froogy: buddhism through deleuzian lens (feat. chatgpt)

Here’s a Deleuzian mapping of Buddhist concepts such as aggregates, desire, karma, and dependent arising, along with some previous discussions about feedback loops, flows, and assemblages. This mapping will align Buddhist ideas with Deleuzian philosophy, focusing on the interconnectedness, non-linearity, and emergence present in both systems.

1. Buddhist Aggregates (Skandhas) ↔ Deleuzian Assemblages

Buddhist Aggregates: In Buddhism, the Five Aggregates (form, sensation, perception, mental formations, and consciousness) are the components that constitute the self or individual. These aggregates are seen as impermanent and interdependent, and they collectively form what we call an "individual" or "self," but none of the aggregates is a permanent, unchanging entity.
Deleuzian Assemblages: Deleuze’s assemblages describe systems formed by a variety of interacting components. An assemblage is not reducible to its parts; instead, it is a dynamic system of components (which could be thoughts, bodies, forces, desires, etc.) that interact and create emergent behavior. Just as the aggregates do not constitute a fixed, permanent self but rather form a dynamic, emergent process, Deleuzian assemblages reflect this same fluid, ever-evolving nature of identities and systems.
Mapping: The Five Aggregates are like Deleuzian assemblages — they are constantly shifting, interacting, and producing the illusion of a self. Both are in a state of becoming, where the self or subjectivity is always in a process of transformation.

2. Desire (Tanha) ↔ Deleuzian Desire & Flow

Buddhist Desire: In Buddhism, desire (tanha) is the root cause of suffering (dukkha), as it binds the individual to the cycle of samsara (the cycle of birth, death, and rebirth). Desire is seen as the attachment to impermanent things, which causes grasping and clinging, leading to suffering.
Deleuzian Desire: Deleuze, particularly in collaboration with Guattari in Anti-Oedipus, redefines desire as a productive force rather than something negative. Desire is not just about lack, but about flowing, creating connections, and engaging with the world. It’s the force that propels systems (social, biological, cognitive) into becoming. Desire flows and connects elements into assemblages, driving the system into new configurations.
Mapping: Buddhist desire (tanha) and Deleuzian desire both deal with the flow of forces and the way they shape existence. However, while Buddhist desire is a source of attachment and suffering, Deleuzian desire is a creative, generative force. From a Deleuzian standpoint, Buddhist desire can be seen as desire misdirected or caught in negative feedback loops (attachment, suffering). Liberation, then, would involve redirecting desire toward creative, productive flows that do not cause suffering but create new connections and becoming.

3. Karma ↔ Deleuzian Feedback Loops & Recursion

Buddhist Karma: Karma refers to the actions (mental, verbal, or physical) and their consequences. It’s a law of cause and effect, where actions create ripples that lead to future experiences. Karma is both individual (personal actions) and collective (social or familial consequences). It reflects how intentional actions create patterns that continue to influence the individual’s future experience, binding them to the cycle of samsara.
Deleuzian Feedback Loops & Recursion: Karma is very much like feedback loops in Deleuze’s system, where actions (or forces) create recursions — processes that loop back on themselves, creating emergent consequences. Deleuze’s idea of becoming involves feedback systems that don’t return to a fixed point but instead transform the system. Karma, in this sense, could be viewed as recursive feedback, where actions produce new realities (just as feedback in a system creates new states).
Mapping: Karma and Deleuze’s feedback loops both describe how actions reverberate through time, shaping future events. While Buddhist karma emphasizes moral causality and consequences, Deleuze’s feedback loops describe non-linear causes and effects that shape the system’s evolution, with infinite variability.

4. Dependent Arising (Pratītyasamutpāda) ↔ Deleuzian Rhizomes & Assemblages

Buddhist Dependent Arising: The doctrine of dependent arising teaches that all phenomena arise in dependence upon multiple conditions, without any intrinsic self-existence. It asserts that everything is interconnected and interdependent — nothing exists independently, and all phenomena are the result of a network of conditions coming together. This is also described as the interdependence of all things.
Deleuzian Rhizomes: Rhizomes (a key concept from A Thousand Plateaus) describe systems that grow in multiple directions, without a central point of origin or control. Like dependent arising, a rhizome is non-hierarchical, interconnected, and constantly evolving. The rhizome is an assemblage where flows of energy, information, and desire come together to form new connections that continuously reshape the system.
Mapping: Dependent arising and rhizomes both describe systems where everything is interconnected. Just as Buddhist teachings explain that every phenomenon arises dependent on conditions, Deleuze’s rhizomes describe non-linear networks of becoming, where each node (phenomenon) emerges from multiple causes and contributes to constant reconfiguration. There is no essence, just emergent processes.

5. Samsara ↔ Deleuzian Assemblage/ Becoming-Cycle

Buddhist Samsara: Samsara refers to the endless cycle of birth, death, and rebirth governed by ignorance and desire. It’s a cycle of repetitive, self-perpetuating behavior that binds beings to suffering.
Deleuzian Becoming-Cycle: In Deleuze’s philosophy, becoming is always in progress, never a fixed state. Systems are always in motion, always shifting, never returning to the same state. Samsara can be seen as a repetitive assemblage — a system where desires, feedback loops, and interactions create a cycle that produces new variations but ultimately returns to a similar state. This cycle can be broken when new flows emerge, breaking the repetitive pattern and allowing for new forms of becoming.
Mapping: Both samsara and Deleuze’s cycles of becoming describe how a system can repeat itself over time, but samsara represents a fixed, cyclical repetition driven by attachment and ignorance. Breaking samsara would involve introducing new flows and feedback systems that create a different becoming, disrupting the cycle and transforming the system.

6. Liberation (Nirvana) ↔ Deleuzian Escape / Line of Flight

Buddhist Liberation (Nirvana): In Buddhism, nirvana is the cessation of suffering, the end of craving, and the liberation from samsara. It represents freedom from the cycle of birth, death, and rebirth, where the individual is no longer caught in the web of desires and attachments.
Deleuzian Line of Flight: In Deleuze’s terms, lines of flight are the paths that allow escape from restrictive systems, opening up new possibilities and ways of becoming. Lines of flight represent becoming-other and escaping the rigid structures of identity or systems that constrain growth. It is an emergent transformation where new flows and feedback systems allow the system to evolve in unpredictable and liberating ways.
Mapping: Nirvana and Deleuze’s line of flight both describe escape from restrictive cycles (karma, samsara, etc.). Nirvana is freedom from suffering and the end of becoming in the cycle of samsara, while a line of flight is an opening to new becomings — a pathway that allows the