the generation of thought in the mind, covers all volitional actions, either good or bad, and is directly linked to the Buddhist notion of karma. This is an important association that clearly describes and explains how the Buddha re-interpreted the Brahmanic teachings with regard to karma. Instead of karma being influenced by the will and whim of divine beings, the Buddha made it clear that karma is directly linked to ‘volition’, or ‘will power’ (cetana), which is generated within the human mind and the thought patterns it produces due to historical conditioning. The Buddha stated:
‘Bhikkhu, the world is led by thought, (citta). By thought is it drawn along. When thought has arisen, it goes under its sway.’[12]
The Buddha defines volition as mental construction, and mental activity. The function of volition is to manifest the historical conditioning of the mind in the direction of good, bad, or neutral activity. This model assumes a correlation between ‘thought’ in the head, and ‘actions’ in the body. Good and bad actions generate good and bad karma, whilst neutral actions create neutral karma. Volition is of six types:
1) Eye + visible form = Visual volition
2) Ear + sound = Audial volition
3) Nose + odour = Odour volition
4) Tongue + taste = Taste volition
5) Body + tangible objects = Tangible object volition
6) Mind + mental-objects, (i.e. thoughts) = Mental object volition
The Buddha states that as an individual thinks (in the head), so will he act (in the external environment). However, within Buddhist teaching, it is only volitional activities that create karma, volitional activities such as:
a) Attention (manasikara)
b) Will (chanda)
c) Determination (adhimokkha)
d) Confidence (saddha)
e) Concentration (samadhi)
f) Wisdom (pañña)
g) Energy (Virya)
h) Desire (raga)
i) Hate (patigha)
j) Ignorance (Avijja)
k) Conceit (mana)
l) Idea of self (sakkaya-ditthi)
Over-all, there are 52 such mental activities which constitute the aggregate of mental formations. It is interesting to note that sensation and perception – although included in the 52 activities - are not considered karma producing entities, as they are naturally conditioned responses that are not generated through an act of will. It is clear that the Buddha considered thought and the world of matter to be inherently linked, whilst avoiding the dual trap of pure idealism and pure materialism. This is to say that the mind that thinks can not exist separately from the world it thinks about, and that the world of physical matter does not exist as a closed system separate from the mind that perceives it. Will is the agency within Buddhist thinking that transforms both the mind that generates it, and physical world it operates upon. The Buddha appears to be advocating nothing less than a total mental and physical revolution achieved through the timely application of correct and appropriate action. The mind, through the discipline of meditation, (or ‘mental culture’), changes the type of thoughts it has hitherto generated due to its historical conditioning. In this regard, meditation breaks the cycle of historical conditioning, and eradicates old habits of behaviour together with associated attitudes and ideas. Just as the type of thought generation is transformed, so are the resultant actions in the physical world. Through the use of the will, and the recognition of its centrality within human existence, mind and behaviour are thoroughly transformed. It is the aggregate of mental formations that is trained in the Buddhist system, so that the understanding of all other aggregates is thoroughly transformed. This explains the inner and outer revolutionary value of Buddhist philosophy.
V) Aggregate of Consciousness (Vinnanakkhandha). Within Buddhist philosophy, consciousness is the product of the interaction between the six senses and the six sense objects. Therefore the arising of consciousness is of six types:
1) Eye + visible form = Visual consciousness
2) Ear + sound = Audial consciousness
3) Nose + odour = Odour consciousness
4) Tongue + taste = Taste consciousness
5) Body + tangible objects = Tangible object consciousness
6) Mind + mental-objects, (i.e. thoughts) = Mental object consciousness
Consciousness, however, does not recognise an object, as it is only an ‘awareness’ of the presence of a type of object, nothing more. Furthermore, consciousness is not only associated with the mental objects of the mind, but is also associated with the other five aggregates. Consciousness serves as a ‘bridge’ between the bodily senses and the mind, and their sensory objects. Without consciousness being present, there can be neither sensation, nor perception, but consciousness in this context does not constitute a ‘spirit’ that exists in opposition to the world of physical ‘matter’. The Buddha clearly rejects this duality that is prominent in the West due to the historical influence of Judeo-Christian theology. Consciousness only exists in relation to a sense organ making contact with its corresponding sense object – when this condition no longer exists, consciousness does not arise. Consciousness exists as an important link in the chain of perception and cognition, but does not constitute a permanent ‘soul’ or ‘spiritual’ entity. When this is understood, consciousness should not be interpreted as that which survives physical death and transmigrates. Buddhist consciousness is not a theistic spirit.
Consciousness is the foundation of the 52 mental activities, and without its presence, no mental factors are available. The five physical senses cognise the five sense objects existentially – that is in the present moment – and can only experience their own particular function; but the mind can sense not only its own thoughts, but also the sensory data collected by the other senses simultaneously. The mind can remember the past, and imagine the future, whilst living in the present. The mind faculty is far more adaptable than the other five senses it co-ordinates and controls. Mind consciousness is the product of the mental organ sensing mental objects or formations (i.e. ‘thoughts’). Mind consciousness, which is dependent and conditioned by circumstance, can think in three dimensions, (i.e. past, present, and future), whilst the other five bodily senses can only sense one type of sensory data, and only in the present moment. As the mind faculty (manidriya) possesses this all round sensory ability, the Buddha referred to it as possessing the quality ‘indriya’, or being the ‘chief’ or ‘lord’ amongst the other five senses.
This article continues with: Marxist Critique of the Four Noble Truths - Part 2
©opyright: Adrian Chan-Wyles (ShiDaDao) 2014.
[1] Jayatilleke, KN, The Message of the Buddha, George Allen & Unwin Ltd, (1975), Chapter 12, The Case for the Buddhist Theory of Karma and Karma and Survival: Page 165 for a very astute and logical appraisal of the relationship of the conscious mind to the physical environment it inhabits. Jayatilleke states ‘…the mind and personality grow and change always in conjunction with environmental influences as the body grows and changes.’ but implies that as the mind is able, through meditation, to reduce and negate negative sense impressions received from a bad environment, the dedicated Buddhist is able to break free of environmental influences at the higher levels of meditational attainment.
[2] Marx, Karl, The German Ideology, Prometheus Books, (1998), which contains two versions of Marx’s short text entitled ‘Theses on Feuerbach’, both of which are dated to spring 1845 (Brussels). The first version is the original (Pages 569-571) as it appeared from the pen of Marx, but the above quote is from the second ‘developed’ version (Pages 572-574) which was edited by Engels to add clarity.
[3] Mascaro, Juan, The Dhammapada – the Path of Freedom’, Penguin Books, (1988), Chapter 1, Contrary Ways, Verse 1, Page 35.
[4] Kaviratna, Harischandra, Dhammapada – Wisdom of the Buddha, English-Pali Edition, Theosophical University Press, (2001), The Twin Verses, Canto 1, Verse 1, Page 5.
[5] Ibid, Page 4.
[6] Rahula, Walpola, Sri, What the Buddha Taught, Gordon Fraser, (1978), The Words of Truth – Selections from the Dhammapada - Page 125.
[7] Easwaran, Eknath, The Dhammapada, Arkana, (1987), Chapter 1, Verse 1, Twin Verses, Page 78.
[8] Thera, Narada, The Dhammapada – Pali Text and Translation with Stories in Brief and Notes, The Corporate Body of the Buddha Educational Foundation, (1993), Chapter 1, Yamaka Vagga, The Twin Verses, Verse 1, Page 1.
[9] Banerjee, Nikunja, Vihari, The Dhammapada, Munshiram Manoharlal, (2000), Page 95.
[10] Thera, Piyadassi, The Buddha’s Ancient Path, Munshiram Manoharlal, (2005), Chapter 3, The Central Conception of Buddhism (The four Noble Truths), the First Noble Truth; Dukkha: Suffering, Pages 44-45.
[11] Rahula, Walpola, Sri, What the Buddha Taught, Gordon Fraser, (1978), Pages 20-21.
[12] Rahula, Walpola, Zen& the Taming of the Bull – Towards the Definition of Buddhist Thought, Gordon Fraser, (1978), Page 82 – Footnote 14 Anguttara-nikaya, II (PTS).