06. a Study in Buddhist Psychology

8/3/2019 06. a Study in Buddhist Psychology

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/06-a-study-in-buddhist-psychology 1/17

Contemporary Buddhism, VoL 5, No. 2, 2004 D Routledgeg ^ TaylorfiifranciiCroi

A Study in Buddhist

Psychology: is Buddhism trulypro-detachment andanti-attachment?Lynken Ghose

Butler University, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA

Buddhism is often portrayed as pro-detachment and anti-attachment, yet is this

really true? If we examine love, we can see that attachment is always a part of

love, and, in fact, without a deep attachment or bond, one can question whether

a relationship is loving at all. Thus, since the ultimate aim of Buddhism is to

be compassionate, empathetic and loving towards both oneself and others, how

can this goal truly be a complete lack of attachment?

While it is plausible to interpret Buddhism's goal as that of detachment

(detachment often being used as the antonym of attachment), as some of thescriptural passages seem to be translatable in this fashion. Buddhism could also

be interpreted as accepting attachments based on love but not accepting

attachments based on possessiveness. Along the same lines, rather than accept-

ing all types of detachment, Buddhism could be interpreted as accepting

detachment based on the desire to set someone or something free from one's

acquisitiveness, yet as rejecting detachment that masks a lack of caring or subtle

(or not so subtle) form of apathy. Thus, translators and interpreters of Buddhism

should be very careful to make these distinctions.

In spite of the largely technical nature of this paper, the topic itself is one ofpractical concem. The fact that many modem interpreters of Buddhism and

translators of ancient scriptures argue that Buddhism is pro-detachment and

anti-attachment, not defining these terms in a careful and precise manner could

actually be quite harmful for those who rely on their interpretations for

guidance. In fact, I have witnessed many Buddhist practitioners, in both the East

and the West, attempting to distance themselves from their feelings, even the

softer ones, because they truly believed that this type of distance was the

meaning of Buddhist detachment. Instead, what they ended up doing was

merely making themselves more unhappy, as they lost touch with their realfeelings and became more apathetic towards the world.



106 L. Ghose

physical connection by which one thing is attached to another, a fastening'. If

we focus on the more psychological connotations of the word, 'attachment'

implies a kind of special feeling of bonding to another person. In the same

dictionary, detachment is defined as 'the act or feeling of detaching, separation','indifference to worldly concerns or partisan opinion' or 'absence of emotional

bias, neutrality of feeling' {Webster's Third New International Dictionary

1993). Detachment connotes not only a lack of any special feeling or bond to

another person, but also a kind of indifference or a complete lack of hierarchy

in regard to one's feelings: thus, according to this definition of detachment, one

might treat one's neighbor and one's mother in the same way.

John Bowlby, one of the foundational researchers in Westem psychology on

attachment theory, defines attachment as a '"primary motivational system" with

its own workings and interface with other motivational systems' (Holmes 1993,63).' Other modern psychological definitions, similar to the dictionary

definitions quoted previously, seem to imply that attachment is 'the condition in

which an individual is linked emotionally w ith another person .. .' (Holmes

1993, 218). (Thus, detachment would be the absence of any emotional link.)

Yet, it is perhaps not central to determine whether attachment is a 'motivational

system' (i.e. some sort of volition) or an emotion. Instead, the significance

attributed to attachment within the human psyche is of more import. Beginning

with Bowlby's work on attachment, healthy attachment is seen as an essential

ingredient of a human being's psychological make-up. Bowlby also emphasizes'the importance of bonding between parents and children' and the 'need for a

secure base and to feel attached' (Holmes 1993, 2). In addition, the importance

of attachment is not restricted to the psychological life of the child; for adults

and adolescents, attachment and bonding are also important. Bowlby states that

deep, loving feelings correspond to a deep attachment (Holmes 1993, 69). In

fact, he sees marriage as the 'adult manifestation of attachment whose compan-

ionship provides a secure base allowing for work and exploration, and a

protective shell in times of need' (Holmes 1993, 81-2). In the folowing quote,

Bowlby makes a link between the secure/insecure attachment of the child andsubsequent feelings of security/insecurity that may develop later in life.

A securely attached child will store an internal working model of a

responsive, loving, reliable care-giver, and a self that is worthy of love

and attention and will bring these assumptions to bear on all relationships.

Conversely, an insecurely attached child may view the world as a

dangerous place in which people are to be treated with great caution, and

sees himself as ineffective and unworthy of love. (Holmes 1993, 79)

Thus, in summary, it is evident from Bowlby's work and subsequent theorists



Is Buddhism Truly Pro-detaehment and Anti-attachment? 107

One of the more precise descriptions of attachmetit in Buddhist literature

comes from the Saundarananda of Asvaghosa. In verse 18.18-18.19, Asvaghosa

offers a number of translations for this concept, including murchita, nisrita,

samyoga, pratibaddha, sakta, and grathita. The word murchita comes from theverbal root mUrch + and is especially vivid in its connotation. It seems to

imply a connection to something that has become so rigid as to be calcified.

Sakta, pratibaddha, grathita, and so on imply a grasping, a fastening, or a

clinging.

caturvidhe naikavidhaprasatige yato 'hamdhdravidhdvasaktalf

amurchitas cagrathitas ca tatra tribhyo vimukto 'smi tato bhavebhyahll

(18.18, Saundarananda)

Since I am unattached to the four types of food, all of which have manytypes of attachments (inherent within act of eating them) and (since) I am

not bound nor attached (to them), I am free from the three worlds.

anisritas cdpratibaddhacitto drstasrutddau vyavaharadharmel

yasmdt samatmdnugatas ca tatra tasmdd visamyogagato 'smi muktahll

(18.19, Saundaranandaf

Since I am not dependent nor bound to the everyday world, characterized

by (attachment to) the sense organs, and since I have come to have an

equanimous mind towards this world, I am liberated, detached (from it).

Another telling word that is used in association with attachment within the

Saundarananda is asthd (17.6), In the context of the Saundarananda, this word

seems to imply that one is waiting for a particular result from something, and

hence anastha means the quality of non-waiting or non-expectation. Thus, if we

combine the idea of asthd with murehita and so on, attachment connotes

something like a hardened bond that brings about rigid expectations for a

certain result, and so on. Another part of the standard Buddhist view on

attachment is that it is intricately linked to parikalpa or delusion. In verse 13.49,of Asvaghosa's Saundarananda and in Kambala's Alokamdld,'^ the Buddhist

admonition against parikalpa, and therefore, by extension, attachment, is clearly

expressed,

nendriyam visaye tdvat pravrttam api sajjatel

ydvan na ma nasas tatra parikalpah pravartate//l3.49, Saunda rananda/P

As long as delusion does not exist in the mind, even if a sense organ is

in use, it does not attach to its object.

sarva eva prahdtavyah p arikalpo Hpa ko api hi/



108 L Ghose

with a misconception or a misunderstanding of the world. Without this delusion,

there would be no attachment, only detachment, as we misconceive the things

of the world as permanent, when they are, in fact, impermanent. The second

passage from the Alokamdld gives us a further hint as to the implications ofattachment by saying that conceptions themselves have the nature of delusion.

This seems to imply that conceptions, due to their fixed nature and inability to

approximate the specifics of an experience, may reinforce or strengthen one's

attachments, and cause one suffering when these attachments are brought into

question. For example, if one has the conception that a cow has four legs,

weighs at least 1000 pounds, and has a white color, it may be difficult for one

to adjust to the fact that a 1000 pound black animal with four legs could also

be categorized as a 'co w ', as one would be too attached to on e's preconceptions

about the 'whiteness' of a 'cow'.In summary, to combine the different portrayals of 'attachment' in the

Saundarananda, attachment is characterized by a misunderstanding {parikalpa)

and a certain, fixed expectation (dsthd), as well as being characterized by a

hardened (mUrchita) bond between two people or between a person and a

thing. From these passages from the Saundarananda and so on, one gets

the impression that attachment is clearly something negative. This idea

differs greatly from the Westem psychological understanding of Bowlby and

others, which does not see all attachments as necessarily stemming from

delusive thinking, nor does it see the bond of attachment as necessarilysomething negative. As was mentioned previously, in Western psychological

thinking, love always includes some attachment. This brings into question

translating words with a purely negative connotation in Buddhist Sanskrit texts

(such as updddna, sakta, etc.), as 'attachment' because the English word

'attachment' carries some positive undertones. Perhaps a translation of

'negative attachment' or 'clinging' would always be better for these types of

words.

In his Clarifying the Natural State, Dakpo Tashi Namgyal, a modem Tibetan

interpreter of Buddhism, provides us with more clues as to the Buddhist

understanding of detachment. For him, Buddhist detachment is primarily

concemed with remaining 'unbound' in action and with neither being too much

in pursuit of the pleasant (too 'accepting') nor too rejecting of the painful. The

idea of being 'uninvolved in striving' may hark back to the idea of andsthd in

the Saundarananda, as it implies that one should have a lack of concem for a

certain fixed result. In addition, Tashi Namgyal's reference to 'naturalness' in

the following text seems to be urging a cultivation of one's original state of

mind before the advent of dualistic judgments, for these types of judgments

disturb the inherent peace of the mind, especially if one gets too caught up in

them.



Is Buddhism Truly Pro-detachment and Anti-attachment? 109

and uncontrived without judging; remain unbound and uninvolved in

striving.^

In Buddhism, there are many words, in addition to those from the Saun-

darananda, that have been translated as 'detachment' or 'dispassion': viraga,upeksd, upddana are some that commonly occur. In the Majjhima Nikdya,

viraga is frequently lauded as the goal of Buddhism, and is rendered as

'dispassion' by one modem translator, Bhikkhu Nanamoli; in Rune Johansson's

Psychology of Nirvana, Johansson describes the feelings of the arhat as

'disinterested and impersonal'. In addition, in many standard Sanskrit-English

and Pali-English dictionaries, virdga and upeksd {upekkhd, Pali) are translated

as 'dispassio nateness', 'indifference', 'zero point'.* Zero point seems to imply

some point of non-feeling from which one observes feelings. Also, at times,

upeksd is also rendered as 'equanimity' by some translators. E. H. Johnston,who can still be considered to be the principal scholarly figure in Asvaghosa

studies, translates upeksd as 'indifference' and virdga as 'passionlessness'. In

the same two verses, Alessandro Passi, a more recent translator of the Saun-

darananda, renders virdga as 'free of passion' (priva de passione) and upeksd

as the state of being or remaining 'indifferent' {indijferente)?

Many of these interpreters of Buddhism take the view that attachment is

something negative to be extinguished. For example, Grace Burford, in her

study of the Atthakavagga, states 'the general teaching against desire and

attachment treats persons who detach them selves as ideal, exem plary' (Burford

1991, 50-1). Buddhadasa, a twentieth-century Thai Theravdda Buddhist master,

states: 'Buddhism cannot be characterized as either optimistic or pessi-

mistic ... Furthermore, it teaches us to form no attachments, to be neither glad

over the benefits nor upset over the drawbacks' (Swearer 1991, 86). In the

following passage, Geshe G elsang G yatso, a modem Tibetan teacher, echoes the

sentiments of Buddhadasa.

Likewise, the more attachment we have, the more problems we experi-

ence. At the moment most of our problems arise because of attachment.A thief, for example, may be sent to prison for the whole of his life

because of his atta ch m en t... The Buddhist m aster Vasubandhu used

many examples to show how attachment creates suffering. His first

example was that flies have a very strong attachment to pleasing odours.

Yet when they try to land on food, humans kill them. Moths are attached

to beautiful forms such as light... They try to enter into the light and

finally die. According to Vasubandhu, some living beings die from

attachment to visual form or sound, taste, smell or touch. But human

beings have strong attachment to all of these five sense objects. (Gyatso1984, 5-6)



110 L Ghose

analogy of his to include positive and negative forms of detachment as

well.

The word attachment is frequently used by Buddhists in English. It is

intended to express the idea that we bind ourselves through our passion-ate, demanding possessiveness, and that we therefore necessarily suffer hy

being so bound when, sooner or later, the object of desire eludes our

grasp. It is therefore non-attachment, in giving up and letting go (the sign

of the true love that wishes to make not itself but the loved person happy)

that the way to the overcoming of suffering is to be sought.

This basic Buddhist attitude that teaches people to show first real love,

real compassion, and unrestricted joy in the joy of others (while at the

same time, we attain to an inner equanimity in regard to what happens toourselves), was at a relatively early date reinterpreted and taken to mean

that every kind of human attachment and love was devalued. This concept

arose because of the wide range of meanings in the English word

detachment, but the German-speaking Buddhists followed suit, using the

words Verhatftetsein or Anhaften for all forms of love and affection,

irrespective of whether it was a matter of passionate desire and possess-

iveness or of loving devotion. In this way. Western Buddhism was turned

into a gloomily a scetic and anti-world doctrine ... (Govinda 1991 , 87)

Thus, Govinda asserts that a true understanding of Buddhism is that oneshould feel real joy at the happiness of others, or a kind of deep involvement

with them; yet, one should practice a kind of equanimity in the face of one's

own good and bad fortune or, in a sense, a kind of detachment towards one's

own extemal situation and intemal mood. Govinda continues to explicate his

understanding of attachment in Buddhism, by making very significant distinc-

tion: that of good versus bad attachments.

We must test our attachment in regard to its specific nature and character-

istics, for only by doing so can we determine whether it is wholesome orunwholesome. If we cling to things or beings with passionate possessive-

ness, we will experience suffering and learn the unwholesome nature of

our actions. But if we are inclined toward things and beings with an inner

freedom and with loving sentiments, that is wholesome. (Govinda 1991,

89)

Thus, Lama Govinda, unlike many of the previously quoted modem interpreters

and ancient sources, allows for wholesome and unwholesome attachments.

There is such a thing as being attached in loving way and being attached in a

non-loving way; it is not attachment itself that is the enemy. This seems toimply that an enlightened person could still have loving attachments, and hence



I s B u d d h i s m T r u l y P r o - d e ta c h m e n t and A n t i - a t t a c h m e n t ? I l l

brothers. There are those who continue my work for hungry children, others

who enjoy my w ork of listening to the suffering of people in order to help them

be healed" (1993, 251). Chan Khong does not believe in solitary enlightenment,

nor does she see Buddhist practice outside of the care for the poor and theneedy. For her, Buddhism always implies involvement in the suffering of

others. One can never detach from or live outside of this involvement, even for

a moment. Thus, although she does not state this directly, Chan Khong does not

seem to be for 'detachment' in the sense of indifference or neutrality towards

the sufferings of other people and the world in general, nor does she seem to

be against attachments based on love and caring.

In addition, although many of his interpretations put him at odds with Lama

Govinda, one phrase within Geshe Kelsang Gyatso's comments on attachment

seems to imply some sort of agreement: 'Also, in terms of family and personalrelationships, intense attachment can lead to problems such as over-possessive-

ness' (Gyatso 1984, 5). The key phrase here is 'intense attachm ent'. This phrase

indicates a distinction between 'intense attachment' and some other sort of

attachment—perhaps a less clingy sort of attachment? If this distinction is

indeed implied, then Kelsang Gyatso is closer to Lama Govinda's understand-

ing.

If one looks at the scriptural, commentarial and semi-scriptural literature'" in

Buddhism, certain scriptural sources do seem to make distinctions between

positive and negative types of attachments, as well as positive and negativetypes of detachments. One such discussion takes place in Buddhaghosa's

Visuddhimagga. In one section of the text, Buddhaghosa discusses six major

personality types: faithful, greedy, hating, intelligent, speculative and deluded.

He then breaks this schema down into three pairs: the greedy personality is

paired w ith the faithful one; the intelligent personality with the hating; and the

speculative with the deluded. The paired personalities are considered to be

parallel or linked in a certain way. The only positive personalities in this

schema are the faithful and the intelligent; the rest seem to have qualities that

are not conducive to Buddhist practice.

Yasmd pana dosacaritassa kusalappavattisamaye pannd balavati hoti

dosassa dsannagunattd/yathd hi akusalapakkhe doso nissineho na

drammanarn alliyati eva kusalapakkhe pafind/ yathd ca doso abhUtarn pi

dosameva pariyesati evam pamd bhutarn dosam eva/ yathd doso satta-

parivajjandkdrena pavattati, evarn pafind san khdraparivajjdkdrena tasmd

dosacaritassa buddhicarito sabhdgol {Visuddhimagga, 102)"

One of intelligent temperament is parallel to one of hating temperament

because understanding is strong when profitable {kamma) occurs in one of



112 L. Ghose

beings {satta), whole understanding occurs in the mode of condemning

conditioned phenomena ^^

The key ideas in this quotation is that the hating personality is 'disaffected'

in a negative way, whereas the intelligent personality is 'disaffected'{nissinehaf^ in a positive way; also, neither personality 'clings' to their object.

If one makes 'disaffection' synonym ous to 'detac hm ent', then this seems to

imply that there are negative and positive ways to he detached. According to

Buddhaghosa, someone who is disaffected in a negative way will tend to seek

out meaningless or 'unreal faults', whereas someone who is disaffected in a

positive way tends to see things more as they are, and thus will only see real

weaknesses or faults. Modem interpreters, such as Dakpo Tashi Namgyal from

the Tibetan tradition, also seem to imply that there is such a thing as negative

detachment. In his book Glarifying the Natural State, he calls this negative

detachment 'indifferent calm'. Tashi Namgyal states that 'indifferent calm' can

he easily mistaken for true aw areness, hut it really is something different.

Interestingly enough, Tashi Namgyal believes that this type of detachment is

actually hased in the state of absent-mindedness.

Moreover, if the meditation is regarded as absented-mindedly refraining

from accepting or rejecting the entirety of perceptual experience, that

is indifferent calm and is simply an ordinary state. (Tashi Namgyal

2001, 49)

Westem psychology has also performed some studies of detached states in

children, and it has found that detachment can be a sign of a child not being

able to handle disruptions in their connection or bond to the caregiver. In the

following passage, the author refers to the 'parent's departure'. In this case,

'departure' can refer to actual physical departure or to emotional absence or

inaccessibility.

Fear and anger are often combined in a child's protest of a parent's

departure. As initial attempts to reestablish contact fail and the child'sexpectation for reunion are disappointed, he or she reappraises the

situation, and frightened and angry efforts to reunite give way to sadness.

Despair accompanies the recognition that protest will not succeed in

reestablishing contact with the parent. Since prolonged despair and failure

to reestablish contact leave the child in an intolerahly painful state, the

child may attempt to reduce this pain with defensive efforts to exclude

information about the absent parent. Defensive detachment becomes the

only available means of coping with the severe distress that the child

experiences. (Kobak 1999, 29)

Thus, 'detachment' is a kind of defense against pain, a distance that a child puts




interpreters to take these nuances into account when they are making transla-

tions, for detachment can possibly signify something profoundly negative and

unhealthy. Therefore, to put forth the English word 'detachment' as the goal of

Buddhism, without some clear qualification, could lead those who read thesetranslations to injure themselves psychologically.

In Buddhaghosa's comparison of the faithful and greedy temperaments, one

sees a similar analysis of attachment: the greedy temperament is being por-

trayed as attached in a negative way, whereas the faithful temperament is

attached in a positive way.

Tattha yasma ragacaritassa kusalappavattisamaye saddha balavati hoti

rdgassa asannaguriatta/

Yathd hi akusalapakkhe rdgo siniddho ndtilukho evarn kusalapakkhesaddhd rdgo vatthukdme pariyesati evam saddhd silddigune/yathd rdgo

ahitarn na pariccajati evarn saddhd hitarn na pariccajati tasmd

rdgacaritassa saddhdcarlto sabhdgol {Visuddhimagga, 102)'' '

Herein, one of faithful temperament is parallel to one of greedy tempera-

ment because faith is strong when profitable {kamma) occurs in one of

greedy temperament, owing to its special qualities being near to those of

greed. For, in an unprofitable way, greed is affectionate {siniddho) and not

over-austere, and so, in a profitable way, is faith. Greed seeks out sensedesires as object, while faith seeks out the special qualities of virtue and

so on. And greed does not give up what is harmful {ahita) while faith

does not give up what is beneficial {hita}.^^

When Buddhaghosa says that 'greed does not give up what is harmful while

faith does not give up w hat is bene ficial', he seem s to be implying that a faithful

person is attached to things that are conducive to Buddhist practice whereas the

greedy personality may remain attached to what is detrimental to practice. Also,

Buddhaghosa states that both the greedy and faithful personalities possess

desires; however, the faithful person will desire auspicious virtues whereas thegreedy person will desire things that are inauspicious and unwholesome for

Buddhist practice. The fact that desire exists seems to imply a certain amount

of attachment to the object of that desire.

In another portion of the Visuddhimagga, Buddhaghosa expounds upon a

theory that might explain the problem practitioners encounter in not being able

to distinguish negative types of detachment from positive ones (and, by

extension, negative types of attachment from positive ones): it is called the

'Near and Far Enemy' theory. In this theory, Buddhaghosa goes through the

four divine abidings—compassion, lovingkindness, gladness and equanimity—

and their 'near' and 'far' enemies.'* A near enemy is one that can easily be



114 L. Ghose

Buddhaghosa recognizes the possibility of a negative psychological state being

easily mistaken for a positive one does explain how Buddhist practitioners

could easily fall into the trap of not heing able to distinguish apathy from the

type of detachment that frees or liberates.The term upekkhd {upeksd in Sanskrit) is variously translated in the Pali-En-

glish dictionary as 'disinterestedness', 'equanimity', 'neutral feeling',

'indifference', or as a 'zero point between joy {somanassa) and sorrow

{domanassa)', and so on. In his Buddhism and Society: A Great Tradition and

its Burmese Vicissitudes, Melford Spiro also translates upekkhd with the word

'detachment' (1982, 48). One way of understanding the term upeksd is to

analyze its component parts. The prefix 'upa' can mean 'close' or 'near', or it

can connote respect. For example, the verb upacar + can mean 'respec ting',

'worsh ipping', 'attending u pon ', and so on.'^ Thus, in a sense, one can think ofthe term upeksd as a careful kind of regard or attention, but also one that keeps

a respectful distance. This would give it a different sense from the connotation

of detachment as 'apathy'.

If one looks at upeksd within the context of Buddhist texts like the

Saundarananda, it is also useful to examine how Asvaghosa employs related

words. For example, samupeksd connotes the idea of disregarding in a proper

and careful way. In the Saundarananda, this word is used in the context of the

goldsmith who leaves the gold alone for the proper time so that it is allowed

to cool off and form correctly.'* The process of making gold is compared withthe process of training the mind. O ne has to be careful to choose the right object

of meditation {nimitta) for certain disturbances of mind: the correct nimitta will

let the mind 'cool off properly while the incorrect one will disturb the

disequilibrium of the mind even further. This 'leaving alone' or allowing of the

gold to 'cool off {samupeksd), performed by the goldsmith, does not seem to

be one of indifference, but rather a careful nurturing love of an artisan for her

work. This idea of leaving something alone in a respectful and nurturing way,

attached here, could also be attached to upeksd. In this case, the prefix 'sam'

may just indicate a slight increase in the intensity of the careful (yet not toohovering) regard of upeksd, or perhaps the idea of 'along with' or 'together

with' upeksd (Hayes 1995, 99). Thus, upeksd or samupeksd could connote the

type of positive attachment that Govinda refers to. In addition, in certain

passages of the Saundarananda, detachment or non-attachment is portrayed as

something had and attachment as something good. Verse 8.24 speaks of there

being no joy in the dharma for someone who is not attached to it and the

suhsequent effects of practicing it.

sravane graharie 'tha dhdrarie paramdrthdvagame manahsameavisaktamates caldtmano na hi dharme 'bhiratirvidh'yate //(8.24, Saun-




Chi Tsang (549-623 CE), a Chinese Madhyamaka practitioner and scholar,

believes that the goal of Nagarjuna's interpretation of Buddhism is to eliminate

any attachment one can have to any concept, including the concept of non-at-

tachment. In the following statement from Chi Tsang, 'nonacquisitiveness' canhe taken as roughly synonymous to 'non-attachment'.

If we take nonacquisitiveness as right, it would still be (a form of)

acquisitiveness and is not called 'nonacquisitiveness'. Just the complete

absence of dependence is called 'no nacquisitiveness ' (Liu 1993, 2).

Thus, Chi Tsang seems to be saying: do not get attached to any idea of

non-attachment because then you are attached to some sort of codified precon-

ception of reality and not reality itself. Reality itself should be more fluid.

Kambala, in his Alokamdld, echoes Chi Tsang's main point.iti matvd dvayam mithyd rdgo vairdgyam eva ca /

na kvacid bhinnamustitvdd rajyate na virajyate II Alokamdld, 34 //

In reflecting upon the fact that hoth passion/attachment and dispassion/

detachment are false, (the sage) is neither attached to nor detached from

anything, in that (everything) is of the nature of an open fist (i.e. empty).

vairdgyam yasya rdgo 'pi tasya nihsamsayam punah

tasmdd rdg aprahdnd ya vairdgyam api na sprset II Alokam dld, 35 //

Someone who has dispassion/detachment will surely still have passion/at-

tachment (as they are attached to the concept of detachment); therefore,

in order to rid oneself of attachment, detachment also should not be

conceived of.

Chi Tsang and Kambala are concemed with the tendency in Buddhism (and

religious thinking in general) to refute an opponent's ideas as calcified dogma,

yet erect one's own ideas in their place, not realizing that one's own ideas may

be just as rigid. Detachment may be an important practice, yet it can neverbecome a fixed idea; rather, it has to stay in the realm of direct experience in

order for it to he an effective Buddhist practice. Chi Tsang specifically

comments upon the barriers constructed between Buddhist and non-Buddhist, as

well as between Hinaydna and Mahdydna Buddhism. These barriers are another

sign of the rigid, inflexible thinking that Chi Tsang and Madhyamaka in general

are trying to fight.^"

If an explanation conflicts with the Buddhist sutras and yet hearing it

results in acceptance of the (Buddhist) Way, it becomes (salutary like)sweet dews and it is only right that it should be recorded down (Williams



116 L. Ghose

non-Buddhist and the concurrent subduing (of the ideas of) Mahayana and

Hinayana are known as the true principle (Williams 1989, 3).

Now, these statements from the Madhayamaka and Yogdcdra (Kambala'sAlokamdld), schools of Mahdydna thought seem to be saying something

different to Lama Govinda. Govinda argued that certain types of attachment

are actually acceptable as final ends of practice, and also that an apathetic

type of detachment is not acceptable in Buddhist practice. Chi Tsang and

Kambala are arguing that one's goal should be complete non-attachment or

detachment; however, one cannot reach true non-attachment if one is merely

practicing in a rigid way attached to some notion of non-attachment. Instead,

in order to reach true detachment, any preconception of what this is has to be

let go. However, in one way, Govinda, Chi Tsang, and Kambala are inagreement. All of them do seem to be critiquing any fixed conception of the

Buddhist way, and that includes a strict notion that Buddhism is purely about

detachment.

An examination of standard Mahdydna doctrines, such as nirvdna equals

samsdra and dsraya-pardvrtti, may shed further light on the problem of

attachment versus detachment in Buddhist practice. Asraya-pardvrtti is often

translated as something like 'revolution at the base'—yet what exactly is meant

by the word 'base'? I take this term to mean that our minds have a kind of base

or foundation that underlies all mental phenomena (i.e. thoughts, desires andemotions): this is the foundation or dsraya. If this dsraya is defiled by

selfishness, then all of our desires, emotions and thoughts will be egocentric;

but if this dsraya is completely pure or unsullied (and one can probably

ascertain this by paying attention to one's subjective experience of the dsraya),

then all of our emotions, desires and thoughts will be free of egocentrism. This

pure or unsullied base would be the foundation of nirvdna, just as an impure

base would be at the foundation of samsdra. This interpretation of nirvdna

equals samsdra also connects to ideas such as the trisvabhdva theory from

Yogdcdra Buddhism. In this theory, an ordinary person's mind is considereddeluded {parikalpita), in that the base of his/her mind is impure, yet through

Buddhist practice his/her mind is purified to the point where it is perfected

{parinispanna), thus being able to understand the paratantra or interdependent

nature of the world itself (Cook 1981, 57). In Nichiren's writings, we find the

following reference to the Buddhist teacher Nan-yueh and the idea of a purified

and impure mind: 'the great teacher Nan-yueh says, "the entity of the mind is

endowed with two aspects, the defiled and the pure. However, it does not have

two different forms but is single in nature and without distinction" ' (Nichiren

1999, 418). This passage from Nichiren alludes to a the same Buddhist concept:the mind in sarnsdra is the defiled mind; when the mind becomes pure, it is the




on clinginess and self interest, and yet also the attachments of nirvdria based on

love and the bond of true human affection? And, could there he the detachment

of sdmsdra, based on apathy and uncaring, and the detachment of nirvdna that

seeks to set a loved one free only of one's own clinginess?

Concluding remarks

The purpose of this article has been merely to question monolithic interpreta-

tions of Buddhism. Judging from the evidence and reflections presented.

Buddhism does not appear to be purely pro-detachment nor purely anti-attach-

ment; however, this interpretation has been taken by the majority of modem

Buddhist interpreters. This may be because many of these interpretations havebeen based on translations that have not taken into account the full semantic

range of the English words 'detachment' and 'attachment'. Translators have

often not investigated the latest research in Westem psychology on these ideas;

yet Westem psychological research on these ideas is especially important, as,

like Buddhism, the clinical aspect of Westem psychology is heavily focused

upon understanding the human psyche in order to heal it. Thus, in translating

healing-oriented concepts in Buddhism into English, it seems more important to

examine their meanings in the context of Westem psychology rather than within

the medium of Westem philosophy or Christianity. Even the meanings given instandard English dictionaries may be less central to our translation process.

Perhaps the most significant points in this study come from Buddhaghosa,

Lama Govinda, Chi Tsang and Kambala. Buddhaghosa and Lama Govinda

assert that there are good and bad attachments, as well as good and bad ways

of being detached. This type of interpretation is more all-encompassing in that

it covers the broad spectrum of human feeling inherent within attachment. After

all, we can probably all conjure up moments when our attachment to someone

has been healthy and loving, and also moments when are attachment to

someone has been destructive. Chi Tsang and Kambala imply that, whilenon-attachment or detachment may be the ultimate goal and thus the ultimate

good, one cannot be rigidly attached to any notion of detachment. Notions or

concepts imply dualistic thinking. In order to have a conception about detach-

ment, one has to have a point of comparison (i.e. attachment). Thus, by

questioning any rigid conception of detachment, Chi Tsang and Kambala are

also calling into question the dichotomy between attachment and detachment.

Chi Tsang and Kambala may be trying to give us a hint here. Perhaps

detachment and attachment are merely two sides of the same coin. After all, one

needs both attachment and detachment in a loving relationship. A mother shouldbe intimately involved with every aspect of her child's life, but she also has to



118 L Ghose

The devout seeker is he who mingles in his heart the double currents of

love and detachment, like the mingling of the streams of the Ganges and

Jumna. In his heart the sacred water flows day and night; and thus the

round of births and deaths is brought to an end.^'

On the other hand, the concept of 'detachment' is a particularly tricky one.

Even though Buddhist texts claim the opposite, it could be that detachment is

never constructive or healthy. Westem psychological often indicates that de-

tachment is merely a defense mechanism or a way of distancing oneself from

unwanted feelings, and Westem psychotherapy has also proven that being in

touch with one's feelings improves mental health. This Westem psychothera-

peutic position is not far from the position taken in the Pali Canon conceming

'mindfulness of feeling'. Hence, if being in constant touch with one's feelingsis indeed of ultimate importance, then using the word 'detachment' to translate

any healing-oriented Buddhist concept must be questioned, as detachment could

imply an excessive distance from feelings.

Finally, I would like to close with a passage from Thich Nhat Hanh, which

echoes many scriptural passages on Buddhist mindfulness such as are found in

Santideva's Bodhicarydvatdra, the Pali Canon's Satipatthdna Sutta and so on.^^

In this passage Hanh touches upon a Buddhist concept that comes up frequently

in the literature: namely, that any feeling, no matter whether it is good or bad,

powerful or light, should be paid attention to with mindfulness, and that

mindfulness can be thought of as a force that protects the psyche from harm.

This latter point may be the most important for healing, and it is one that is also

less well known: unbiased awareness itself guards one from the harm one can

do to oneself by dwelling or attempting to push away thoughts and feelings.

The essential thing is not to let any feeling or thought arise without

recognizing it in mindfulness, like a palace guard who is aware of every

face that passes through the front corridor (Hanh 1976, 38).

Thus, in conclusion, perhaps attachment and detachment are both merely

feelings, and therefore should be treated as jus t another object of mindfulness.

And perhaps it is only through unbiased awareness that we can uncover their

true meaning for our psychic health, and therein discover a more fluid, less rigid

version of the Buddhist path.

Notes

1 Holmes (1993, 63). Here, I have chosen to situate myself within Westem psychologyrather than Westem philosophy and so on, because the Westem psychology has aclinical, healing-oriented aspect that seems to correspond more closely to Bud-




Yogdcdra school of thought.5 Asvaghosa (1975, 94).6 Lindtner, Christian, tr. A Garland of Light: Kambala's Alokamala, 8, p. 15. On p. 2,

Lindtner states that the Tibetan version is 'a sorry piece of work'. For this reason,

and for the reason that my Tibetan is not as strong as my Sanskrit, I have chosen toderive my meaning primarily from the Sanskrit.

7 Tashi Namgyal (2001, 56).8 Johansson (1970, 27), Monier-Williams' Sanskrit-English Dictionary (pp. 215, 982),

and Davids and Stede's Pali-English Dictionary (pp. 150, 634). Also, in BhikkhuNanamoli's translation of the Majjhima Nikdya, viraga is rendered as 'dispassion'and upekkhd as 'equanimity' (Bhikkhu Nanamoli 1995, 1384).

9 Asvaghosa. Saundarananda, 17.32, 17.50, etc., E.H. Johnston, tr. Asvaghosa. Saun-darananda, 17.32, 17.50, etc., Alessandro Passi, tr.

10 Here, I am referring to such works as Asvaghosa's Saundarananda, Buddhaghosa'sVisuddhimagga, and so on.

11 Buddhaghosa, Visuddhimagga of Buddhaghosa (1977, 82).12 Buddhaghosa, The Path of Purification: Visuddhimagga, 102 (1991, 102). Here, I

have changed Bhikkhu Nanamoli's translation according to what I have read inMathieu Boisvert's explanation of sakhara. See Boisvert (1995, 93-105).

13 In looking at the original text, I could not entirely follow the translation; however,I do not feel confident enough, at this point, to question it. Please see theVisuddhimagga of Buddhaghosa (Buddhaghosa 1977, 82).

14 Buddhaghosa, Visuddhimagga of Buddhaghosa (1977, 82).15 Buddhaghosa, Visuddhimagga, 102 (1991, 101-2).16 Buddhaghosa, Visuddhimagga. 319 (1991, 311-2).17 Apte (1992, 280) and Richard Hayes (1995, 100). Hayes' notes are unpublished and

in use just at McGill University.

18 Asvaghosa. Saundarananda. E.H. Johnston, tr. (pp. 119-20).19 Asvaghosa. Saundarananda. E.H. Johnston, tr. (p. 52).20 Williams (1989), on p. 211 of this overview, alludes to Fa Tsang, from the Hua Yen

school, and states that Fa Tsang may have argued that a bodhisattva is not entirelydevoid of attachment, but rather may retain a 'sliver of attachment' related tocompassion. See also Williams' footnote on this.

21 Fisher and Bailey (2000, 80). It is possible that the word 'love' is a debatabletranslation. Kabir is basically a non-sectarian sage, although he is revered by Hindu,Muslim and Sikh alike.

22 See 5.3-5.5, etc., of ^dntideva's Bodhicarydvatara {Santideva 1990).

References

Apte, Vaman S. 1992. The Practical Sanskrit-English Dictionary, Delhi: Motilal

Banarsidass.Asvaghosa. 1975. Saundarananda, in E.H. Johnston (ed), Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass

(Sanskrit and English).Bhikkhu Nanamoli (trans). 1995. The Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha: A New

Translation of the Majjhima Nikaya, Boston: Wisdom Publications.Boisvert, Mathieu. 1995. The Five Aggregates: Understanding Theravdda Psychology



120 L. Ghose

Cook, Francis. 1981. Hua Yen Buddhism, University Park: Pennsylvania State UniversityPress.

Fisher, Mary Pat and Bailey, Lee W. 2000. An Anthology of World Religions, Upper

Saddle River: Prentice Hall.

Govinda, Lama Anagarika. 1991. Buddhist Reflections, York Beach: S. Weiser.Gyatso, Geshe Kelsang. 1984. Buddhism in the Tibetan Tradition, London: Penguin.Hanh, Thich Nhat. 1976. The Miracle of Mindfulness, Boston: Beacon Press.Hayes, Richard. 1995. Continuing Sanskrit, Unpublished notes on Sanskrit grammar,

Montreal: McGill University.Holmes, Jeremy. 1993. John Bowlby and Attachment Theory, New York: Routledge.Johansson, Rune E.A. 1970. Psychology of Nirvana. Garden City: Anchor Books.Kambala. 2002. Garland of Light: Alokamala, Christian Lindtner (trans), Fremont: Asian

Humanities Press (Sanskrit, Tibetan and English).Khong, Chan. 1993. Leaming True Love: How I Learned and Practiced Social Change

in Viet Nam, Berkeley: Parallax Press.

Kobak, Roger. 1999. 'The Emotional Dynamics of Disruptions in Attachment Relation-ships', in Jude Cassidy and Phillip Shaver (eds). Handbook of Attachment, New York:Guilford Press.

Liu, Ming-Wood. 1993. 'A Chinese Madhyamaka Theory of Truth: The Case of ChiTsang' , Philosophy East and West, 43(4).

Nagarjuna. 1992. Mylamadhyamakakdrikds de Nagdrjuna, in Louis de la Vallee Poussin(ed), Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass (Sanskrit).

Nichiren. 1999. The Writings of Nichiren Daishonin, Gosho Translation Committee(trans), Tokyo: Soka Gakkai.

Santideva. 1990. ^antideva's Bodhicaryavatara, Parmananda Sharma (trans). NewDelhi: Aditya Prakashan (Sanskrit and English),

Spiro, Melford E. 1982. Buddhism and Society: A Great Tradition and its BurmeseVicissitudes, 2nd edn, Berkeley: University of California Press.

Swearer, Donald (ed). 1991. Me and Mine: Selected Essays of Bhikkhu Buddhadasa,Delhi: Satguru.

Tashi Namgyal, Dakpo. 2001 . Clarifying Th e Natural State, Hongkong: Rangjung YeshePublications (Tibetan and English).

Webster's Third New International Dictionary. Springfield: Merriam-Webster, 1993.Williams, Paul. 1989. Mahayana Buddhism: The Doctrinal Foundations, London:

Routledge.

Correspondence address: Lynken Gho se, Department of Philosophy and R eligion, ButlerUniversity, 4600 Sunset Avenue, Indianapolis, IN 46208-3485, USA. E-mail:[email protected] or [email protected]

06. a Study in Buddhist Psychology

Documents

Transcript of 06. a Study in Buddhist Psychology