Kukai's Ten Stages of Consciousness (Jūjū shinron)

[henroguy]

I'm putting together a research on economics which has Kukai's 10 Stages of Consciousness as its base (i.e. there can't be any global blanket economic theory since everyone has different consciousnesses and motivations).

I found out that other religions have their own consciousness-level groupings. Theraveda has 8-12 levels, Sokka Gakkai has 9, yoga has 7 corresponding to chakra, and new age has its own levels.

Which of the other consciousness level-groups are most similar to Kukai's 10 stages ? I'm trying to find patterns and similarities so that I can defend basing my research on Kukai's work (because his work was detailed and observable in all places).

[Jikan]

What's your research question?

What's the context of your research--are you in an academic program or working independently or...?

[dearreader]

Dear Henroguy,

To clarify, when you cite "Juju Shinron" are you referring to Kukai's work Himitsu mandara jujushin ron? Rev. Eijo Dreitlein and Rev. Shingen Takagi's extensively foot-noted work, "Kukai on the Philosophy of Language" makes a number of references to Himitsu mandara jujushin ron though as it applies to his theories on language. There is a passage on Page 9 of Rev. Eijo and Rev. Takagi's work which I cite below:

"He[Kukai] says, however, that 'The sea of Dharma has but a single taste. It seems shallow or profound depending on our own capacities.' This is a significant remark demonstrating Kukai's appreciation of coexistence and his recognition of the organic relationships among different ways of thinking, cultures, and religions. Kukai developed this idea and presented it to the world in his Himitsu mandara jujushin ron. At the root of Kukai's thought are his deep, esoteric interpretations specifically on the mantric (pure) nature of language." (Page 9) (-please note that while the "single taste" comment may remind you of Ekayana (Only Path) it is not as "single taste" is alluding to something a bit different. http://www.keio-up.co.jp/kup/eng/philo/17570.html

If you can clarify which translation of Kukai's work you're using it would be helpful or if you are using the original?

Rev. Eijo also has another work which was published last year, "An Annotated Translation of Kukai's Secret Key to the Heart Sutra"http://www.koyasan-u.ac.jp/mikkyobunka/blog/documents/kiyo24/24_thomas.pdf (Annotated is no joke, the extensive footnotes are fantastic). This may also reference Jujushin ron.

I'm putting together a research on economics which has Kukai's 10 Stages of Consciousness as its base (i.e. there can't be any global blanket economic theory since everyone has different consciousnesses and motivations).

I found out that other religions have their own consciousness-level groupings. Theraveda has 8-12 levels, Sokka Gakkai has 9, yoga has 7 corresponding to chakra, and new age has its own levels.

Which of the other consciousness level-groups are most similar to Kukai's 10 stages ? I'm trying to find patterns and similarities so that I can defend basing my research on Kukai's work (because his work was detailed and observable in all places).

toodles!

[Jikan]

It seems to me that the OP is interested in challenging an assumption at the base of classical & neoliberal economics: that economic activity is driven by the choices of rational and predictable actors. If it is true that people are heterogenous in their motivations (ie not rational or not self-interested or...), then a serious problem in that economic theory is revealed.

Have any economic theorists already taken such a position on consciousness and economic determination? since, say, the mid-1840s?

I'm interested in what you have to say about Kukai (not as any kind of expert [I am no expert!] but as someone who is interested in learning). I'm posing this question ^^ first because I'm trying to understand the conversation you are trying to start.

[henroguy]

I guess my research question is--what economic system will best replace capitalism? It started as personal research for a tiny NGO (non-govt-org).

I'm referring to the 10 Stages/Levels of Mind from Kukai's Major Works by Hakeda and Shingon Japanese Esoteric Buddhism by Yamasaki.

As far as I know, no economist has factored in consciousness into any model. Even behavioral economics assumes a single consciousness type (rational) and only observes the effects of such type. For example, Friedman and von Mises could not explain the technicalities on how 2 minds could agree on the value for certain products, so they just settled for their own superficial solutions--Friedman chose money, von Mises chose the gold standard. Both ways attempt to quantify the abstract, which is unnatural and thus eventually leads to economic/social injustice/imbalance. Kukai, on the other hand, could analyze things more deeply.

If Kukai's observations were 'reproducible' in other countries, then an economic solution philosophically derived from it would also be applicable to other countries.

[viniketa]

As far as I know, no economist has factored in consciousness into any model. Even behavioral economics assumes a single consciousness type (rational) and only observes the effects of such type. For example, Friedman and von Mises could not explain the technicalities on how 2 minds could agree on the value for certain products, so they just settled for their own superficial solutions--Friedman chose money, von Mises chose the gold standard. Both ways attempt to quantify the abstract, which is unnatural and thus eventually leads to economic/social injustice/imbalance.

I know nothing about Kukai or his ten stages. However, from an economist's POV, consciousness is not a variable. One either is or is not conscious, there are no "levels" of consciousness (for an economist). "Rationality" is theory of "choice" -- how one chooses between actions -- rather than a theory of "consciousness". As such, rational-action theory is a technicality abou how two minds could agree on a "price" for certain products. Money is merely a "measurement" of the outcomes of choices, for Friedman. "Value" is a whole other area of research, which brings economists to gold-standards, silver-standards, etc., and is not a direct variable in "choice".

In other words, from an economic viewpoint, you are mixing apples & oranges (& rutabagas). Which is not to say that "consciousness" cannot be posed as an economic variable, but simply that one either needs an entirely new theory or needs to explain thoroughly how it fits into existing theory.

Hope this is helpful.

[henroguy]

I guess 'consciousness' may not be the correct English word for 'citta' (which has the levels) so I'll use 'mindset' instead. Since every action comes from the mind, knowing the mindset can help predict outcomes, which is especially useful in economics/finance. Other Asian philosophers have their own analyses of minds: Musashi, for example, says there are 4 kinds of people/minds. I combined this with Kukai's stages to make a consciousness model. I then tested this model on a democratic event such as elections, where the effect of consciousness can be measured objectively (e.g. a person with a business mindset will likely vote a pro-business candidate). My model predicted an Obama win with 10% more popular votes than Romney, but now his votes are only 4% ahead. If Romney won, then I could conclude such a model was irrelevant.

[viniketa]

I guess 'consciousness' may not be the correct English word for 'citta' (which has the levels) so I'll use 'mindset' instead.

Citta is 'mind'. It would seem you are referring to something very akin to the German Weltanschauung, "worldview", which many economists have theorized about:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weltanschauung

Best wishes for your research.

[viniketa]

Hmm, that Wikipedia article isn't very thorough. Take a look at the work of Max Weber, Georg Simmel, and Michel Foucault.