Contexts and Dialogue: Yogacara Buddhism and Modern Psychology on the Subliminal Mind by Tao Jiang dives into a comparative analysis between concepts related to Yogacara Buddhism and modern psychology. The book utilizes the Buddhist idea of Alayavijnana and the notion of unconscious as described by modern psychologists as the foundation for the dialogue within its pages. Jiang makes note that due to a weak analysis of Alayavijnan, a problematic nature stems out from performing comparative studies of the two topics. Alayavijnana is defined as base consciousness and is fundamental to Yogacara Buddhism, it may be thought of as the subliminal reserve within one’s mind that stores a different aspects of a person from their experiences, memories,
…show more content…
Jiang feels as though the reason for this common misconception is because scholars are elaborating on Alayavijnana in regard to the context of modern psychology, when it is naturally unrelated and, in turn, unable to be explained by it. The dilemma present is that the original meaning of the concept gets washed up in a process of making it relative to the structure of modern psychology without regard of its own. In recent times, Buddhism has adopted the perception of being a means for self-development, losing its intended core religious aspects. To resolve this common dilemma, Jiang prescribes that we perform an adequate and fair comparative study of Buddhism and modern psychology, which requires explaining Alayavijnana through the use of its intended definition in Yogacara, and only then relate it to what modern psychology claims about the …show more content…
Xuan Zang believes that the individuality is a sense of self that is a result of Alayavijnan holding onto mental seeds, while Freud argues it is their ego because it shapes desires from the external world, and Jung divides it into ego, persona, and self. Xuan Zang sees the unconscious as an orderly process while Freud holds it to be a chaotic battle due to interaction of the internal and external. Jung differs from both of them since it is delegated into three sections, the ego is the internal complex of the conscious and unconscious, persona is how the agent actually portrays themselves in the external, and self can be thought of as a combination of the internal and external, the organizer of the psyche. Their positions for what the collectivity related to the individual is differ too; Xuan Zang believes it includes the container holding the physical world, other people’s minds and bodies, Freud says the superego represents moral values acquired through external socialization, and Jung argues for a shared unconscious across all individuals combined with instinct. The thing that strongly separates Xuan Zang’s theory from modern psychologists, like Freud and Jung, is that he does not believe spirituality is located in the subliminal mind, rather it is something that transcends
Jiang feels as though the reason for this common misconception is because scholars are elaborating on Alayavijnana in regard to the context of modern psychology, when it is naturally unrelated and, in turn, unable to be explained by it. The dilemma present is that the original meaning of the concept gets washed up in a process of making it relative to the structure of modern psychology without regard of its own. In recent times, Buddhism has adopted the perception of being a means for self-development, losing its intended core religious aspects. To resolve this common dilemma, Jiang prescribes that we perform an adequate and fair comparative study of Buddhism and modern psychology, which requires explaining Alayavijnana through the use of its intended definition in Yogacara, and only then relate it to what modern psychology claims about the …show more content…
Xuan Zang believes that the individuality is a sense of self that is a result of Alayavijnan holding onto mental seeds, while Freud argues it is their ego because it shapes desires from the external world, and Jung divides it into ego, persona, and self. Xuan Zang sees the unconscious as an orderly process while Freud holds it to be a chaotic battle due to interaction of the internal and external. Jung differs from both of them since it is delegated into three sections, the ego is the internal complex of the conscious and unconscious, persona is how the agent actually portrays themselves in the external, and self can be thought of as a combination of the internal and external, the organizer of the psyche. Their positions for what the collectivity related to the individual is differ too; Xuan Zang believes it includes the container holding the physical world, other people’s minds and bodies, Freud says the superego represents moral values acquired through external socialization, and Jung argues for a shared unconscious across all individuals combined with instinct. The thing that strongly separates Xuan Zang’s theory from modern psychologists, like Freud and Jung, is that he does not believe spirituality is located in the subliminal mind, rather it is something that transcends