MAIN MINDS AND MENTAL FACTORS
Main Minds
IN THE LAST CHAPTER, we made a distinction between mind (singular) —our general mental experience—and minds (plural)—different aspects operating within that basis of mind. The main function of traditional Buddhist psychology is to identify these minds and to classify them so th� Vat we can effectively manage them. A mental event that seems to us to be simple is in fact quite complex. I see a flower and that seems to me to be all there is. But Buddhism asserts that there are many minds involved.
According to Abdhidharma texts, especially Asanga’s Compendium of Valid Knowledge (Abhidharmasamucchaya), minds are divided into two main categories: main minds and mental factors.
Main minds are passive, whereas the mental factors associated with them are active. Main or primary minds (in Tibetan sem and Sanskrit chitta) are traditionally divided into six types and the mental factors (semjung; chaitasika) into fifty-one. As long as the mental factors are active—which is almost always the case—there is no way to consciously access the main minds. They are just there as background. It is mere experience, neither positive nor negative.
There are many metaphors to describe the relationship between the main mind and the mental factors. In some ways we can see the main mind as the screen in a cinema, with the mental factors the images projected upon it. We never really see the screen because we are so caught up in the stories projected onto it. The mental factors color and determine our understanding of the main mind, which is much more neutral and unadorned.
The mental factors are also compared to busy ministers, where the main mind is the king who sits by passively. Or we can consider them the hand and fingers, where the palm and so forth is the base but the fingers operate to cause the hand to function. Each of these metaphors reinforces the idea that the main mind is the neutral and passive ground within which the mental factors—rarely neutral and usually very active—operate.
Some commentators use the term primary mind rather than main mind. My concern is that “primary” indicates that there must be a secondary something as well—the primary aspect being the most important and the secondary aspects somehow inferior. In my view, this term carries the connotation of the mental factors being derivative or subsidiary. Again, be careful with this. Mental factors are in fact aspects of the mind and in no way subsidiary to it. They are functions that condition the basic clarity and awareness of mind. It is the colorful storyline provided to main mind by the mental factors that determines whether our mind as a whole is positive or negative.
To observe the main mind we need to turn the projector off and look closely at the screen. This is not easy. Say, for instance, that an old friend walks into my flat. Immediately I recognize that person, and that recognition is a function of the mind and so is a mental factor. The main mind is more basic than this. It is the mere awareness that a possible object of knowledge—a mere entity—is present. There is nothing else but this simple awareness: no labeling, no discrimination, and no emotion.
It is not the function of the main mind to be specifically concerned with any aspect of the objective field. It is unconcerned with any of the many other things that normally happen during the process of recognition—the focus, the interest, the attitude, the feelings that that awareness creates, the labeling good or bad, the past memories, the future fantasies. The main mind itself does not label or make a fuss; it is simply aware of the entity.
Maybe basic would be a better term for this mind, because it is neither primary with the mental factors being secondary or derivative, nor main with the mental factors subsidiary. Basic suggests something� ksts unsophisticated or unadorned. Thinking further, however, the main mind is not a base as such, so that name too is problematic. The main mind is more like the stew into which the vegetables and spices of the mental factors go, to use yet another metaphor. Without them the meal has no flavor and no calories. A main mind without mental factors cannot exist, nor can mental factors without a main mind.
It is incorrect to view the main mind and the mental factors as completely separate entities. Buddhist scholars list five ways in which they are concurrent in that they share a concurrent base, duration, aspect, referent, and substance.
The main mind and its associated mental factors are produced in dependence on the similar base. This base is also called the empowering condition. The empowering condition is that which empowers the main mind and mental factors to operate. For something like the eye consciousness (one type of main mind), both the main mind and mental factors are empowered by the eye organ itself. This is not, as the name might imply, the physical eyeball, but a very subtle form that allows the color and shape of an object to be apprehended by the eye consciousness. It is the same with the other sense consciousnesses—hearing, smell, taste, and so on. The sixth consciousness is the mental consciousness and its “organ” is consciousness, not form.
Just as the Madhyamaka texts say that the two truths—relative and ultimate truth—are one entity and different isolates because they arise, abide, and cease together, so too the main mind and mental factors arise, abide, and cease simultaneously.13 This is what we mean when we speak of similar duration. For the eye consciousness apprehending an apple, the object—the color and shape of the apple—arises and appears to both the main mind and the associated mental factors, abides, and then ceases at the same time.
In this case, the eye consciousness and the mental factors are generated in the same aspect. If the eye consciousness is generated in the aspect of the color and shape of an apple, the mental factors are also generated in the aspect of the color and shape of the apple. They have a concurrent referent, in that both observe the same object. If I am looking at a bunch of flowers, then the referent for both the main mind and mental factors is that bunch of flowers. It is not as if the main mind observes one thing and the mental factors another.
And finally, the main mind and its associated mental factors share a concurrent substantial entity. The same conditions that produce the main mind of the eye consciousness also produce its associated mental factors.
THE SIX MAIN MINDS
The presentation of the main mind and mental factors may seem to be composed of endless lists, but the lists have a value. For if your understanding of these lists helps you differentiate the types of mind that occur in your daily life, this makes all the other aspects of Buddhist practice far easier. By refining our sensitivity to the way our minds process the outside world and discerning the patterns in our perceptions and reactions, we can begin to see through them more effectively.
The first list is quite simple. According to most of the Tibetan Buddhist schools there are six possible main minds, one for each sense consciousness and the mental consciousness.
The six main minds are:
<� kgn=img recindex="00005" align="baseline" height="163" width="435">
Each sense organ is accompanied by a corresponding main mind. By definition these are perceptual, in that they perceive the object directly. The sixth main mind is the mental main mind, which can be either a perceptual or a conceptual mind. A perceptual mind is unmediated and direct—there is nothing between the object and the mind. In contrast, a conceptual mind is mediated and indirect—a mental image arises between the object and the mind. We will look at this further in chapter 6.
The main mind that corresponds to each of the five sense consciousnesses is always a direct perception. The main mind of the eye consciousness perceives its object purely and simply; it does not have the capacity to conceptualize—to identify, classify, or judge in any way. If you think about this carefully, it makes sense. When we look at something, the eye consciousness registers it. This process is direct and nonconceptual. It is exactly the same with the other four sensory main minds. Each sense consciousness only has the ability to apprehend a particular aspect of the complete object. We assume when we look at a flower that we see the whole flower, but in fact the eye sense consciousness can only apprehend the color and shape of the flower, the olfactory consciousness only the smell, and so on. This is simple logic, but it is something we rarely consider. The eye consciousness merely sees colors and shapes without labels, whereas the conceptual mind labels it blue, round, pretty, and so forth. In summary, this is the process—the sense consciousness perceives the object directly, and the mental consciousness elaborates with labels and conceptualization.
That is not to say all sensory main minds are correct and all mental consciousnesses are wrong in some way. All six main minds can be valid or mistaken. The jaundiced eye that sees everything as yellow is a mistaken main mind, whereas mental concepts can be valid even if they are not direct perceptions.
Although it is possible to have many mental factors operating at once, two main minds, even if they are of different types, cannot operate simultaneously. This means when one main mind is focusing on an object another main mind cannot. In this situation, if there is another main mind present, the object will appear to it but will not be ascertained. This process can be exemplified by the experience of being so engrossed in reading a book that we do not notice the traffic outside at all. Actually, we feel that we can easily watch TV and listen to it at the same time, and so it may seem there are two main minds operating simultaneously, but in fact what is happening is that the mind is switching from eye main mind to ear main mind and back again so rapidly that we experience the illusion that both are operating together.
Even though the mental consciousness can also be a mind of direct perception in that it has the capacity to perceive an object directly, I think that the mental consciousnesses of people like us are always all conceptual. There is always some kind of generality involved with the mental consciousness, in that the conceptual mind selects and filters the experience, limiting it in some way. A practitioner must reach a very advanced level on the spiritual path before the object of the mental consciousness and the consciousness itself relate to one another directly.
Such direct mental perceptions are incredibly powerful minds, and the most important of these is bodhichitta. According to Mahayana Buddhism, bodhichitta is the culmination of the twin aspirations of wanting to free all beings from their suffering and wanting to attain enlightenment in order t� knt o bring this about. Although both of these aspirations are classified as mental factors, when they are developed to their highest potential, they become the main mind of bodhichitta that continuously and spontaneously works solely for the benefit of others. It is interesting to note that the development of a single aspiration does not constitute bodhichitta. Neither the aspiration to free ourselves from the obscurations that obstruct our enlightenment alone nor the aspiration of wishing to be enlightened for the sake of all sentient beings alone is bodhichitta. Bodhichitta is the main mind that arises from both of these aspirations.
THE SENSORY MAIN MINDS
According to Buddhism the five sensory consciousnesses arise as a result of three conditions. They are the apprehending condition, the immediate condition, and the empowering condition.
The apprehending condition refers to the object. For example, the apprehending condition for the visual main mind perceiving a flower is the shape and color of the flower. The immediate condition is the preceding moment of consciousness, which in the same example is the immediate moment of consciousness before the eye consciousness apprehends that flower for the first time. The empowering condition is the eye organ. Thus the five sense main consciousnesses arise in the clear and knowing nature based on these three conditions.
Note that according to Buddhism the apprehending object of the eye consciousness is shape and color—not smell, taste, or tactile sensation. In other words the objects that these five sense main minds apprehend are fixed. The eye consciousness can never apprehend sound or taste, the ear consciousness can never apprehend color and shape, and so on.
These five sense consciousnesses are direct perceptions. As such, they do not interpret, label, or describe objects. Despite the fact that they do not interpret good and bad, or right and wrong, they still have a monumental influence on our daily lives. The sights, sounds, smells, tastes, and tactile sensations that bombard us continually through our sense consciousnesses compose our entire sensory world and as such are immensely important.
The fact that they are direct does not mean they are always correct. Many direct perceptions are distorted because they lack the capacity to perceive subtle changes within color and shapes. Sometimes they are distorted by internal conditions, such as the experience of people unable to hear pleasant music because of a previous moment of intense anger. The sense consciousnesses are also influenced heavily by the frequency of our interaction with an object—the more we come across an object the more “programmed” we are to apprehend it.
It is very interesting to hear modern child psychologists talk about the impact of the external environment on a child’s development. Although an infant may not be old enough to interpret the sensations they experience, they are nonetheless profoundly affected by the external world. Soft surroundings, pretty colors, and pleasant sounds all create positive impressions.
The Tibetan for mental factors, semlay jungwa chö (Skt. chaitasika dharma), means phenomena arising from the mind, suggesting that the mental factors are not primary to the mind but arise within a larger framework. A mental factor, again, is defined as the aspect of the mind that apprehends a particular quality of an object. Because it is characterized by the qualities� n of activity and non-neutrality, it has the ability to color the mind in dependence on the way it manifests. Hence, a feeling of desire from seeing what is conceived as a beautiful object affects the other mental factors that are present at that time, and this colors the whole mind.
Mental factors are the images upon the screen; they are the ministers that do the king’s work. The film might be a tragedy or a comedy, but the screen is just the screen. The king may be benign or ineffectual, but he will almost certainly employ a variety of ministers—some energetic, some lazy, some compassionate, some quite nasty. I was just a typical teenager of fifteen when my teacher used this metaphor and the example really stuck. It showed me that even though (like the king) the main mind rules, it is the mental factors (like the ministers) that are the most powerful influence in our daily life.
Just as the subjects’ opinions of their king are affected by the behavior of his ministers, when we are considering our own minds, we are almost invariably reflecting on our mental factors. We do not perceive things directly but perceive rather our thoughts about things. And these stories and perceptions, when accompanied by powerful emotions, can dramatically color our experiences. When we are angry or happy, in fact, we may feel that our mind is fundamentally angry or happy, mistaking a single mental factor for the whole mind. This point is important as we begin to try to manage our emotions.
There are innumerable mental factors, each with a specific function that relates to a particular quality of the object. Tibetans often compare the mental factors to couch grass—a multi-segmented plant that proliferates quickly and underground is a thick web of roots. This powerfully illustrates the thick and entangling complexity of the mental factors.
The Abhidharma enumerates fifty-one mental factors within six groups, providing a helpful entryway to understanding how each one operates in our lives. The six groups are:
1. always-present mental factors
2. object-ascertaining mental factors
4. main mental afflictions
5. derivative mental afflictions
6. variable mental factors
The title of each group describes the function of each mental factor that belongs to it. So always-present, for example, implies that these mental factors are always present; main mental afflictions are those mental factors that are the root cause of all our problems; variable mental factors are those that can be positive or negative depending on the context, and so on.
Always-Present Mental Factors
The five mental factors present with every mind are:
1. contact
2. discernment
3. feeling
4. intention
5. attention
Whether the mind is present for a long time or the briefest moment, these five mental factors are always involved. Some scholars use the term units in reference to these phenomena—the main mind plus the five always-present mental factors compose a “unit” of mind. Without any one of these five mental factors, a unit of mind could not function fully.
Contact is the first occurrence in a mental process. It is the simple act of mind meeting object. When you consider this, it is logical. How can a mind know an object without contact? To phone a friend you need to pick up the phone and dial the number. This mental factor is like the phone—its only function is to contact the object. Once contact is made, the next mental factor can note the characteristics of that object.
DISCERNMENT
The mind receives raw data through contact, but it has yet to be processed. Therefore, the next mental factor is discernment, which functions to note the characteristics of the object, to identify it, and to serve as the basis of memory. Without discernment, it would be impossible to distinguish between objects or recognize those we have encountered before.
Good discernment increases our memory and strengthens our mindfulness. Quite often our mind is able to make contact with an object, but because of weak discernment we have difficulty in identifying it, or if we do identify it we cannot recall it later. Discernment is always present but sometimes it is very weak.
In reality, feeling is what drives us. We work ceaselessly for shelter, food, clothes, medicine, holidays, possessions, and so on, motivated by the wish for comfort or pleasure. Our sense consciousnesses continually pursue objects that trigger pleasant feelings. This, in fact, is the reason that our world is called the desire realm. Desire is a great part of our psyche. Even compassion, the crucial motivational force in Buddhism, is feeling.
Once we have discerned an object, we experience one of three feelings. Our minds are drawn to the object on a scale from mild attraction to strong craving, or our minds are repelled from the object to a greater or lesser degree. Alternately, we may fall somewhere in the middle, and feel neutral toward the object. But even neutrality is a feeling. In general, feeling is the always-present mental factor that gives flavor to the object.
Although feeling is a mental event, it is very closely associated with the main minds of the senses. The main mind of the eye consciousness can see a sunset, but it is feeling that causes us to enjoy it.
On one level we all know feeling—“I’m feeling happy,” “My feelings have been hurt,” and so on—but, on another level, very few of us recognize the degree to which our lives are ruled by feeling. It is said that feeling is both conditioned and conditioning. It is conditioned in the sense that it is the result of contact with the sense objects and the experience of our programmed responses to them that have been built up over lifetimes. It is conditioning in the sense that it is the trigger for almost everything we do, mentally, verbally, and physically. As the cause of every other mental event that has preceded it, which in turn causes verbal and physical actions, feeling can truly be see� { trn as the engine that drives the endless chain of cyclic existence.
Generally, feeling is almost always associated with our sensory consciousnesses. If we have a joyful feeling while remembering a past event, although that is a memory and hence a mental consciousness, that mental state has occurred because of its association with sensory consciousnesses. We remember a beautiful sunset or an angry word, a pleasant smell or a nasty insect bite—all sensory consciousnesses.
Feeling arises through four conditions: natural condition, training, mental disposition, and personality.
Natural condition simply refers to the fact that whenever the mind meets an object, there is a natural tendency to go either toward the object or away from it. Even though the reaction may be very subtle, there is always a natural degree of attraction or aversion.
Training refers to the environmental and cultural influences that affect us and how they modify our feelings. Of course, these can be negative, such as army training that teaches us to be aggressive—but when the term training is used in the normal Buddhist way, it seems to me to refer to a more positive aspect. If we diminish our ignorance through study and training, our feelings become more gentle.
The next condition, mental disposition, refers to the fact that we are born in this particular realm because of our previous karma and therefore we have the potential to feel in relation to sensory objects. Sometimes this is called the nature of rebirth because our place of rebirth affects the kind of feelings we experience. For example, if we were born in the formless realm, where there are no sensory objects, we would not experience any sensory feeling at all.
The last one, personality, makes a big difference. A person who is gentle and mindful will have different feelings than someone who is very reactive and thoughtless. In this way our personality conditions our feeling.
These four things condition feeling, but conversely feeling conditions everything we do. It is impossible for an animal, dominated by suffering and without intelligence, to understand its world and develop compassion. Even a human being, if prone to aggression, will probably find it very difficult to meditate. On the other hand, if we meditate on compassion and that feeling arises very strongly, that will certainly influence our behavior.
On a more subtle level, the way we feel about an object is affected by each of these four conditions. Say I place a banana cake in front of a group of friends. Most of them would simply see it as a delicious cake and want to have a piece, but perhaps some would feel differently. One person might feely really unhappy because he loves banana cake but has a flour allergy. Someone else, having read articles about overeating, might refuse it. That is feeling conditioned by training.
INTENTION
Intention, the next always-present mental factor, is also called volition. This is the element that coordinates and directs the activity of each of the other elements within the main mind in respect to the object. Once feeling is present, intention moves our mind in a certain direction.
Intention is the factor that actualizes what feeling has initiated. If the feeling generated upon contact with an object is attraction, intention moves the mind forward toward the object. For example, I smell a ripe mango in a shop I am pas� {shosing, and the feeling of attraction arises. Intention is the shift in the mental process toward buying it.
Intention is related to motivation, but be careful here. In Tibetan, the term motivation reflects a gross level of function, while intention is more subtle. Whatever the object, intention actually moves the mind toward it. In other words, intention, or volition, is a karmic action. Karma is one of the most important words in Buddhism but is often misunderstood. It refers to the law of cause and effect in relation to the mind. We may perform actions with our bodies or our speech, but it is our mental acts (and our perceptions of our physical and verbal acts) that create karma. New karma is created in every moment of consciousness because intention is always present. When, with attraction or aversion to a sense object, our minds act, we create the potential for positive or negative experiences in the future.
So intention is actually responsible for all our future pleasure and pain. If feeling is the cause, intention is the resultant action in its most subtle and latent form. Intention plants the seeds that will ripen as our future happiness or unhappiness.
When our mind focuses on certain things, it needs some kind of direction to go in, something to pursue. As when we arrive at a roundabout where many different roads begin, a decision must be made about which to take. That decision is intention. But again this decision is not random; there are reasons we choose one thing and not another.
Where does intention come from? Why do we take one road instead of another? From beginningless time, through our actions we have collected karmic imprints on our mindstreams, and these dictate our intentions. Karmic imprints act like mental habit patterns, and our unique collection of karmic imprints determines how we perceive and respond to the world. It is very important to understand how, due to these karmic imprints, intention leads us in a particular direction. Take a basic example. Because we are born in this realm with these sensory consciousnesses, it is the propensity of the eye consciousness to perceive form. If there were no karmic imprints this would not happen. This is a natural process. Just as the eye consciousness looks at form, the ear consciousness listens to sound, and so on. According to Buddhism, this does not occur merely because the eye has the power to see, which is a biological function; there is actually a karmic tendency to see things.
The strongest tendency of all is that of self-preservation. Imagine standing at a crossroads faced with two choices—a safe route and a dangerous route. The vast majority of us would naturally take the safe route, the route of self-preservation. Whatever helps or harms our sense of self colors our feelings and intentions. This tendency manifests itself most strongly at the time of death, where the propensity to cling to existence activates the karmic seeds that project us into our next life.
Habit, of course, creates tendencies. This is happening all the time. That first cigarette, which might be disgusting, will lead to another, and another, and slowly the addiction sets in. But generally the process is more subtle than that. The eye sees blue. This sets up a propensity to see blue in the future. If somehow one is conditioned to associate pleasure with the color blue, one’s mind will tend to be attracted to blue things. In a crowd of people wearing different colored clothes, for instance, one’s eye will naturally seek out and rest upon a blue dress or sweater. Our minds contain countless karmic imprints from our habitual behaviors over countless lifetimes. Try to remember this when seeking to understand why we are drawn to cer� { drtain things and repulsed by others. When our attractions and aversions seem random, it is only because the level at which karma is working is too subtle for our comprehension.
ATTENTION
The last always-present mental factor is attention, which focuses the mind on a specific object to the exclusion of other objects. Attention also helps to keep the object before the mind. Without it, the mind would be unable to remain on the object for even a second.
Attention is the factor that filters information. Considering the vast amounts of sensory information we receive every moment, imagine our experience if we could not focus on one thing and exclude others. Our minds may skip from object to object from one moment to the next, but within a given moment, the mind attends to a single object, and it is this always-present aspect that is pertinent here. Through meditation, of course, we can enhance this attention and learn to direct it voluntarily and sustain it indefinitely, and this becomes a powerful tool for liberation.
These five aspects of mind function together, whether we are engaged in positive, negative, or neutral actions. In themselves they are neither wholesome nor unwholesome. Whenever there is mind, these five factors are present, whether we are aware of them or not—and they are not always obvious.
If we consider it, it is fairly easy to understand why there can be no mind without them. For mind, which is subjective, to be present, there must be an object. There must also be contact between the mind and its object in some way. If there is no discernment, there is nothing about the object that the mind can apprehend, and if there is no feeling there can be no actual experience of the object. In this case, how can there be a mind that “knows” the object?
But even this understanding reflects a very basic level of operation—so to move beyond that we consider intention. Finally, without attention, even if all the other factors are present, we could not focus on the object long enough for the mental event to be meaningful.
Object-Ascertaining Mental Factors
Within the traditional sixfold division of mental factors, the second group is the object-ascertaining mental factors. They are:
1. aspiration
2. appreciation
3. recollection
5. intelligence
If the first group is like the engine of the mind, this group is what really shapes the mind’s experience. These mental factors ascertain the object of the main mind, taking the clay of raw sense data and molding it into the finished sculpture. How close the ascertained object is to reality depends on how deluded, or enlightened, the ascertaining mind is.
ASPIRATION
Aspiration, like intention, moves us toward an object of attachment or away from an object of aversion. It is the mind that wishes to engage in a particular activity a� ~nd takes a strong interest in the process. It might be a conscious, discursive decision, or occur at an unconscious, prelinguistic level. But aspiration differs from intention. Although they are similar, intention is much more basic and acts as one of the fundamental aspects of any mind, whereas aspiration is a result of the many processes occurring and is not always present.
Aspiration functions as the basis for enthusiasm, an important part of our Buddhist practice. For example, hearing that it is possible to end samsara, the cycle of suffering, we become inspired and aspire toward that achievement. This is indeed a powerful mind, though the end of samsara will not come about through aspiration alone, no matter how fervent. We will need to employ other means as well.
APPRECIATION
If aspiration is the wish to attain or possess the object, appreciation is the mental factor that develops that mind. Seeing that the ascertained object has qualities that are worthwhile (and remember this can be positive or negative), appreciation stabilizes the relationship with the object by directing the mind toward it more forcefully.
Appreciation has the function of desiring the object and securing its recollection. Say you are reading this in your living room, and on the coffee table in front of you are a great assortment of objects. What directs your eye consciousness toward one object? Recollecting that scene later, what mental factor is responsible for one object being remembered clearly but not another? Feeling is just that—attachment, aversion, or indifference to an object. Appreciation takes this one stage further in recognizing the quality in the object that has triggered that feeling, and in doing so moves the mind toward holding the object. It “appreciates” the object in the recognition of the quality, whether positive, negative, or neutral.
RECOLLECTION
Recollection is the ability of the mind to return to the object. It is different from appreciation in that appreciation can ascribe a quality to the object but does not have the ability to return to the object, either moment by moment or at a future time.
Without recollection we could never know an object for more than one moment. Recollection is the ability of the mind to return to the object again and again, which is in fact what happens continuously as we are observing an object. As we will see in chapter 7, the first moment of a mind encountering an object, according to the Pramana texts, is distinguished from the subsequent moments in that they are more powerful, the subsequent moments relying on the initial experience and so not creating the same impact on the mindstream. This is quite academic, and perhaps it is enough here to stay with the ordinary usage of the word “moment.” Intuitively it seems our mind stays on an object, whereas in fact it is a continuous process of returning to the object, which is what the texts call recollection. Recollection is also the basis for memory. If the recollection of an experience is strong, it will be easier to repeat the experience later.
The continuous application of recollection acts as the basis for concentration, and the ability of recollection to return to the object at a later date is also the basis for memory.
For example, when you enter the gompa of a Tibetan monastery, the strong Tibetan incense has a very distinctive smell. If it is your first visit, you are not actually recollecting the smell; it is being stored in your memory. Whenever you smell��eve that incense in the future you find yourself back in that gompa—it is your recollection that takes you there. If you associate the smell with peace and happiness, that feeling will arise in your mind. If you are allergic to incense, however, you may just remember sneezing!
CONCENTRATION
Although we call this mental factor concentration, that may be slightly misleading, as concentration often refers to a consciously willed activity. Concentration in this context is merely the ability of the mind to remain on the object. If recollection brings us back to the object again and again, concentration has the sense of holding that object.
Our ability to hold the object is completely dependent on our connection with the experience. For example, if we are trying to focus on the wish to be free from samsara but the motivation is not really there, our minds will move to another object quite readily. I personally have no problem moving my mind from one thing to another; staying on an object is another matter.
INTELLIGENCE
As with the word concentration, the common usage of the word intelligence differs from the meaning intended here. Conventionally, intelligence is the opposite of stupidity. Here we are talking about something more subtle: the ability of the mind to examine an object and determine its value, by seeing that the object has certain characteristics that make it attractive or repulsive (or neither). In determining the characteristics of the object, this mental factor has a degree of certainty. Other mindstates muster information about the object; this mindstate makes decisions based on that.
The always-present mental factors are present whether we are focused or not. The object-ascertaining mental factors, in contrast, are not. Their presence is dependent on the degree to which our minds explore the object. Not falling into the category “always-present” suggests that they do not all operate in every mental event, and traditionally this is what is stated, but I feel that generally these five factors will almost always operate. If we have any focus at all (and unless we are unconscious there is usually some focus), then all five must be operating. However, they do operate at different degrees—some very actively, some hardly at all. Perhaps, for example, our aspiration to progress on the spiritual path might be very strong, but our intelligence is low, or vice versa.
Whether we are aware of these mental factors depends on the length of time they occur in our mindstream. For example, if the first, aspiration—in this case let’s say the aspiration to attain liberation—remains for a while, we might recognize that it is there.
Whereas it may look as though these five object-ascertaining mental factors are sequential—that one is built on the previous—in fact they are not. The order in which they arise depends on the circumstances.
Although the terms for the mental factors seem indicative of virtuous minds, these mental factors by themselves (like the always-present mental factors) are neither intrinsically virtuous nor intrinsically nonvirtuous. The mind that precedes the action of stealing needs some kind of aspiration, recollection, and intelligence, and the mind that precedes the action of giving requires the same.
The object-ascertaining mental factors are cognitive, psychological activities that constitute the basic mechanism of our a��aniwareness. Under normal circumstances, it is difficult for us to see this mechanism operating. We are confounded by cultural conditioning, which loads us with assumptions, and confused by language, which limits our experience of an event or object by simplistic naming and verbal describing. We often perceive a secondary mental factor as a main mind. We say “I am angry” or “I am happy” and due to language we feel that we are that anger. To understand that this is not so we need to move beyond the assumptions we make on the level of our basic, superficial emotions and examine the more complex levels of our minds at work.
