| Introduction to Buddhism | ||||||||||||||
Introduction to Buddhism |
The Four Noble Truths: The Cause of Suffering A continuation of the empirically oriented thought that has led to the First Noble Truth (suffering as a characteristic of existence), will lead us further into the understanding of the cause of suffering. This thought-evolution is not bound to, nor conditioned by a revelation, an authority (e.g. the Veda), nor by any form of axiomatic thinking (such as most of the sramanist schools), but is based upon a gradual examination of empirical data. This examination is performed as neutral as possible; this means as free as possible from emotional influences. Moreover it is important to abstain from any form of prejudice where the term ‘suffering’ is concerned. E.g. we should not be influenced by the Christian idea or evaluation of ‘suffering’. Suffering arises only when a preceding desire is present: when this condition is absent, no unfulfilled (because unfulfillable) desire (i.e. suffering) can arise. The existential condition of suffering (‘birth-and-death’) thus results from desire (trsna, P. tanha). Desire is not only ‘wanting’ (urge, obsession, drive, greed, etc.)
To make (something) one’s own But also in its negative form ‘fear’ (frustration, inhibition, angst, etc.)
Not to make (something) one’s own, being unable to, wanting to avoid, Just as the concept of ‘suffering’ is broader than the mere experience of pain, so the concept of ‘desire’ reaches further than what is popularly understood by it. Both aspects of desire cover all psychic activity, regardless the ethical character of the object of desire. In this way, trsna includes the desire for freedom from suffering, or the fear of not being able to realize enlightenment.
Taken together, all these diverging and dualistically structured desires can be called ‘thirst’ (trsna) or ‘attachment’ (upadana), although there is a clear difference between the two:
‘Thirst’ is active, orientated, directed towards the other, either in a positive or a negative sense. ‘Attachment’ on the other hand is conservative, strives to keep what one is or has, and is directed towards possessions that are regarded as ‘mine or me’. Attachment results from [or as we will see further, is conditioned by] desire. Desire and attachment occupy a pivotal place in the origination of the existential condition.
An inevitable question would be: "Why this desire?"
Desire necessarily stands in relation to:
The content of consciousness (vijñana) Each form of desire (» attachment) is founded on ‘ego-thought’ present in vijñana, getting its ‘energy’ from samskara. Both vijñana and samskara are based on the thought-error:
This is said to be the confusion between:
This fundamental thought-error is technically called ‘ignorance’, avidya: here it should be mentioned that avidya corresponds to ‘not-knowing’ or ‘wrong-knowing’ and not to the pejorative meaning of ‘stupidity’. Because of this, the deep cause of suffering is not just desire – as is often, but wrongly, stated – but ignorance. Therefore no ‘god’ is to be found at the origin of suffering. Buddhism indicates this fundamental ignorance – present in every ‘sentient’ being – as the basis for the origination of suffering. It is responsible for the totality of actions (physical, verbal and mental). Ignorance leads to desire which in its turn leads to suffering. Besides this causal evolution from ‘ignorance’ to ‘suffering’, there also exists a ‘retro-evolution’ from ‘suffering’ to ‘ignorance’. This causal chain is called pratitya samutpada (P. paticca-samuppada). Pratitya Samutpada or Dependent Arising Pratitya (also pratyaya): condition, secondary cause, circumstance, preceding source of dependence ¹ hetu: root condition, necessitating cause. Samutpada: sam = together + utpada: arising, originating. A literal translation of the technical term ‘pratitya samutpada’ could read:
‘The mutually arising in dependence of causal conditions’
In both the Pali-texts and the Sanskrit Agama this ‘causality chain’ is usually formulated in a stereotyped manner. 10, 7, or 5 causality-links are mentioned, but mostly the sources (locus typicus) mention 12 nidanas (bases or causalities), summed up as follows:
This doesn’t actually end the chain, it starts anew at every link. ‘Old Age and Death’ are not the end, but in their turn re-condition the ‘ignorance’ of a connecting cycle. In this way the ‘series’ continues endlessly.
The series ‘Dependent Origination’ should not be regarded as a linear chain, but rather as a circle or even as a cyclical-spherical form. Another point to be noted is that it is a causal chain (causally related) and should not be regarded as a chronology: each of the nidanas or links happens simultaneously with the 11 others.
The elements of the chain are connected through pratitya (not hetu!): it concerns a ‘conditioning’ and not a ‘necessitating cause’; although the chain starts with ignorance, ignorance is also conditioned by the chain and is therefore not a “first cause”. Pratitya samutpada should therefore not be seen as a static scheme, but as a dynamic and pragmatic approach of the problem of suffering.
The links of the Pratitya Samutpada
Ignorance - Avidya
The fundamental ignorance: i.e. the thought-error through which everything – including oneself! – is reduced to an I or ego, a self or atman. Avidya is a Buddhist technical term to indicate ‘blinding’, the delusion that affects every existence. The term should not be confused with maya, a brahmanistic metaphysical term indicating the "universal illusion". From the Buddhist point of view it is not the "world" that is the illusion, but the "I" that perceives the world. In this self-delusion the existant sees him/herself as essence. Out of its relative, existential condition, the being projects itself as permanent and absolute (substance). This thought-error has its basis in consciousness and from there "controls" and manipulates thoughts as well as actions. Karma-Formations - Samskara
Conditioned by the fundamental thought-error, karma-formations can develop. These formations, which are primarily volitional and conative (from the Latin: conamen, conatus = effort, trial, undertaking) in nature, provide the motivation to continue the life-urge in its familiar ego-form. Dependent on ignorance they actively translate (karma = action) that which is potentially present in ignorance. Retrospectively one could say that the karma-formations form the residue that remains of nama-rupa after the moment of death.
Consciousness - Vijñana
‘Consciousness’: in this case mainly the (collective un-) conscious and (sub-) conscious tat constitutes the basis for a personality conscious of its consciousness. Considered in relation to time, one could refer to the consciousness of the unborn child: a consciousness that supposedly is without content and at the same time provides the basis for the input of later existential empirical data. Buddhologically[1] seen, consciousness ‘creates’ the personality: this in contradistinction to Western psychology where ‘personality’ is considered the basis for consciousness. This consciousness results from previous karmic activity and forms at the same time the first factor for a "rebirth in the present". Resulting from former processes, vijñana will become the conditioning factor for later processes.
Name-and-Form - Nama-rupa
Because consciousness is directed towards itself, it is involved in the arising of the totality of psychic and physical functions. Consciousness "sees" itself as a unity, but this unity is actually the sum of an incalculable number of empirical data. Consciousness, conditioned by avidya, projects the nama-rupa (personality) as a self or ego, there where nama-rupa is only the sum of experiences that the being "has" through its consciousness structures and content.
Six Senses - Sad-ayatana
The personality would be condemned to imprisonment within its own made walls, would it not be for the capacities (functions, organs) that it has at its disposal. Capacities by which it can switch from an ego-directed consciousness to an extra-ego directed consciousness (from centripetal to centrifugal). Consciousness however needs its "nourishment" by way of function-channels or transmission-channels in order to receive experiences by which it can build up a ‘consciousness of other’ (= object-consciousness). The experience of ‘becoming conscious of other’ will stand in contrast to ‘self-consciousness’ or subject-consciousness. This contrast will take form in the dichotomy of subject (ego, self-consciousness) and object (consciousness of other). With sense-perception as its basis, personality arrives at the dualistic viewpoint in which ‘this is me, that is mine’ will come to stand against ‘this is not me, that is not mine’. The six sense-functions (cfr. pañca skandha) are a necessity in relation to the cognitive process of subject/object. This cognitive process will inevitably be limited and conditioned by the structure and the quality of the senses: this means that our empirical world is determined by the capabilities of our perception and consciousness (physical, physiological, and psychological limitations of perception account e.g. for the difference between humans and animals).
Contact - Sparsa
Literally means ‘contact(-s)’. More precisely we could describe it as the transmission of ‘consciousness-impressions through the six sense-functions’. These contacts presuppose a sensory confluence of object and subject, of ‘perceived’ and ‘perceiver’. In such a concurrence sparsa – in the strict sense - performs both the verbal function of ‘perceiving’ and the nominal function of ‘perception’.
Perception - Vedana
Literally means ‘sensation’ or ‘perception’: in pratitya samutpada, vedana is the fruition of contact. If there is a sense-function, but there is no contact, then there is no perception or sensation (cfr. anaesthesia, meditation, etc.). Just in how far this perception is in concordance with an ‘absolute, objective reality’ remains an unanswered question in this context, because the only possible answer would be an axiomatic one, and this is exactly what the Buddha is trying to avoid. It is important to realize that a perception, i.e. the experience of an object by a subject, is necessarily colored by the mental attitude of the subject. In general there exist three modalities of subjective attitude: The perception of other is, at a certain time and place, pleasant (and thus desirable); The perception of other is unpleasant (and thus fear-inspiring or repulsive); The perception of other is neutral (neither stimulating desire or aversion and thus karmically inactive).
Vedana provides the necessary material through which consciousness can reflect upon itself, (namely the consciousness of being conscious, ego-thought that thinks of ego). In this way all later empirical data can be measured by fixed standards which are characterized by vedana as ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’. Through the influence of ignorance all this is recognized as "true". There where sad-ayatana introduced the distinction between ‘I’ and ‘not-I’, vedana will carry this discrimination further between ‘I = subject’ and ‘not-I = object’.
Desire or Thirst - Trsna
Literally means ‘thirst’, and is used to denote ‘desire, passion, grasping, longing, etc.) Perception is not the direct cause of desire, but makes it possible and conditions it. Without perception (in one form or another) there can be no desire. Through ego-perception arises ego-desire. This is the inclination to reduce everything experienced as ‘not-I’ or ‘other’ to an ‘ego-form’, mostly through the existential procedures of ‘having’ and ‘being’ (and their corollaries: ‘not-having’, ‘not-being’). This inclination is expressed as a volitional reaction, a ‘striving towards’ which is activity, drive, and urge. From a subjective polarization the object of desire is looked upon as ‘good or desirable’.
Attachment - Upadana
Attachment: being attached, holding on to what is obtained. Where trsna takes no account of the characteristic of anatta (non-self), attachment takes no account of the characteristic of anicca (impermanence).
‘Desiring for’ gives rise to staying attached, the inevitable counterpart of trsna. Attachment is the inertia to remain in the condition of desire, i.e., maintaining the drive and its object. Attachment expresses itself most strongly where ‘I’ is both subject and object at the same time, namely, the attachment to ‘ego-existence’, the life-urge or ‘will to live’ (Wille zum Leben).
Process of Becoming - Bhava
Process of Becoming: not to be seen as a mere biological process. Bhava results from conscious or unconscious ego-attachment: this expresses itself actively in the will to exist, the confirmation of the self. Ego-existence is experienced as the fundamental necessity for the fulfillment of ego-desire. Because the object of desire and attachment are always projected into the future, the process of becoming is also directed towards the future, i.e. an ego-directed future. In this way the process of becoming becomes the actual link with the future. In this sense bhava corresponds to the karma-formations. It is as it were a bundle, a synthesis or actualization of all different karma-formations within our existence. Samskara then becomes the potentiality – the synthesis of karma in the past - to be actualized.
Birth - Jati
Birth. Bhava, the ego-urge-to-exist gives rise to (conditions, leads to) birth. Here again birth should not merely be seen as a mere biological fact. Bhava is the carrier of the life-urge around which the skandhas (aggregates) are grouping. Jati is the result of bhava: birth (= becoming) is the result of the urge to exist. For physical conception (which is in this context is more than mere ‘birth’) the ‘coming together of the three’ is required. Father: male biological, genetic factors Mother: female biological, genetic factors Bhava: the life-urge and carrier of the karma-conditions. An active interaction between these three factors can be supposed, also within the perspectives of modern day science.
The karmically colored bhava is the link between death and birth, a link that is not a ‘being’ but a ‘becoming’. Bhava is ‘charged’ with vital energy and gives the impulse for a new birth. Jati is thus the actualization, the precipitation or the urge-to-exist.
The following question could easily occur: Is the being that generates bhava the same or a different being than that which comes to birth through bhava? Is the being that performs karmic actions the same or a different being than that which undergoes the karma-formations (karmic results)? In relation to these questions, there are three possible points of view: If the emphasis is put on the uninterrupted continuation of the vital urge, then both beings are identical (A’ harvests from A) If the emphasis is put on the composition of nama-rupa, then both beings are different (B harvests from A, in which B is different from A). Both previous statements cannot answer this question adequately since they both start from the postulate that A, A’ and B are ‘beings’. Since Buddhism is not concerned with ontology, and terms such as ‘being’ and ‘non-being’ only have relative value (i.e. only in the context in which they are used), the question of the identity or difference of beings cannot be answered adequately. The only thing that can be stated is that they are somehow related. Therefore the questioning itself is irrelevant. Moreover, personality (nama-rupa) cannot be separated from the surrounding ‘other’ (e.g. collectivity, environment, temporal/spatial system, through which again and again other karmic aspect can be evoked: collective karma, etc.)
Seen as such, every being in every moment of its existence can be looked upon as the convergence of e.g. personal karma, family karma, national karma, human karma, planetary karma, etc. This is why the Buddha emphasized that all ‘beings’ involved in bhava/jati are both (or neither) identical and different.
Old Age and Death - Jara-marana
Old Age and Death. This term should not be merely seen as the inevitable process of ageing and decline of the personality, but as the existential experience of suffering. As there is a birth at any moment of life, so is there (at that very same moment) a decline, a death, an un-becoming. Old age and death are not to be regarded as the end of an evolution, but are present factors in every moment of existence: one ages constantly, one dies constantly.
From this comes the realization of suffering and the projection of a world of suffering (samsara, lit. cycle of birth-and-death). This projected world of suffering is again ruled by desire and ignorance, thus returning to the first nidana: avidya, and so it completes the cycle. It would therefore be a mistake to interpret the 12 nidanas in a merely linear, chronological context. Pratitya samutpada is a causality-chain, not a view on biological evolution. We should therefore be careful not to interpret the chain in terms such as "birth precedes old age and death"….until "ignorance precedes karma-formations".
We should interpret it in the form of "(a) conditions (b); in (a), (b) finds its cause" thereby always remembering that the texts use the word pratitya (condition – secondary cause – circumstance, etc.) and not hetu (necessitating cause). The nidanas constitute a practical scheme, so their mutual semantic separation is conventional, didactic, and pragmatic. Not only do these 12 nidanas overlap one another, but within each moment they occur simultaneously. One could therefore imagine the causality chain as a figure in space, rather than a two-dimensional plane. Because such a construction is difficult to conceive of, people prefer the illustration of a circle in constant movement (a turning wheel). Thus, our actual existence is a complex whole made up of all these elements, a whole in which past, present and future constantly meet. This complex structure of existence is a plurality of synchronicities of such series of events.
A much more simple and shortened scheme would be:
Ignorance ® belief in ego ® ego-desire ® ego-existence ® suffering ® ignorance ® etc. [1] “Buddhological” is a neologism which contrasts with “theological”, since in Buddhism there is no conception of “God” (theos), theology would not be an appropriate rendering. Another neologism frequently used in Buddhist academic circles is “dharmology” (Theory of Dharma). |
|||||||||||||
| © 2002 Akshin Web Design |
