Tibetan and Himalayan Library - THL

Description: This chapter looks at the question of whether traditional Buddhist typologies of mind are commensurable with the Western concept of emotion. The concept of emotion is, as the author notes, complex and has been the subject of multiple competing theories coming from Plato, Aristotle, William James, and others. The various views assume their own frameworks for defining emotion with some emphasizing their mental aspect and others their physicality. While traditional Buddhists certainly experience emotions and have words for particular emotions, the concept of emotion itself is absent in Buddhist typologies of the mind. The author describes the traditional understanding of mind according the Buddhist point of view (specifically from the Abhidharma tradition), noting the distinction between (1) the mind (or primary mental states; Sanskrit: citta; Tibetan: sems) and (2) mental factors (secondary mental states that accompany primary states of mind; Sanskrit: caita; Tibetan: sems 'byung). In general, the mind and mental factors operate together to make for full-blown cognition of objects and include, amongst other things, a feeling tone, a directedness and awareness of objects, and an intention. A mind may be virtuous, non-virtuous, or neutral. Some mental states, both virtuous and non-virtuous, can be thought of as emotions, although, as the author points out, it can become problematic to map English words for certain types of emotions onto Buddhist mental states. From the Buddhist perspective, compassion, for example, can- at certain instances- be an immediate feeling that arises in response to suffering, and in this way it possesses the characteristics often associated with emotions. However, compassion is also thought of as a mental state that has been developed gradually through spiritual practice. Unless the concept of emotion is extended, the latter understanding of compassion (i.e. compassion as a cultivated mental state) can not be thought of as an emotion. In the end, the author concludes the Buddhist and Western typologies of the mind are incommensurable. However, this does not mean that the experiences of traditional Buddhists and the experiences of those with other mental typologies are significantly different. English words for emotion can be used intelligibly to describe Buddhist mental states as long as the difficulties inherent in such translations are recognized. (Zach Rowinski 2004-12-29)