1 Why should we observe afflictions?
First, we need to clarify what “affliction” actually is. We certainly would not say that a cup or the mountains and rivers outside have afflictions; we can only say that our mind has afflictions. In other words, affliction is not a form (rūpa), but a mind (citta). It is the functioning of consciousness, a mental activity unique to sentient beings.
There are many kinds of mental phenomena. The body-mind world of sentient beings is composed of the “Five Aggregates” (pañca-skandha): form (rūpa), feeling (vedanā), discrimination (saṃjñā), compositional factors (saṃskāra), and consciousness (vijñāna). Among them, the aggregate of form belongs to material phenomena, while the other four—feeling, discrimination, compositional factors, and consciousness—are mental phenomena. Since afflictions are mental phenomena, they must be included within these four aggregates.
So, do material phenomena have anything to do with afflictions? Yes, they do. What kind of relationship is that? This is precisely the core topic we will discuss today—understanding how afflictions arise and what causes them, and then striving to eliminate them. For a Buddhist practitioner, this is the most important task.
Once you understand these points, observing the mind and practicing introspection (vipassanā) will become much easier. We often speak of “inner observation,” of “looking at our afflictions” and “looking at our mind.” But without understanding these principles and methods, it is often impossible to see clearly.
2. Defining the scope: temporarily defining affliction as “painful feeling”
Without using technical terms, in everyday language, whenever the mind feels uncomfortable, we call that affliction.
However, we often confuse things. For example, when our hand hurts, we might say, “This is so annoying,” but the pain in the hand is only a cause that gives rise to affliction. From the perspective of mental phenomena, affliction is actually a kind of painful feeling (duḥkha-vedanā), belonging to the aggregate of feeling (vedanā-skandha).
Among the three feelings, each contains various subcategories: there are many kinds of suffering, many kinds of happiness, and even neutral feelings (avyākṛta) that are neither pleasant nor painful—each of which can be deep or shallow.
What does it mean for neutral feeling to be deep or shallow? For example, during meditation, one may remain immersed in a state that is neither wholesome nor unwholesome, neither pleasant nor painful—this is a deep neutral state arising from meditative concentration (samādhi). In contrast, when we casually lie on the sofa with nothing much happening—neither very happy nor very unhappy—that is a relatively shallow neutral state.
Similarly, both suffering and happiness have degrees of depth—some are intense and profound, while others are fleeting.
Affliction is the concrete manifestation of painful feeling within the aggregate of feeling. However, in many cases, when we speak of afflictions, we are actually referring to other factors—such as desire (rāga), anger (krodha), ignorance (moha), pride (māna), doubt (vicikitsā), and jealousy. These are six powerful mental factors (caitta), which properly belong to the compositional factors (saṃskāra-skandha). Yet we often call them afflictions because they give rise to painful feelings.
Greed does not always involve painful feeling. For instance, when craving delicious food, the desire to eat and the act of eating may produce pleasant feeling (sukha-vedanā). So why is greed still called an affliction? Because over time, greed inevitably leads to suffering—this is the perspective from which it is defined as an affliction.
Since we are defining affliction as a kind of painful feeling, yet in daily life we often mistake other aspects of the Five Aggregates for affliction, we now need to clarify this. Among form, feeling, discrimination, compositional factors, and consciousness—what exactly is affliction, what is not, what can give rise to affliction, and what cannot?
Is pleasant feeling an affliction? If we define affliction as painful feeling, then it is completely opposed to pleasant feeling; from this perspective, pleasant feeling is not affliction. However, from the standpoint of spiritual practice, since pleasant feeling is impermanent and will eventually turn into suffering, it can also be considered a form of affliction. But this makes the concept very confusing. Therefore, for now, we adopt a narrower definition and refer to painful feeling as affliction.
——Excerpted and adapted from “The Arising and Remedy of Afflictions”
This article is a preliminary translation draft and has not yet been reviewed or proofread by the speaker.
Comments (0)