Buddhism × Psychoanalysis

A Systematic Comparative Study of Mental Factors and Affect Theory
Xiaomeng Qiao — psychoanalyst in training, Buddhist practitioner, independent researcher
What correspondences, tensions, and mutual illuminations emerge when we place the mental factor (心所) taxonomy of Yogācāra Buddhism alongside psychoanalytic affect theory?

Two traditions, developed independently over centuries, each built sophisticated systems for classifying and understanding mental life. This project places them side by side — not to argue that they are "similar," but to discover what each reveals that the other cannot see, and what the comparison itself produces.

The Treatise on the Hundred Dharmas (百法明門論) classifies 51 mental factors into six categories. Psychoanalytic theory organizes affects through drives, object relations, and developmental models. Neither system is used to "explain" the other. The comparison is the method; the framework that emerges is the finding.

Method

Layer 1 — Literature Review

Each mental factor is grounded in its own tradition before comparison begins. Buddhist side: original definitions, commentarial traditions, structural relations. Psychoanalytic side: how the relevant affect has been theorized across schools — including internal debates and competing frameworks.

Layer 2 — Six-Dimension Comparative Coding

For each mental factor: definition in source text, nearest psychoanalytic concept(s), points of correspondence, points of tension, blind spots on each side, and experiential verification from the researcher's dual practice.

Layer 3 — Experiential Verification

The researcher's position as both Buddhist practitioner and psychoanalyst is formalized as an epistemic resource. When textual comparison produces a claim, lived experience — in meditation and in the consulting room — provides a third check. These judgments are explicitly marked as experiential.

Methodologically, this project is situated within hermeneutic dialogue: two horizons of understanding meeting in the researcher's dual position.

Progress

Phase 1 — Root Afflictions 根本烦恼 Active
The six root afflictions: the most intense affective structures, offering the most direct dialogue with psychoanalytic affect theory. Establishing method here.
贪 rāga
嗔 pratigha
痴 moha
慢 māna
疑 vicikitsā
不正见 dṛṣṭi
Phase 2 — Foundations 遍行 + 别境 Pending
How does the mental factor system understand mental activity at its most basic? Building the epistemic ground before comparative claims about health or pathology.
触 sparśa
作意 manaskāra
受 vedanā
想 saṃjñā
思 cetanā
欲 chanda
念 smṛti
定 samādhi
慧 prajñā
Phase 3 — Wholesome Factors 善心所 Pending
Eleven factors describing what a well-functioning mind looks like. Psychoanalysis has remarkably little to say here — this phase may produce the richest blind-spot analysis.
信 śraddhā
精进 vīrya
惭 hrī
愧 apatrāpya
无贪 alobha
无嗔 adveṣa
无痴 amoha
轻安 praśrabdhi
不放逸 apramāda
行舍 upekṣā
不害 ahiṃsā
Phase 4 — Secondary Afflictions + Integration 随烦恼 + 不定 Pending
24 factors, many processable in groups. Final integration into a complete comparative framework.

Findings

贪 (rāga) × Libido — Pilot, May 2026

Same phenomenon, different ontological levels. Both describe a movement of the mind toward objects that "sticks." But rāga's object is existence itself (三有) — the clinging to being. Libido's object is always a specific relational other. One operates at the ontological level; the other at the relational.

Shared structure, divergent epistemologies. Buddhism treats rāga as a root affliction — the source of suffering, to be recognized and transformed. Psychoanalysis treats libido as life force — never itself the problem, only problematic when fixated.

Generative relations. In the Hundred Dharmas, afflictions have a generative structure: rāga obstructed produces pratigha (anger). Psychoanalysis treats libido and aggression as parallel drives, not as sequentially generated. This structural difference has no simple resolution.

A false neighbor: "greed." The common English translation misleads. Greed is a moral judgment about excess. Neither rāga nor libido is about quantity — one names a mechanism of clinging, the other a mechanism of investment.

Publications

Roots

This programme draws on twenty years of Buddhist practice and seven years of psychoanalytic training. Formalising it as a research project in 2026 does not mark a beginning — it marks the point at which the accumulated experience became method.

2006

First temple involvement

Weekly volunteer work and study at a Buddhist temple. Sustained practice begins.

2012

Buddhist refuge (皈依)

Formal commitment to Buddhist practice.

2018

First intersection

Concordia proposal: A Practice-based Study on Buddhist Psychology as a Framework for Therapeutic Game Design. Joined temple psychology group — first systematic attempt to combine Buddhist psychology with another discipline. Began writing《我佛》.

2019

Psychodynamic training begins

Started personal analysis and psychodynamic training. Began thinking systematically about the relationship between Buddhism and psychoanalysis from inside both practices.

2021

Early conceptual writing

First drafts exploring Buddhism × Psychoanalysis. Continued Buddhist study alongside analytic training.

2025

Academic grounding

Self-elective: Buddhism vs. Psychoanalysis. CPS Substack subsection launched. Systematic restudy of the Hundred Dharmas (百法明門論).

2026

Programme launch

"Clearing the Ground" paper draft completed. Buddhist app (Returning Path) prototype. Pilot coding: 贪 (rāga). Programme formally established.

Scholarly Dialogue

This project is in conversation with the sixty-year history of Buddhist-psychoanalytic dialogue, and seeks to extend it through systematic method and attention to the specificity of both traditions.

About

Xiaomeng Qiao is a psychoanalyst in training, Buddhist practitioner, and independent researcher. His work explores the intersections of psychoanalysis, Chinese subjectivity, Buddhist thought, and queer experience. He writes at Chinese Psychoanalytic Scene and 何苦开心.

Contact: xiaomeng.qiao.ayame9joe@gmail.com