The paper is Article 1 of the Pali-Psycho series. It focuses on the empirical and clinical comparison axis: mindfulness, breath meditation, compassion cultivation, absorption states, affect labeling, default-mode-network findings, and selected positive-psychology parallels are treated as modern comparison points for Pali-canonical practice architectures. The central result is deliberately qualified. The paper finds partial empirical support for methods derived from or inspired by Buddhist practice, stronger structural parallels for some attentional and affect-regulation mechanisms, and more tentative conceptual analogies for broader philosophical claims. It does not claim that modern mindfulness trials validate the full Pali Canon, that Buddhist soteriology is reducible to clinical psychology, or that single-case jhana evidence establishes a general neuroscientific model. (i) External preprint inputs: The article builds on Pali-canonical sources, Buddhist psychology scholarship, mindfulness and compassion meta-analyses, clinical intervention literature, and selected neuroscience studies. (ii) Structural component: The paper introduces a convergence-type differentiation that separates empirical, structural, and conceptual parallels. (iii) Diagnostic / comparative evidence: Modern evidence is treated as evidence for specific operationalized constructs and interventions, not as wholesale validation of the Pali framework. (iv) Open bridge: The journal-stage update should integrate the current safety, no-self/DPDR, advanced-meditation, and construct-validity literature more fully. This is an advanced draft preprint. It has undergone internal review, source and citation checks, English style calibration, bilingual build checks, PDF preflight, and policy checks, but it has not undergone formal journal peer review. Major revisions are possible before journal submission. Abstract (English) 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 collectively encompassing hundreds of randomized controlled trials for depression, anxiety, and stress. Between Buddhist concepts and modern psychology, there exist parallels supported in part empirically, in part structurally, and in part 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. At the same time, 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. Zusammenfassung (Deutsch) Der Pali-Kanon enthält Elemente einer empirisch untersuchbaren Protopsychologie, deren Kernmethoden -- Achtsamkeit, Atemmeditation, Mitgefühlskultivierung und Absorptionszustände -- in modernen klinischen und neurowissenschaftlichen Kontexten teilweise anschlussfähig sind. Der Artikel unterscheidet empirisch gestützte, strukturelle und konzeptuelle Parallelen und hält zugleich die Grenzen klinischer Achtsamkeitsprogramme gegenüber dem soteriologischen Gesamtsystem des Pali-Kanons fest. Changes in Version 1.0 (June 2026) Initial Zenodo release of Article 1 in the Pali-Psycho series. Initial release: English, German, and combined PDFs are published synchronously. Review status: 7-phase review completed and P0/P1 fixes applied before publication. Source and citation checks: EN/GER citation sets were synchronized and DOI-bearing sources checked in May 2026. Style and claim guardrails: The 2026-05-28 English style pass calibrated overstrong claims about clinical evidence, DMN/anatta, jhana neuroimaging, and compassion training. DE/EN: English and German PDFs published synchronously; combined PDF generated from EN plus DE.
Lukas Geiger (Sat,) studied this question.