Mind is characterise by mental processes ike doubtig,
imagaining, dremaing and expercting. It is also characterised by pleasure
and pain and desires. These are the distinguishing marks of mind.12 The
Nandisutra describes mind as that which grasps everything
saarvartha- grahanam manah .13 In the Tattavarthasutra, we
are told that cognition of what is stated on authority, as in scripturesis
is the object of mind srutam anindriyasa.14 In maitri Upanisad
mind is described I its reflective aspect as source of all
mentalmodifications. He sees by mind by mind he hears, and by mind too, he
experiences all that we call desire, will and belilef, resolution,
irresolutio. All this is but mind itself.15 In modern psychology also ,
wundt says that mind will be the subject �to whih we attribute all
theseparate facts of internal experience.� Mind , in the popular thought,
is ot simply a subject in the logial sense, but a sustance in real being,
ad the various activities of the mind are its expressions or notions. But
this invlves, he says, some metaphysical presuppositions. For him, mind is
a logical concept of interal experience.16 The Abhidhanarajendra
metions that the word manas has a functional sifnificance,because
it describes the funtions of the mind like thinking, imagining ad
expectiig.17 andfrom this functional significance of the mind the
srutcture of the mind is unferred. The Jaina thinkers make a distinction
between two phases of mind dravya manas and bhava manas (manah
divividham dravya manah bhava-bhava-manas ca). In the
visesavasyakabhasya, we geta descroption of the tow phases of the
manas. The materia mind which may be called the menta structure, is
composed of infiite, fineand coherent particle fo matter meant for
function of mind- dravyatah deavyamanah. It is further described as
a collection of fine particles which are meant for exciting thought
processes due to the yoga arising out of the contat of the jiva with the
body.18 In the Gommatasara: Jiva-kanada also there is a
description of the material mind as produced in the heart from the
comingof mind molecules like a full blow lotus with eight petals.19
Sucha description of mind as dravya manas and
bhava manas, the srutctural and the psychical aspect, can be
compared to the descriptionof mind given by some modern philosophers.
C.D.Broad , in his Mindand its place in nature presents a similar view. It
is a modicication of the insturmental theory according to which mind is a
substance that is existentialy independet of the body. For Broad, mind is
composed of twofactors neither of which is ad for itself has the property
of mind, but which whe combined exhibits menta properties. The factors are
the bodily and the psychic factors. It is comparable to a chemical
compound ike Nacl and H20 in which the individual components lose their
individual identit when composed of living body possessed of I) the
nervous system and somethig else and ii) the psychic factor, which
possesses some feeling like mental.20 The bodily factor is described as
�the liig brain and the nervous system�. About the psychic factor, Broad
seems to be vague.21 Neithermental characteristics not mental evets seem
to belong to it. It is likely to be sentience only. However, the pshchic
factor must be capable of persistig for a period at least after tha death
of the body; and it must be capable, when separted from the body, of
carryig �traces� of experience which happen to the mind of which it was
formerly a constituent. In other words. It must coprise the �mnemic mass�.
Broad�s view comes nearer to the Buddhist vinana, rather to the Jaina
view of bhava manas. Of all the psychic factors in the Buddhist
view. Vinnaa has morepermaent nature. I the Dighanikaya it is
mentioned that agter death the body is dissolved mind ceases, but
vinnana, the coefficent of the desire to enjoy, clings to produce its
effects in some other embryo waking wsewhere.22 with this differerene of
the psychic factor the Jaina distinction between the dravya manas
ad the bhava manas corresponds with Broad�s theory of the compositio of
mind. In speakig of the mental structure. Mcdougall has likened it to the
structure of a machine. Howeve, mcdougall also warns us that it shsould
not be taken in the sense of material structure of arrangement of parts.
He likens it more to the compostiton of a poem of music. �the structure of
the mind is a sonceptual system that we have to build up by inference from
the date of the two orders , facts of behaviour and the facts of
intropection.�23 The same ca be said of the composition of the manas.
Each Jiva has its own mind,aothough the general
nature of mindis one: mano laksanatvena sarvamanasam ekatvat�because
the essential nature of mind is the expression of metal states. In the
situation, the Fods, men and Asuras have each his won mind. In the
Rattavarthasutra, the classifiction of the souls, five sensed organisms
with minds, is mentioned; sajininah samanakah.25 In the five-
sensed organisms only some possess minds comparative psychologists like
akohler and Alverdes have shown that mind in the devrloped form is
possible in case of higher animals having insight. Naiyayaikas also
believe that each organism possesses a mind and sensitive organs in order
that it may be in a position to cognoze the objects and to experience
pleasure and painin accordance with past Karman. Each self has one mind,
because a singel mind of atomic magnitude cannot be shared by all. This
mind in each self can funtion only inside the organism with which the self
is connected.26 if the Jiva was sarvagata, there would be
cognition of everything by everyone.27 Theirarguments were metaphysical
and epistemologial than pschological. But modern psychoogy has analysed
the same problem from te psychological pioint of view. McDougall writes,�
it seems probable that mind has the same nature wherever and whenever it
exists or manifests itself, whether in animals, men or superhuman beigs,
whether I the new-born infant, the fool or the wise man. On the other
hand, the structure of the mind seems to be peculiar to each individual;�
not only is it different in the various species of animals (if they hae
minds) and in man; but the structure of the mind of e man is different
from that of every other man; ad in any one man at each stage of his
career or life-history, it is not quite the same as at any other stage.28
