Freud vs. Buddha

“Finally, The countdown is over. On one side of the cage, We have world-renowned psychologist and psychotherapist: Sigmund Freud. What!? He’s smoking a cigar? I don’t know if that’s allowed in the death cage but after all, he’s Freud. God damn it. On the other side, We have the famous sage, Gautama Buddha wearing his orange robe. Is this guy gonna fight with his eyes closed? Can Freud fight with Buddha’s mystical forces? Let’s find out” 

I don’t think Buddha is the person anyone should pick a fight with. Not because he’s going to use mystical powers but he’ll transmute the anger into love. I think we are forgetting here that he has transcended all suffering.

Let’s break down this showdown (breakdown, showdown). 

Hate to break it to you but it’s not a literal fight. It’s more symbolic. It’s the fight for truth. The fight between Science and Spirituality. Even though no such fight exists (by the end of this article you’ll know why). However, People get involved in arguments regarding which is closer to the truth: Science or Spirit?

Or specifically, Psychology or Spirituality?

Before you read ahead, I wanna ask. Who would be the winner according to you?

One day in my psychology class. All the students had to give a presentation on any topic of their choice. The topic I chose was “Psychoanalysis, from a Buddhist perspective”. I spoke for about 10 minutes while the average speaking time was 2 minutes. Everybody clapped for my speaking skills but I don’t think anybody got the idea I wanted to share. Alas! Let’s try again.

In the late 1900s, Sigmund Freud came along and his insights into the human mind blew all of the psychology away. Such deep inquiry into the human mind proposing genuine principles was never done before. He told us how the human mind develops. Concepts like ‘Id, Ego, Superego’, ‘Unconscious’, and ‘Suppression/Repression’ were breakthroughs. What he said was,

90% of the mind is unconscious.

It consists of stored past experiences.

It runs your life.

Blunt and intense. Pretty deterministic if you ask me.

On the other hand, If you read the ancient Buddhist teaching. You’ll be amazed to find out that they describe the mind in the same way. Their definition of the human mind depends upon two polarities: Resisting & Clinging.

Resisting means that the experiences you had in your past were too painful. You stored them inside.

Clinging means that the experiences you had in your past were too pleasant. You stored them inside too. Ergo, your mind is a collection of painful and pleasant past experiences, and if you aren’t careful. This polar-charged collection will run your life and cause you suffering all along. This is exactly what Gautama Buddha said, concisely and direct:

“All of life is Suffering and The Cause of Suffering is Desire”

Buddha was not pessimistic. What he tried to tell you was what we just shared about the mind 

You see how both Freud and Buddha described the mind in pretty much the same way.

Now the question becomes, “How did Buddha know this so long ago?”

It’s simple. Buddha was a scientist!

He left his kingdom and wealth behind just to see that people were suffering. Rich and Poor, Good and Bad. All kinds of people were suffering. He was compassionate, so he wanted to find out the root cause and the way out. So he found a quiet place to sit down under a bodhi tree. Closed his eyes. Sat day & night for 40 days. I must appreciate his dedication. After 40 days, He found the answer to transcend suffering. 

Not only he, but All of the ancient Rishis, Sufis, and Yogis also did the same. They found a quiet place. They went to caves and stayed in isolation. Closed their eyes and studied the human mind.

They did exactly what scientists do in laboratories: Isolating Variables.

You can’t study any phenomenon unless you isolate the variables which affect it. Hence, creating an isolated system. Buddha knew that if he had to study the mind. He can’t do it with his eyes open, in his kingdom because there were just too many variables. So he went into ‘isolation’ both of himself and the variables affecting him.

Patanjali in his yoga sutra writes about Pratyahara. The practice of extracting your senses from sense objects. This helps you study the mind in great depth (even if that’s not the final goal).

Are they that different? Psychology & Spirituality?

From two different angles, don’t they finally arrive at the same conclusion about the human mind? That it’s a MESS! (No pun intended)

Still, there is a difference.

Psychology limits itself to the domain of the mind, but spirituality goes on to study something deeper i.e the one observing the mind. Both psychology and spirituality give you different ways to deal with the mind.

Psychology has different forms of therapies to deal with the mind. Spirituality, on the other hand, invites you to do something deeper: Transcend the mind. It invites you to become the observer who got lost in the mess.

“Which one is right?” That’s not the question we should be asking. What we should ask is, “Which is more effective?”. In my personal experience, It has been Spiritual practices. Modern science agrees too. Many different studies prove the effectiveness of practices such as mindfulness, meditation, and breathwork to improve neural cell regeneration, sleep quality, and overall well-being while causing a decrease in stress and depression levels.

Psychology studies the mind while Spirituality studies the soul/spirit while taking the route of the mind. It experientially answers the fundamental question, “Who am I?”. Who is the one observing the mind?

That’s what all spiritual practices are for. Knowing Thyself.

“Meditation is entering the laboratory of soul research” — Paramahansa Yogananda

Science and spirituality aren’t two forces opposing each other. They are two ways that lead to the same truth. One is objective while the other is subjective. Both are equally important even though in the western world, we have given little regard to subjective experiences. What we don’t realize is that both, Subjectivity and Objectivity are interrelated. But this is an in-depth discussion for another time.

Even though this wasn’t a battle but just for the fun of it. Who do you think won?