Does Theravada acknowledge Subconsciousness?

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
Leon-nl
Posts: 144
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 11:44 pm

Re: Does Theravada acknowledge Subconsciousness?

Post by Leon-nl » Fri Dec 18, 2015 5:26 pm

kirk5a wrote:
Leon-nl wrote:Take my example again:

"I like somebody very much. I don't know exactly why and I start investigating why I like this particular person. Then I start having sexual thoughts about this person while exploring my feelings and thoughts.
Do these thoughts come from the subconsciousness?"

Sure, underlying tendencies play a role but can thoughts be subconscious? I doubt it. In this example the sexual thoughts arise the moment itself, they don't come from a subconscious part of the mind I think. Am I wrong?
Pre-rational, not sub-conscious. The sexual thought itself is but the flower of something with deep roots.
I would call it a thought formed by "the obsession of sensual passion", one of the seven obsessions or underlying tendencies (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;) combined with an object (the person that is liked) and not being mindful.

Would you agree?

As for me, that is something very different from subconsciousness as "existing in the mind but not immediately available to consciousness".
I see it as factors coming together and enabling a thought to arise. Correct?
“Look on the world as empty, Mogharāja, being always mindful.
Having removed wrong view of self, in this way one will cross beyond Death.
When looking on the world in this way the king of Death does not see one.” - Sn 5.15

Pinetree
Posts: 460
Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2015 4:25 am

Re: Does Theravada acknowledge Subconsciousness?

Post by Pinetree » Fri Dec 18, 2015 5:44 pm

Sure, underlying tendencies play a role but can thoughts be subconscious? I doubt it.
Of course they can.
No, I mean subconsciousness with this definition: "existing in the mind but not immediately available to consciousness".
Clearly knowledge of "subconsciousness " is improved through mindfulness practice. We don't know why we like what we like and we dislike what we dislike, and it shows us.

So I would answer that Buddhism works with the subconscious, but to my knowledge, it didn't define it negatively like you did (at the conceptual level).

Like: "the thoughts that I am not thinking right now". If you think about it, it's not that practical.
I like somebody very much. I don't know exactly why and I start investigating why I like this particular person. Then I start having sexual thoughts about this person while exploring my feelings and thoughts.
Do these thoughts come from the subconsciousness?
That is not all of it subconscious. When you start investigating, the investigation will create new stuff that wasn't there before. This is an important criticism against psychoanalysis.

The sexual thoughts could be created by onion (yes, there is a thread around here about onion as an aphrodisiac). And the fact that you are not aware that your sexual thoughts are triggered at the body level and not by thinking of the lovely person, this is subconscious. But as long as you're not aware of it, you can't prove it exists.

This is one of the problems you encounter in practice when working with "stuff that doesn't exist".

I would call it a thought formed by "the obsession of sensual passion", one of the seven obsessions or underlying tendencies (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;) combined with an object (the person that is liked) and not being mindful.

Would you agree?
Not sure I understand you, but what it is is dependent origination.
As for me, that is something very different from subconsciousness as "existing in the mind but not immediately available to consciousness".
I see it as factors coming together and enabling a thought to arise. Correct?
Yes, but it's exactly the same thing, just described in different words. That is my point: just different words.

Leon-nl
Posts: 144
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 11:44 pm

Re: Does Theravada acknowledge Subconsciousness?

Post by Leon-nl » Fri Dec 18, 2015 6:01 pm

Pinetree wrote:
Sure, underlying tendencies play a role but can thoughts be subconscious? I doubt it.
Of course they can.
Explain if you want - as I understand it, thoughts arise, come into existence and we can observe them.
According to you, thoughts could arise, come into existence before we can observe them - I'm not sure about that.
As I understand it, there must be a tendency, an object (at least in the example I gave earlier) and absence of mindfulness for the sexual thoughts from my example to occur. How then can they ever have been subconscious?
“Look on the world as empty, Mogharāja, being always mindful.
Having removed wrong view of self, in this way one will cross beyond Death.
When looking on the world in this way the king of Death does not see one.” - Sn 5.15

User avatar
kirk5a
Posts: 1959
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 1:51 pm

Re: Does Theravada acknowledge Subconsciousness?

Post by kirk5a » Fri Dec 18, 2015 6:05 pm

Leon-nl wrote:I would call it a thought formed by "the obsession of sensual passion", one of the seven obsessions or underlying tendencies (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;) combined with an object (the person that is liked) and not being mindful.

Would you agree?

As for me, that is something very different from subconsciousness as "existing in the mind but not immediately available to consciousness".
I see it as factors coming together and enabling a thought to arise. Correct?
Sounds accurate to me.

Regarding lack of mindfulness, that's an important point. I'm reminded of the Malunkyaputta Sutta SN 35.95, where Ven. Malunkyaputta says
Seeing a form
— mindfulness lapsed —
attending
to the theme of 'endearing,'
impassioned in mind,
one feels
and remains fastened there.
One's feelings, born of the form,
grow numerous,
Greed & annoyance
injure one's mind.
Thus amassing stress,
one is said to be far from Unbinding.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html
The whole sutta has some very fruitful insight to contemplate, in bringing up the association of memory and perception combined with lack of mindfulness - with craving.

Interestingly, Ven. Malunkyaputta was the same monk who gave what the Buddha said was an inadequate explanation of the five lower fetters in MN64. He also had a rough patch when he made a poorly considered demand for the Buddha to explain the "undeclared" matters in MN63. But he ultimately attained arahantship, so it certainly worked out.
"When one thing is practiced & pursued, ignorance is abandoned, clear knowing arises, the conceit 'I am' is abandoned, latent tendencies are uprooted, fetters are abandoned. Which one thing? Mindfulness immersed in the body." -AN 1.230

User avatar
kirk5a
Posts: 1959
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 1:51 pm

Re: Does Theravada acknowledge Subconsciousness?

Post by kirk5a » Fri Dec 18, 2015 6:18 pm

Bhikkhu Bodhi's footnote 651 to MN64 may also be relevant here.
On the anusayas or underlying tendencies, see n.473. In the commentaries the defilements are distinguished as occurring at three levels: the anusaya level, where they remain as mere latent dispositions in the mind; the pariyutthana level, where they rise up to obsess and enslave the mind (referred to in #5 of this discourse); and the vitikkama level, where they motivate unwholesome bodily and verbal action. The point of the Buddha's criticism is that the fetters, even when they do not come to active manifestation, continue to exist at the anusaya level so long as they have not been eradicated by the supramundane path.
"When one thing is practiced & pursued, ignorance is abandoned, clear knowing arises, the conceit 'I am' is abandoned, latent tendencies are uprooted, fetters are abandoned. Which one thing? Mindfulness immersed in the body." -AN 1.230

Leon-nl
Posts: 144
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 11:44 pm

Re: Does Theravada acknowledge Subconsciousness?

Post by Leon-nl » Fri Dec 18, 2015 6:23 pm

Thank you, Kirk, also for the suttas and footnote!
“Look on the world as empty, Mogharāja, being always mindful.
Having removed wrong view of self, in this way one will cross beyond Death.
When looking on the world in this way the king of Death does not see one.” - Sn 5.15

Pinetree
Posts: 460
Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2015 4:25 am

Re: Does Theravada acknowledge Subconsciousness?

Post by Pinetree » Fri Dec 18, 2015 7:32 pm

Explain if you want - as I understand it, thoughts arise, come into existence and we can observe them.
There is stuff that you are aware of and stuff that you are not aware of.

Same as there is stuff in your visual field that you don't notice, there are thoughts in your field of mind that you don't notice ?
As I understand it, there must be a tendency, an object (at least in the example I gave earlier) and absence of mindfulness for the sexual thoughts from my example to occur. How then can they ever have been subconscious?
- what tendency, object ?
Like I said, the subconscious assumes there is stuff there that you don't see. Which makes it difficult to talk about it, because you don't see it.

- mindfulness is not a factor for the sexual thoughts to occur or not, you could have sexual thoughts occurring and be mindful of them

- no, it's not the sexual thoughts that are subconscious

- the body sensations were subconscious (in my example, the thoughts were triggered by body sensations and you weren't aware of them)

Leon-nl
Posts: 144
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 11:44 pm

Re: Does Theravada acknowledge Subconsciousness?

Post by Leon-nl » Fri Dec 18, 2015 11:06 pm

Pinetree wrote:
Explain if you want - as I understand it, thoughts arise, come into existence and we can observe them.
There is stuff that you are aware of and stuff that you are not aware of.

Same as there is stuff in your visual field that you don't notice, there are thoughts in your field of mind that you don't notice ?
As I understand it, there must be a tendency, an object (at least in the example I gave earlier) and absence of mindfulness for the sexual thoughts from my example to occur. How then can they ever have been subconscious?
- what tendency, object ?
Like I said, the subconscious assumes there is stuff there that you don't see. Which makes it difficult to talk about it, because you don't see it.

- mindfulness is not a factor for the sexual thoughts to occur or not, you could have sexual thoughts occurring and be mindful of them

- no, it's not the sexual thoughts that are subconscious

- the body sensations were subconscious (in my example, the thoughts were triggered by body sensations and you weren't aware of them)
You say thoughts can be subconscious, I don't believe so. You can be not mindful of a thought, but I don't believe there is any credibility to a thought being hidden and coming to life suddenly.
The Budhha taught that thoughts arise and fall away. As they arise, they come into existence and fade again. Subconsciousness suggest there is a storage with thoughts -again, I don't believe so.

With regard to the "stuff in your visual field that you don't notice": if you don't notice it, if there is no mind-object contact, then it does not exist in your mind.

For the tendencies, see: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The object was the "somebody I like very much" from the example I gave.

"mindfulness is not a factor for the sexual thoughts to occur or not, you could have sexual thoughts occurring and be mindful of them"

Yes, but if you are really mindful, as soon as they arise, you drop them. And yet I think mindfulness is a factor: read the sutta(s) that Kirk cited above.

"the body sensations were subconscious" -->In my example there were no body sensations. And though one might be unaware of body sensations, that is different from body sensations being subconscious, which I don't think is possible.
“Look on the world as empty, Mogharāja, being always mindful.
Having removed wrong view of self, in this way one will cross beyond Death.
When looking on the world in this way the king of Death does not see one.” - Sn 5.15

Pinetree
Posts: 460
Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2015 4:25 am

Re: Does Theravada acknowledge Subconsciousness?

Post by Pinetree » Sat Dec 19, 2015 9:16 am

You say thoughts can be subconscious, I don't believe so. You can be not mindful of a thought, but I don't believe there is any credibility to a thought being hidden and coming to life suddenly.
If there is something in front of your eyes, you can not be aware of it, and if there is a thought in your mind, you can equally be unaware of it. If you want to call it "no contact", you can apply this equally to both examples.

I think there is a problem that you see mind as a single block entity. So you automatically assume that if there is a thought, it must be conscious, because if it was subconscious, there was no mind to think the thought.

There also seems to be confusion about what subconscious means to mainstream psychology. I really think you need to look more into that, otherwise the discussion becomes tedious.
It is not always the case that we are aware of thoughts that precipitate emotions because our thinking, or framing of situations, is very automatic or conditioned. We are used to thinking certain ways, out of habit. We develop habits of thinking over time. These are just patterns of thinking given certain stimulus cues (events) in our environment. When these habits become so automatic that we are not even aware of them, then we call them “subconscious”. Subconscious just means out of awareness. It doesn’t mean that we cannot become aware of the thoughts it just means that they are so automatic that we don’t recognize them.
http://www.drfabian.com/cognitive.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The Budhha taught that thoughts arise and fall away. As they arise, they come into existence and fade again. Subconsciousness suggest there is a storage with thoughts -again, I don't believe so.
There sort of is a storage for thoughts, called memory. Not sure how that relates to the topic.
For the tendencies, see: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ... .than.html
There is not much there ...
Yes, but if you are really mindful, as soon as they arise, you drop them. And yet I think mindfulness is a factor: read the sutta(s) that Kirk cited above.
The cited sutta says something different: it's about non-self, and it says - if there are sensual thoughts, they are not yours and you have no desire in them.

But I'm a bit puzzled by:

"The ideas cognizable via the intellect that are uncognized by you — that you have never before cognized, that you don't cognize, and that are not to be cognized by you: Do you have any desire or passion or love there?"
Is that about a thought that you are not thinking ?

And what does it mean: "have never before congnized" ? Is that a thought that you never had, a seeing that you never saw, a hearing that you never heard ? What is actually the point here ?

Leon-nl
Posts: 144
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 11:44 pm

Re: Does Theravada acknowledge Subconsciousness?

Post by Leon-nl » Sat Dec 19, 2015 2:04 pm

Pinetree,

Something went wrong with the link I gave to the Anusaya Sutta, here it is:

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Further, I think your reasoning is wrong and you lack some basic knowledge which makes it a little difficult to discuss.
As I am not very knowledgeable about this subject myself -that's why I put the question- let me cite Yuttadhammo ( http://buddhism.stackexchange.com/users/18/yuttadhammo" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ) a Theravada Buddhist monk:

"In Theravada Buddhism, there is no such thing as a sub-conscious mind. There is what is called "bhavanga-citta", but it is not active in the sense of contributing to conscious activity; it is just a state of mind that lies in wait, kind of like a pilot light.

According to the Mahapatthana, the seventh book in the abhidhamma pitaka, there are many causal relationships, one of which is where the physical is causally connected to the arising of the mental (i.e., the physical brain at least partially conditions a thought). This is where your flashes are coming from; it also works the other way of course, where the mental affects the physical.

It could be worth your while (if you are following the Theravada) to study at least Bhikkhu Bodhi's Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma, since it describes some of the building blocks of reality that are involved in this process.

Understanding causality, of course, is of great importance in Buddhism; it is the second stage of insight knowledge to understand how the physical and mental aspects of existence affect each other."

http://buddhism.stackexchange.com/quest ... cious-mind" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



WIth metta,

Leon
“Look on the world as empty, Mogharāja, being always mindful.
Having removed wrong view of self, in this way one will cross beyond Death.
When looking on the world in this way the king of Death does not see one.” - Sn 5.15

Pinetree
Posts: 460
Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2015 4:25 am

Re: Does Theravada acknowledge Subconsciousness?

Post by Pinetree » Sat Dec 19, 2015 4:35 pm

Ok, in any case, my point is that to psychology, a subconscious thought is a thought that you are not aware of but can direct awareness towards and bring it into the light of consciousness (at which point it is not subconscious anymore) .

I think this point should prove helpful in avoiding confusions. I'll let other people decide if that is known to Theravada or not.

User avatar
lionking
Posts: 132
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2015 1:28 pm

Re: Does Theravada acknowledge Subconsciousness?

Post by lionking » Sat Dec 19, 2015 11:26 pm

None of what I mention here is metaphorical. This is exactly the way things are.

1. There is only one consciousness (ear, nose mind etc).
2. This creates everything you see. That includes the sun, moon even the mountains.
3. The world you observe is a manifestation of your own consciousness.
4. It creates a sense of an animated physical world by projecting frames to you in 3 dimensions.
5. Each frame occur at sub-nano second intervals so it appears fluid.
6. Each frame that comes into being is an entirely new physical self.
7. The consciousness creates the world unsupervised.
8. The unsupervised consciousness is perhaps what is referred as "Subconsciousness" here.
9. The unsupervised consciousness "thinks" itself. The thinking is a vibration that turns light into matter you see.
10. You gain access to this consciousness by being mindful.
11. The more mindful you are the more control you have over your own creation.
12. Being mindful is how you take responsibility for the vibrations you generate subconsciousnessly.
13. Thus you are able to mold the experience to your preferences to a large degree.
grr ..

Leon-nl
Posts: 144
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 11:44 pm

Re: Does Theravada acknowledge Subconsciousness?

Post by Leon-nl » Sat Dec 19, 2015 11:54 pm

Leon-nl wrote:
lionking wrote:None of what I mention here is metaphorical. This is exactly the way things are.


8. The unsupervised consciousness is perhaps what is referred as "Subconsciousness" here.


12. Being mindful is how you take responsibility for the vibrations you generate subconsciousnessly.



Nope, what you are referring to, is "not being mindful".

Earlier in the thread I defined "subconscious" as ""existing in the mind but not immediately available to consciousness".

Subconsciousness does not exist according to Theravada. As you said, there is only one consciousness.
“Look on the world as empty, Mogharāja, being always mindful.
Having removed wrong view of self, in this way one will cross beyond Death.
When looking on the world in this way the king of Death does not see one.” - Sn 5.15

User avatar
lionking
Posts: 132
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2015 1:28 pm

Re: Does Theravada acknowledge Subconsciousness?

Post by lionking » Sun Dec 20, 2015 12:48 am

Leon-nl wrote:Subconsciousness does not exist according to Theravada. As you said, there is only one consciousness.
What kind of divergence exists in other Dhamma schools of thought? Is there a concept of Subconsciousness in Mahayana for example?
grr ..

Pinetree
Posts: 460
Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2015 4:25 am

Re: Does Theravada acknowledge Subconsciousness?

Post by Pinetree » Sun Dec 20, 2015 9:46 am

Earlier in the thread I defined "subconscious" as ""existing in the mind but not immediately available to consciousness".
I have difficulty finding clarity in this definition, and fear it can be a source of confusion.

If you find a mental object that is "available", how can you prove that it existed before it became available ?

And if you cannot prove that, what does the definition apply to ?

Leon-nl
Posts: 144
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 11:44 pm

Re: Does Theravada acknowledge Subconsciousness?

Post by Leon-nl » Sun Dec 20, 2015 4:33 pm

lionking wrote:
Leon-nl wrote:Subconsciousness does not exist according to Theravada. As you said, there is only one consciousness.
What kind of divergence exists in other Dhamma schools of thought? Is there a concept of Subconsciousness in Mahayana for example?
Mahayana is so broad, I guess you will find all kind of beliefs there. But you should ask Mahayana buddhists that question.

As for theravada, if you want to go deeply in it, this might be interesting, but I did not completely read it, don't know how accurate it is:

http://www.middlebury.edu/media/view/44 ... _mind0.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
“Look on the world as empty, Mogharāja, being always mindful.
Having removed wrong view of self, in this way one will cross beyond Death.
When looking on the world in this way the king of Death does not see one.” - Sn 5.15

User avatar
The Thinker
Posts: 805
Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2015 6:12 pm
Location: UK

Re: Does Theravada acknowledge Subconsciousness?

Post by The Thinker » Sun Dec 20, 2015 5:35 pm

Subconscious reaction in my opinion is very much a learning curve that may grow, change, and continue throughout a lifetime, from birth, our lives start being conditioned, our beliefs, education ,Culture, religion,TV etc all play a part on our subconscious world, I also think that other things may be at play , which are natural survival tendencies, a baby grasping for mothers nipple(milk) = (thirst) and a mothers tendencies(not in all cases) to feed the new born is possibly the first subconscious behavior we encounter? Subconscious is surely just a small part of a much broader interactive use of words of description thought up to describe an object of the imagination?, it's complicated.
"Watch your heart, observe. Be the observer, be the knower, not the condition" Ajahn Sumedho volume5 - The Wheel Of Truth

Leon-nl
Posts: 144
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 11:44 pm

Re: Does Theravada acknowledge Subconsciousness?

Post by Leon-nl » Sun Dec 20, 2015 5:42 pm

Pinetree wrote:
Earlier in the thread I defined "subconscious" as ""existing in the mind but not immediately available to consciousness".
I have difficulty finding clarity in this definition, and fear it can be a source of confusion.

If you find a mental object that is "available", how can you prove that it existed before it became available ?

And if you cannot prove that, what does the definition apply to ?
Let me cite again, what I started with:

"There is much here that contradicts modern psychological assumptions. To cite just the most glaring example, there is no place in abhidhamma for the " subconscious" as understood in modern terms. Consciousness is seen as arising momentarily upon a single object, there is no room for multiple levels of consciousness happening simultaneously."

Let me take my example again:

"I like somebody very much. I don't know exactly why and I start investigating why I like this particular person. Then I start having sexual thoughts about this person while exploring my feelings and thoughts.
Do these thoughts come from the subconsciousness?"

Psychologists would probably call it suppressed feelings that emerge from the subconscious (or unconscious).

In Buddhism we have the "ten fetters" from the Sutta Pitaka ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetter_%28Buddhism%29" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ), one of which is "sensual desire". And the Anusaya Sutta gives us "the obsession of sensual passion". We also have "dependent arising" in buddhism.
This is enough material to explain the sexual thoughts from the example.
And these thoughts are formed the moment they arise, they were NOT (lying dormant) subconscious, as you asserted in an earlier post:

I said: Sure, underlying tendencies play a role but can thoughts be subconscious? I doubt it.
You said: Of course they can.

I think this gives a good definition of subconscious:

"The subconscious is the part of our mind that is not in current awareness. It is the part of our consciousness that is not being focused on and is lying dormant. It is impossible to hold the entirety of our knowledge in direct focus in our minds at the same time so we need to store memories and knowledge. This storage is known as the subconscious, the term being coined by Pierre Janet. The subconscious stores all of your memories, beliefs, previous experiences, the people/places you have seen, and the skills you have acquired. Information in the subconscious cannot be recalled easily, they are buried deep within our minds (or repressed)."

source: http://www.alleydog.com/glossary/defini ... bconscious" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Note that this definition does NOT include thoughts.

The source you gave, says:

"When these habits become so automatic that we are not even aware of them, then we call them “subconscious”. Subconscious just means out of awareness. It doesn’t mean that we cannot become aware of the thoughts it just means that they are so automatic that we don’t recognize them. "

And that mislead you to believe that thoughts can be subconscious. Reactions can be automatic, without thought. "Subconscious" if you want, but thoughts cannot be subconscious. Example:

If a dangerous dog comes running towards you, you might start running, to get away, without thinking. That reaction, you might call "automatic", coming from the "subconsciousness". ----> And I would not call it subconsciousness, but an automatic response pattern stored in the brain.

If you don't start running immediately but start thinking about the best way to escape the dog or not getting harmed by it - then we are talking about thoughts and they are definitely not subconscious.

The thing being wrong with your source is that it starts with actions without thought "automatic habits" (non-volitional) and then says there are thoughts (volitional) behind these actions.

When the phone rings, most of the time I just pick it up without any thought. But when I am speaking with somebody else and I say "wait a second, I must pick up the phone", only then there is a thought.

And that concludes my discussion with you:-)
“Look on the world as empty, Mogharāja, being always mindful.
Having removed wrong view of self, in this way one will cross beyond Death.
When looking on the world in this way the king of Death does not see one.” - Sn 5.15

Leon-nl
Posts: 144
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 11:44 pm

Re: Does Theravada acknowledge Subconsciousness?

Post by Leon-nl » Sun Dec 20, 2015 5:47 pm

The Thinker wrote:Subconscious reaction in my opinion is very much a learning curve that may grow, change, and continue throughout a lifetime, from birth, our lives start being conditioned, our beliefs, education ,Culture, religion,TV etc all play a part on our subconscious world, I also think that other things may be at play , which are natural survival tendencies, a baby grasping for mothers nipple(milk) = (thirst) and a mothers tendencies(not in all cases) to feed the new born is possibly the first subconscious behavior we encounter? Subconscious is surely just a small part of a much broader interactive use of words of description thought up to describe an object of the imagination?, it's complicated.
I agree with you, I believe "conditioning" is the key word. Our brains are being conditioned all the time and if you understand "subconsciousness" as such, I think nobody will refute it.
But as I mentioned in my reaction to Pinetree: thoughts cannot be subconscious. One can only be not mindful of them.
“Look on the world as empty, Mogharāja, being always mindful.
Having removed wrong view of self, in this way one will cross beyond Death.
When looking on the world in this way the king of Death does not see one.” - Sn 5.15

User avatar
The Thinker
Posts: 805
Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2015 6:12 pm
Location: UK

Re: Does Theravada acknowledge Subconsciousness?

Post by The Thinker » Sun Dec 20, 2015 6:25 pm

Hi leon-nl,

The word subconscious did not come into known existence til 1823(or so the historians tell us?) I think subconscious was indeed well recognized by the Buddha , who had a limited vocabulary with which to work, but he did break down the causes of dukkha to a handful or even less words (meanings) Craving(thirst etc) which in the pali like language, had very broad meanings, in my view, this answer may or may not be relevant, but we humans crave conventions of one sort or another and words and the ability to create new words is also one of those clinging conventions.
"Watch your heart, observe. Be the observer, be the knower, not the condition" Ajahn Sumedho volume5 - The Wheel Of Truth

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bundokji, EmptyShadow, mikenz66 and 44 guests