The Conditioning Process
Why is our experience of everything conditioned? Why do we do this to ourselves?
In the Buddhist tradition, we condition what we experience because we are born pre-wired with the underlying tendencies (anusaya) to want to know what is happening, to be able to discern exactly what everything is, and to feel good as much as possible. For better or for worse, we are born to be conditioned or, perhaps better, to condition what we experience. These underlying tendencies are no doubt shared with many other species of animals, and have been of great benefit to us in our survival as a species. However, they also lead us to experience what is happening in a distorted way based on how we want to experience it.
In the Buddhist tradition, we condition what we experience because we are born pre-wired with the underlying tendencies (anusaya) to want to know what is happening, to be able to discern exactly what everything is, and to feel good as much as possible. For better or for worse, we are born to be conditioned or, perhaps better, to condition what we experience. These underlying tendencies are no doubt shared with many other species of animals, and have been of great benefit to us in our survival as a species. However, they also lead us to experience what is happening in a distorted way based on how we want to experience it.
Sound On
In the Buddhist tradition, how we condition what we experience is described by the three projections (Pali asava), which are also sometimes translated as “outflows” or “taints”. We first project our not-knowing in order to create the illusion that we do in fact know what is happening, and that we have a transparent experience of it. The second projection is that of existence, where everything, including ourselves, is assumed to absolutely exist. With this projection in place, what we experience becomes a vast array of actual “somethings” that we can know, predict and even control. Finally, the third projection is that of desire, where we feel compelled and even entitled to push and pull at all of these actual “somethings”, as if what is happening could and should be to our liking and make us feel good.
Of course, while we may want to experience ourselves and all else in these ways, merely projecting in this way doesn’t change anything! For example, whether it be a relationship, a home, a car, a job or the country in which we live, just because our filters make it seem that these things could or should be a certain way doesn’t make them so. It can be helpful to consider how a disinterested third party would perceive them: the same home or car would be just that - a home or a car. Thus, two people could see the exact same thing but have entirely different expectations and thus experience of it, based on how they have conditioned themselves to experience it.
While everyone might see and recognize, at least in conventional terms, a home or a car, there are things we condition that no one has ever actually seen, yet we infer or assume they exist. In the meditations in the Shorter Discourse, the most basic and fundamental aspects of experience (three-dimensional space, consciousness, "something-ness" and perception), assumed to be innate features of (our) reality, are seen to be mental creations. It might be supposed that it is only due to being in a temporary meditative state that these aspects of experience disappear; in fact, they disappear altogether once the seventh fetter is broken. And the sense of “I Am” or “I Exist”, the conviction which apparently makes us who are, and even is who we are, disappears upon the breaking of the eighth fetter, as does the sense that there are inner and outer aspects to experience. Thus, as we awaken, everything we rely upon to establish our identity, selfhood and existence is seen to be three things: conditioned, manufactured in mind, and not permanent but something that ceases: that is the "punch line" of the Shorter Discourse.
(Note: another way the Buddhist tradition describes how we condition experience is by the "three poisons" of greed, hatred and delusion - it's as if everything we experience is automatically sent through these three filters, whether we are aware of it or not. From this perspective, the Shorter Discourse is concerned with the form that "filtration" takes; in other words, the projections are how greed, hatred and delusion manifest.)
The Three Reminders
With all three projections in place, our experience is fully conditioned, by which what we experience can seem to be permanent (and even permanently ours), substantial and what we want it to be. That this isn’t actually so is reflected in another Buddhist formulation, that of the Three Characteristics (or, as I suggest they be called, the Three Reminders), that apply to everything we thus condition. That which is most conditioned is our experience as a “self”, by which: (1) the entirety of our experience is assumed to be permanently “ours”: it is internal, innate, owned, predictable and controllable; (2) we are substantial: there is an “I” that exists and is real; and (3) our experience can and should be what we want it to be: pleasing, and even blissful. The Three Reminders therefore prompt us to see, over and over again, that none of this is actually true.
While the Three Characteristics or Reminders apply first and foremost to “me”, they also apply to our experience of that which is ostensibly “not me” (i.e., what seems to be “everything else”). However, even things that seem to be separate from “me” are in fact our mental interpretations, rather than separate entities - from this perspective, there is nothing we experience that is “not me”. As the Buddha once explained, “the world” we perceive is simply the content of sensory consciousness, rather than a transparent experience of a separate portion of reality. Eventually, the “me/not-me” distinction is no longer made, and we see that “the world” is in fact a mental interpretation. At that point, the Three Reminders are no longer needed, because we no longer condition our experience of ourselves, a mobile phone or anything else (i.e., everything is now unconditioned by us).
The Three Reminders therefore tell us that the conditioned phenomena we experience in our mind (which is the only experience we have) are not permanent, substantial or what we want them to be. Instead, they are liable to ceasing, they are insubstantial and we have no choice in how they feel to us, which we realize once we stop our projections.
It is important to note that the Three Characteristics or Reminders say nothing affirmative about what is experienced, nor do they describe “the way things really are”. Instead, they point to the way things really aren’t. In other words, they are simply correctives, and can be dispensed with once we no longer need to be reminded that what we experience in our mind is not permanent, substantial or inherently pleasing. And as with emptiness and fullness, the terms permanent and non-permanent (or impermanent) are mutually-defined opposites which eventually have no particular meaning.
That is not to say that reflecting on change and impermanence is of no value, particularly when we start out on the path to awakening. For example, reflecting on change and impermanence can open the door to the prospect that perhaps we are not the fixed and isolated beings we otherwise appear to be. The reason that this sort of reflection can be useful is that it is understandable to us right away: we already can think in those terms. Eventually, though, we will have to let go of how we currently think and perceive, by which we can start to experience "things" differently. If instead we always focus on change and impermanence, we will in all likelihood simply reinforce and embed our current way of thinking and perceiving.
Of course, while we may want to experience ourselves and all else in these ways, merely projecting in this way doesn’t change anything! For example, whether it be a relationship, a home, a car, a job or the country in which we live, just because our filters make it seem that these things could or should be a certain way doesn’t make them so. It can be helpful to consider how a disinterested third party would perceive them: the same home or car would be just that - a home or a car. Thus, two people could see the exact same thing but have entirely different expectations and thus experience of it, based on how they have conditioned themselves to experience it.
While everyone might see and recognize, at least in conventional terms, a home or a car, there are things we condition that no one has ever actually seen, yet we infer or assume they exist. In the meditations in the Shorter Discourse, the most basic and fundamental aspects of experience (three-dimensional space, consciousness, "something-ness" and perception), assumed to be innate features of (our) reality, are seen to be mental creations. It might be supposed that it is only due to being in a temporary meditative state that these aspects of experience disappear; in fact, they disappear altogether once the seventh fetter is broken. And the sense of “I Am” or “I Exist”, the conviction which apparently makes us who are, and even is who we are, disappears upon the breaking of the eighth fetter, as does the sense that there are inner and outer aspects to experience. Thus, as we awaken, everything we rely upon to establish our identity, selfhood and existence is seen to be three things: conditioned, manufactured in mind, and not permanent but something that ceases: that is the "punch line" of the Shorter Discourse.
(Note: another way the Buddhist tradition describes how we condition experience is by the "three poisons" of greed, hatred and delusion - it's as if everything we experience is automatically sent through these three filters, whether we are aware of it or not. From this perspective, the Shorter Discourse is concerned with the form that "filtration" takes; in other words, the projections are how greed, hatred and delusion manifest.)
The Three Reminders
With all three projections in place, our experience is fully conditioned, by which what we experience can seem to be permanent (and even permanently ours), substantial and what we want it to be. That this isn’t actually so is reflected in another Buddhist formulation, that of the Three Characteristics (or, as I suggest they be called, the Three Reminders), that apply to everything we thus condition. That which is most conditioned is our experience as a “self”, by which: (1) the entirety of our experience is assumed to be permanently “ours”: it is internal, innate, owned, predictable and controllable; (2) we are substantial: there is an “I” that exists and is real; and (3) our experience can and should be what we want it to be: pleasing, and even blissful. The Three Reminders therefore prompt us to see, over and over again, that none of this is actually true.
While the Three Characteristics or Reminders apply first and foremost to “me”, they also apply to our experience of that which is ostensibly “not me” (i.e., what seems to be “everything else”). However, even things that seem to be separate from “me” are in fact our mental interpretations, rather than separate entities - from this perspective, there is nothing we experience that is “not me”. As the Buddha once explained, “the world” we perceive is simply the content of sensory consciousness, rather than a transparent experience of a separate portion of reality. Eventually, the “me/not-me” distinction is no longer made, and we see that “the world” is in fact a mental interpretation. At that point, the Three Reminders are no longer needed, because we no longer condition our experience of ourselves, a mobile phone or anything else (i.e., everything is now unconditioned by us).
The Three Reminders therefore tell us that the conditioned phenomena we experience in our mind (which is the only experience we have) are not permanent, substantial or what we want them to be. Instead, they are liable to ceasing, they are insubstantial and we have no choice in how they feel to us, which we realize once we stop our projections.
It is important to note that the Three Characteristics or Reminders say nothing affirmative about what is experienced, nor do they describe “the way things really are”. Instead, they point to the way things really aren’t. In other words, they are simply correctives, and can be dispensed with once we no longer need to be reminded that what we experience in our mind is not permanent, substantial or inherently pleasing. And as with emptiness and fullness, the terms permanent and non-permanent (or impermanent) are mutually-defined opposites which eventually have no particular meaning.
That is not to say that reflecting on change and impermanence is of no value, particularly when we start out on the path to awakening. For example, reflecting on change and impermanence can open the door to the prospect that perhaps we are not the fixed and isolated beings we otherwise appear to be. The reason that this sort of reflection can be useful is that it is understandable to us right away: we already can think in those terms. Eventually, though, we will have to let go of how we currently think and perceive, by which we can start to experience "things" differently. If instead we always focus on change and impermanence, we will in all likelihood simply reinforce and embed our current way of thinking and perceiving.
Pixabay
The Wheel of Life and Conditioned Co-production
As above, we project our not-knowing onto what is happening, by which we condition ourselves to experience everything in erroneous ways. That the projection of our not-knowing inevitably leads to whatever we experience being conditioned comprises the first two of the twelve links in the Buddhist "Wheel of Life". This image, one of the most prominent in the Buddhist tradition, can be seen as describing both the cycle of death and rebirth as we transmigrate from lifetime to lifetime, and also how we create suffering for ourselves in this life, right now.
After these first two links, the third link is “consciousness”: if we believe that there are actual somethings, then we invent the notion of “consciousness” by which we are aware of those somethings. After this, we invent and recognize the “name and form” of everything to further solidify them in our mind. Then, as the fifth link, we convince ourselves that we have six sense bases (sight, sound, touch, taste, smell, and thought) which give us detailed information about what exactly we are experiencing.
By this process, which happens instantly and automatically, we create in our minds a conditioned version of whatever is happening. We then contact and experience whatever it might be in ways that inevitably lead to suffering, which also reinforces our view of ourselves and a separate being who is born, lives, suffers and dies. Unless we do something to interrupt this sequence of conditioning, our reinforced not-knowing continues on to the next experience, creating a self-propagating cycle or loop of conditioned “existence”.
The Buddha called these twelve links “dependent origination” or “conditioned co-production” (paticca-samuppada). This principle emphasizes that this loop of conditioning reliably leads to the next link, based on the previous link. In other words, there’s a reason you see things the way you do: you have conditioned yourself to manufacture a version of them in your mind. This cyclic process is so reliable that there is another recurring phrase in Buddhist canonical literature to describe the “specific conditionality” (idappaccayatā) described in the twelve links:
When this exists, that comes to be; with the arising of this, that arises.
When this does not exist, that does not come to be; with the cessation of this, that ceases.
It is also sometimes translated, and even abbreviated, as “this being, that becomes…”, a phrase that might be considered a summary of Buddhist teaching and practice.
It should be noted that although the concepts of specific conditionality and dependent origination (conditioned co-production) are fairly well known, they occur relatively infrequently, and are primarily found in one particular chapter of the so-called Linked Discourses. More importantly, they are both specific to the twelve links of the Wheel of Life. A typical example is:
The noble disciple attends closely and carefully to dependent origination (paticca-samuppada) itself thus:
‘When this exists, that comes to be; with the arising of this, that arises.
When this does not exist, that does not come to be; with the cessation of this, that ceases.
That is, with ignorance (not-knowing, avijja) as condition, volitional formations (conditionings, sankhara) come to be;
with volitional formations as condition, consciousness…."
Thus, if we read or use the phrase “this being, that becomes...”, this must initially refer to our not-knowing, and that must initially refer to how we condition what we experience. That these concepts are sometimes more widely applied to the impermanence of everything in conventional terms is discussed in the final essay.
As above, we project our not-knowing onto what is happening, by which we condition ourselves to experience everything in erroneous ways. That the projection of our not-knowing inevitably leads to whatever we experience being conditioned comprises the first two of the twelve links in the Buddhist "Wheel of Life". This image, one of the most prominent in the Buddhist tradition, can be seen as describing both the cycle of death and rebirth as we transmigrate from lifetime to lifetime, and also how we create suffering for ourselves in this life, right now.
After these first two links, the third link is “consciousness”: if we believe that there are actual somethings, then we invent the notion of “consciousness” by which we are aware of those somethings. After this, we invent and recognize the “name and form” of everything to further solidify them in our mind. Then, as the fifth link, we convince ourselves that we have six sense bases (sight, sound, touch, taste, smell, and thought) which give us detailed information about what exactly we are experiencing.
By this process, which happens instantly and automatically, we create in our minds a conditioned version of whatever is happening. We then contact and experience whatever it might be in ways that inevitably lead to suffering, which also reinforces our view of ourselves and a separate being who is born, lives, suffers and dies. Unless we do something to interrupt this sequence of conditioning, our reinforced not-knowing continues on to the next experience, creating a self-propagating cycle or loop of conditioned “existence”.
The Buddha called these twelve links “dependent origination” or “conditioned co-production” (paticca-samuppada). This principle emphasizes that this loop of conditioning reliably leads to the next link, based on the previous link. In other words, there’s a reason you see things the way you do: you have conditioned yourself to manufacture a version of them in your mind. This cyclic process is so reliable that there is another recurring phrase in Buddhist canonical literature to describe the “specific conditionality” (idappaccayatā) described in the twelve links:
When this exists, that comes to be; with the arising of this, that arises.
When this does not exist, that does not come to be; with the cessation of this, that ceases.
It is also sometimes translated, and even abbreviated, as “this being, that becomes…”, a phrase that might be considered a summary of Buddhist teaching and practice.
It should be noted that although the concepts of specific conditionality and dependent origination (conditioned co-production) are fairly well known, they occur relatively infrequently, and are primarily found in one particular chapter of the so-called Linked Discourses. More importantly, they are both specific to the twelve links of the Wheel of Life. A typical example is:
The noble disciple attends closely and carefully to dependent origination (paticca-samuppada) itself thus:
‘When this exists, that comes to be; with the arising of this, that arises.
When this does not exist, that does not come to be; with the cessation of this, that ceases.
That is, with ignorance (not-knowing, avijja) as condition, volitional formations (conditionings, sankhara) come to be;
with volitional formations as condition, consciousness…."
Thus, if we read or use the phrase “this being, that becomes...”, this must initially refer to our not-knowing, and that must initially refer to how we condition what we experience. That these concepts are sometimes more widely applied to the impermanence of everything in conventional terms is discussed in the final essay.