Tṛ́ṣṇā: Buddhist Philosophy & the Solution to Mental Health

Buddhist Philosophy has long posited the universal truth of life is suffering.[1] I will argue, through first an analysis of tṛ́ṣṇā, and a subsequent critical reflection on its application in modern context, that despite the obscurity of many Buddhist philosophical texts, the notion of tṛ́ṣṇā, is paramount to the reduction of mental health disorders.

Tṛ́ṣṇā (Sanskrit, Taṇhā: Pāli), literally translated as “thirst”, however more commonly referenced as ‘craving’[2], is one of the four central and interrelated claims made by Gautama Buddha via oral discourses in the 6th Century BCE[3], and later developed by both Hīnayāna and Mahāyāna Buddhist Philosophers alike. Asserting the universal truth of human existence is duhkha (Sanskrit: ‘suffering’), tṛ́ṣṇā is believed to be dualistically both the cause and answer to unhappiness[4]. Whilst there is much debate around the translation of such terminology within Western discourse[5], the Buddha himself clarifies in his first sermon, tṛ́ṣṇā not only embodies “craving for sense pleasures” aligning with English conceptions of the term, but also “for becoming and for not becoming.”[6] As such, less reductive accounts of tṛ́ṣṇā detail both positive (craving) and negative (aversion) reactions of sensory and psychological phenomena.

The pervasiveness of duhkha (incorporative of both brute physical and existential frustration) is thought to originate from the misapprehension of reality to be both personal and permanent.[7] In our ignorance (Sanskrit: avidyā) of the transitoriness of both external phenomena and our own metaphysical and empirical selves[8], it is argued that we create attachments; fooled by the presumption that in achieving our desires or avoidances we can attain pleasure and avoid displeasure respectively. Yet, such pursuits only further multiply and strengthen tṛ́ṣṇā, creating a causal chain and repeated rebirth (Sanskrit: Saṃsāra)[9]. Furthermore, the insatiable hunger that longs for ‘this’ or ‘that’, or even for ‘not this’ or ‘not that’ enacts an irremediable rejection and departure of unconditioned reality and what actually ‘is.’

In accepting the doctrine of tṛ́ṣṇā, I believe Buddhist Philosophy can offer a pragmatic approach in dealing with the trials and tribulations of modern-day society. Today, we are overloaded with commercial advertisements and subliminal messaging encouraging a grasp for yesterday’s nostalgia or the fantasising of tomorrow’s ‘maybe’s’. In addition to this constant removal from the present moment, we find ourselves endlessly comparing ourselves with our peers via social media platforms. To maintain avidyā in this manner would be to subscribe to a life constantly discontented with one’s current situation, potentially forfeiting a genuine edification for self and community. How can we learn to be satisfied with where we are in life, or what we have?

Whilst some critics have suggested the cessation of suffering entails but cognitive reasoning not dissimilar to the a priori methodology of Greek Rationalists, I believe the Noble Eightfold Path offers a practical utility of how one ought to live. Mahāyāna Philosopher Nagarjuna asserted “without a foundation in the convention truth, the significance of the ultimate cannot be taught.”[10] Whilst such translations may seem recondite to the layperson, it is within the practice of yoga or meditation that the value in awareness of tṛ́ṣṇā can become reified. It is also of utmost importance to note the attainment of such wisdom is not restricted to merely philosophy kings[11], but rather is accessible to all, religious and non-religious alike.

Further contrasting Buddhist and Greek philosophies, I also note that unlike Plato, who assimilated and substituted ‘pleasant’ for ‘good’ and ‘unpleasant’ with ‘bad’[12], I believe tṛ́ṣṇā offers a more mature relationship with these supposedly binary emotions, suggesting instead they are two sides of the same coin, with subjective suffering essential for happiness. Could such notions even potentially reduce social stigmatism around mental health ailments?

By remaining detached from our mental inclinations (tṛ́ṣṇā), I believe we can begin to feel liberated from the agitation experienced from life’s vicissitudes, gaining psychological agency over our physical and metaphysical being. However, for tṛ́ṣṇā to be understood in this manner throughout the Western world, for the purpose of alleviating mental health issues, I strongly believe a naturalistic reinterpretation excluding Hindu doctrines of karma and rebirth is necessary.  

[1] Radhakrishnan and Moore, A Source Book in Indian Philosophy (New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1957), 272.

[2] William Hart, The Art of Living (Singapore: Vipassana Publications, 1990), 49, 163.

[3] Carpenter, “The Buddha’s Suffering,” 1.

[4] Radhakrishnan and Moore, A Source Book, 272-6.

[5] Carpenter, “The Buddha’s Suffering,” 8.

[6] Thich Nhat Hahn. The Heart of The Buddha’s Teaching (Great Britain: Ebury Publishing, 1999), 258.

[7] Carpenter, “The Buddha’s Suffering,” 14-5.

[8] Radhakrishnan and Moore, A Source Book, 273.

[9] S. N. Goenka, The Discourse Summaries (Igatpuri: Vipassana Research Institute, 1987), 40.

[10] Jay Garfield, The Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way (New York: Oxford University Press, 1995), 69.

[11] Plato. The Collected Dialogues (Princeton University Press, 1963), 696.

[12] Plato. Complete Works (Hackett Publishing Company, 1997), 781.