Mindscape Collective is now The Consciousness Library. Same library, new name. You may need to sign in again. About the change
Skip to content

Lukas Geiger

4 papers in the library · publishing 2026

Papers

Integrative Exegesis of the Pāli Canon: Phenomenological Psychology, Methods of Mental Training, and Interdisciplinary Reception

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) July 6, 2026 Lukas Geiger

This integrative review article systematically reads the Pali Canon through contemporary psychology and cognitive science, comparing the Abhidhamma's combinatorial mind-model, the Noble Eightfold Path's training methods, and the four Jhana stages with empirical findings from clinical psychology, neuroscience, and consciousness research. It proposes a structured convergence-type differentiation to classify the evidential status of each parallel, distinguishing empirical, structural, conceptual, and negative mappings. The analysis emphasizes that modern evidence for clinical or cognitive constructs does not validate Pali constructs under their own conceptual and soteriological frame. The paper is an advanced draft preprint that has undergone internal review but not formal journal peer review.

The Pali Canon and Christian Contemplative Psychology: A Synoptic Comparison

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) June 21, 2026 Lukas Geiger

This article systematically compares the psychological framework of the Pali Canon with four Christian contemplative traditions: the Desert Fathers, Rhineland Mysticism, Carmelite Mysticism, and Ignatian Spirituality. Using a convergence-type schema that distinguishes structural-phenomenological, conceptual, and no-parallel relations, it finds robust parallels in contemplative attention regulation, affect regulation, developmental staging, and practice architecture. The strongest convergence is in attention regulation, where both traditions identify a critical leverage point at the transition from a mental event's initial appearance to its elaboration. However, the comparison does not claim doctrinal identity, historical derivation, or direct empirical validation across traditions. Irreducible differences in ontology, soteriology, and causal architecture are documented alongside the parallels, supporting a moderate convergence position.

The Pali Canon as Protopsychology: Systematic Comparison of Buddhist Practice and Modern Psychological Evidence

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) June 19, 2026 Lukas Geiger

The Pali Canon contains elements of an empirically investigable protopsychology whose core methods—mindfulness, breath meditation, compassion cultivation, and absorption states—demonstrate moderate effect sizes across meta-analyses encompassing hundreds of randomized controlled trials for depression, anxiety, and stress. Between Buddhist concepts and modern psychology, there exist parallels supported in part empirically, structurally, and conceptually: affect labeling exhibits limited functional similarities with vedananupassana, default-mode-network deactivation has been interpreted as consistent with the anatta concept, and jhana states show measurable neural signatures in single-case studies. Clinical mindfulness extracts individual techniques from a soteriological whole system, and critical replication evidence limits overstrong neuroplasticity claims. The review proposes a structured differentiation of convergence types between ancient practices and modern findings.

The Pali Canon and Christian Contemplative Psychology: A Synoptic Comparison (DRAFT)

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) June 6, 2026 Lukas Geiger

A systematic comparison of the psychological framework of the Pali Canon with four Christian contemplative traditions—Desert Fathers, Rhineland Mysticism, Carmelite Mysticism, and Ignatian Spirituality—finds robust structural and conceptual parallels in contemplative attention regulation, affect regulation, developmental staging, and practice architecture. Both traditions independently identify a critical leverage point at the transition from a mental event's initial appearance to its elaboration. However, the analysis does not claim doctrinal identity, historical derivation, or direct empirical validation across traditions. Irreducible differences in ontology, soteriology, and causal architecture are documented alongside the parallels, supporting a moderate convergence position rather than doctrinal convergence or a historical-contact thesis.