Is the Cardiac Theory Buddhistic?

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism

Is the Cardiac Theory Buddhistic?

Postby retrofuturist » Fri Apr 03, 2009 10:43 am

Greetings,

An interesting commentary and question posed by venerable K. Sri Dhammananda on page 111 of his translation of the Dhammapada (with specific reference to verse 37)....

" It is clear that the Buddha had not definitely assigned a specific basis of consciousness as he had done with the other senses. It was the cardiac theory (the theory that the heart is the seat of consciousness) that prevailed in his time, and this was evidently supported by the Upanishads. The Buddha could have adopted this particular theory, but he did not commit himself. In the Patthana, the Book of Relations, the Buddha refers to the basis of consciousness in such indirect terms as yam rupam nissaya, dependent on that material thing. What the material thing was the Buddha did not positively assert. According to the views of commentators like the Venerables Buddhaghosa and Anuruddha the seat of consciousness is the heart (hadayavatthu).

One wonders whether one is justified in presenting the cardiac theory as Buddhistic when the Buddha Himself neither rejected nor accepted this popular theory."


What does one think?

:heart:

Metta,
Retro. :)
If you have asked me of the origination of unease, then I shall explain it to you in accordance with my understanding:
Whatever various forms of unease there are in the world, They originate founded in encumbering accumulation. (Pārāyanavagga)


Exalted in mind, just open and clearly aware, the recluse trained in the ways of the sages:
One who is such, calmed and ever mindful, He has no sorrows! -- Udana IV, 7


Dharma Wheel (Mahayana / Vajrayana forum) -- Open flower ~ Open book (blog)
User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
 
Posts: 14674
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Is the Cardiac Theory Buddhistic?

Postby appicchato » Fri Apr 03, 2009 12:03 pm

retrofuturist wrote:What does one think?

This one thinks that if the Buddha neither rejected, nor accepted, this idea than it might not be a bad idea to do likewise...simplistic?...maybe...but then that's my motto...'keep it simple'...

Be well... :smile:
User avatar
appicchato
 
Posts: 1597
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:47 am
Location: Bridge on the River Kwae

Re: Is the Cardiac Theory Buddhistic?

Postby Individual » Fri Apr 03, 2009 5:32 pm

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings,

An interesting commentary and question posed by venerable K. Sri Dhammananda on page 111 of his translation of the Dhammapada (with specific reference to verse 37)....

" It is clear that the Buddha had not definitely assigned a specific basis of consciousness as he had done with the other senses. It was the cardiac theory (the theory that the heart is the seat of consciousness) that prevailed in his time, and this was evidently supported by the Upanishads. The Buddha could have adopted this particular theory, but he did not commit himself. In the Patthana, the Book of Relations, the Buddha refers to the basis of consciousness in such indirect terms as yam rupam nissaya, dependent on that material thing. What the material thing was the Buddha did not positively assert. According to the views of commentators like the Venerables Buddhaghosa and Anuruddha the seat of consciousness is the heart (hadayavatthu).

One wonders whether one is justified in presenting the cardiac theory as Buddhistic when the Buddha Himself neither rejected nor accepted this popular theory."


What does one think?

:heart:

Metta,
Retro. :)

Is modern neuroscience Buddhistic in a way that Cardiac Theory is not?

The idea of a "seat of consciousness" seems to be something like a soul-theory, but there is still a strong enough connection between emotions and the heart that it is understandable why they would think that. Emotions like anxiety\fear, anger, love, etc., all have very noticeable physical impacts on the heart. Recognizing that feeling and relaxing it (instead of trying to relax the conscious state) is one way of subduing it.
The best things in life aren't things.

The Diamond Sutra
Individual
 
Posts: 1970
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 2:19 am

Re: Is the Cardiac Theory Buddhistic?

Postby Jason » Fri Apr 03, 2009 9:07 pm

Retro,

In my opinion, the evidence, scientific as well as textual, weighs heavily against the cardiac theory.

On the textual side, even Narada Thera, in The Buddha and His Teachings, admits that: "In the Patthana, the Book of Relations, the Buddha refers to the seat of consciousness, in such indirect terms as "yam rupam nissaya—depending on that material thing", without positively asserting whether that rupa was either the heart (hadaya) or the brain. But, according to the view of commentators like Venerable Buddhaghosa and Anuruddha, the seat of consciousness is definitely the heart. It should be understood that the Buddha neither accepted nor rejected the popular cardiac theory" (425).

Should we then favor Buddhaghosa over the evidence? I say no. It is often stated as a fact that the seat of consciousness is the heart or heart-base; nevertheless, the Buddha never explicitly states this and an increasing amount of scientific evidence is suggesting otherwise. Therefore, I would say that the cardiac theory, as much as people try to defend it with textual references and logic, is looking less and less tenable if we look solely at evidence at hand. Perhaps there is a means by which the two perspectives can be reconciled; however, I have yet to see one that sufficiently does so.

Neuroscience, on the other hand, has provided evidence that consciousness is centered in the brain.

There is, for example, data on the correlations between brain events and conscious experiences. Then there things such as the experiment done on the way the brain codes and recodes visual stimuli that effectively showed how one can "... even 'inject' such experiences into the brains of experimental animals, as demonstrated, for example, in elegant experiments (Newsome & Salzman 1993) in which monkeys responded (behaviourally) to microstimulation of a circuit encoding a particular direction of motion in the same way that they had been trained to respond to an exteroceptive stimulus having the same directional value" (Gray, The Contents of Consciousness).

Another example that I find rather interesting are the results of so-called brain bisection operations, which I suppose can be interpreted as showing nothing more than the experience of consciousness being processed and recognized in the brain, but can also be interpreted as supporting the theory that consciousness is centered in, or even the product of, the two hemispheres of the brain operating together (The Unity of Consciousness).

While far from being conclusive, scientific data certainly lends this theory considerable credibility.

Jason
"Sabbe dhamma nalam abhinivesaya" (AN 7.58).

leaves in the hand (Buddhist-related blog)
leaves in the forest (non-Buddhist related blog)
User avatar
Jason
 
Posts: 469
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 1:09 am
Location: Earth

Re: Is the Cardiac Theory Buddhistic?

Postby pink_trike » Fri Apr 03, 2009 9:37 pm

Elohim wrote:
Neuroscience, on the other hand, has provided evidence that consciousness is centered in the brain.

(The Unity of Consciousness).



I'm not surprised that the science of a brain-centric culture would posit the brain to be the center of consciousness. Did they look for consciousness in the heart? Did it occur to them to look there? Are they capable of finding heart-based consciousness? They likely have some evidence of _a_ brain-centered consciousness, but did it first arise in the heart and then arise to the brain? Is brain-consciousness second hand news because as a culture we've lost touch with heart consciousness? Maybe heart consciousness can only be recognized via the heart, not the brain? :reading:
Vision is Mind
Mind is Empty
Emptiness is Clear Light
Clear Light is Union
Union is Great Bliss

- Dawa Gyaltsen

---

Disclaimer: I'm a non-religious practitioner of Theravada, Mahayana/Vajrayana, and Tibetan Bon Dzogchen mind-training.
User avatar
pink_trike
 
Posts: 1038
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:29 am

Re: Is the Cardiac Theory Buddhistic?

Postby Individual » Fri Apr 03, 2009 10:07 pm

The idea of a "center" of consciousness, period, is a soul-theory or theory of ego. When there is a sensory organ and a sensory object, that is the sensory contact right there. Among the six senses, there is no central self by which they all meet together, neither in the heart nor in the brain. Even the brain itself is merely part of a broader central nervous system, which is connected to the pulmonary system, so when you have certain emotions, the heart and breath reacts a certain way. Now, if the heart and lungs react to emotions, just as the CNS does, why refer to one as the "center" but not another? It is a fabricated concept.
Last edited by Individual on Fri Apr 03, 2009 10:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The best things in life aren't things.

The Diamond Sutra
Individual
 
Posts: 1970
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 2:19 am

Re: Is the Cardiac Theory Buddhistic?

Postby Jason » Fri Apr 03, 2009 10:07 pm

pink_trike wrote:Maybe heart consciousness can only be recognized via the heart, not the brain? :reading:


Perhaps, but what about people with artificial hearts? Do they have artificial consciousnesses? :D
User avatar
Jason
 
Posts: 469
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 1:09 am
Location: Earth

Re: Is the Cardiac Theory Buddhistic?

Postby clw_uk » Fri Apr 03, 2009 10:10 pm

Elohim wrote:
pink_trike wrote:Maybe heart consciousness can only be recognized via the heart, not the brain? :reading:


Perhaps, but what about people with artificial hearts? Do they have artificial consciousnesses? :D




:rofl:
“ Your mind is likewise blocked. But the right road awaits you still. Cast out your doubts, your fears and your desires, let go of grief and of hope as well, for where these rule , then the mind is their subject." Boetius
User avatar
clw_uk
 
Posts: 3479
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales, United Kingdom

Re: Is the Cardiac Theory Buddhistic?

Postby pink_trike » Sat Apr 04, 2009 12:05 am

Elohim wrote:
pink_trike wrote:Maybe heart consciousness can only be recognized via the heart, not the brain? :reading:


Perhaps, but what about people with artificial hearts? Do they have artificial consciousnesses? :D


Teflon and plastic consciousness. :rolleye:
Vision is Mind
Mind is Empty
Emptiness is Clear Light
Clear Light is Union
Union is Great Bliss

- Dawa Gyaltsen

---

Disclaimer: I'm a non-religious practitioner of Theravada, Mahayana/Vajrayana, and Tibetan Bon Dzogchen mind-training.
User avatar
pink_trike
 
Posts: 1038
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:29 am


Return to General Theravāda discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: waryoffolly, Yahoo [Bot] and 9 guests