The Fundamental Tenets of Buddhism Concerning Reality – Part 2 of 3

“Where there is birth, age and death necessarily follow. This realm (of causal nexus) is perpetual, regardless of the Tathāgata’s appearing or not appearing (in this world); and the stability of truth and the order of truth follow their necessary and natural concatenation. The Tathāgata has comprehended this and penetrated into the Truth; having comprehended and penetrated into it, he announces and preaches it, makes it known, establishes and reveals it, and makes it clear and visible.”
(Samyutta, 12. 20.)

Herein is a point of great importance, which gave rise to two opposite interpretations of Buddha’s teachings. One school understood in this thesis the permanent stability of the Dharma, meaning thereby external existence, while the other interpreted the stability of truth as existing in our own mind. The difference may be stated thus: The school which emphasized the objective import of the Dharma ran to an extreme verging on materialism, asserting the reality of the external order, and denying the mind, on the ground of the doctrine of non-ego. The opposite direction was taken by the other school, which saw no meaning in what is usually spoken of as the objective world, apart from its significance as a manifestation of the universal Dharmatā. The consequence was that the truth of existence was to be realized only in the enlightened mind of a Buddha, and that, therefore, reality belonged, not to the world of visible diversity, but to the realm of transcendental unity. The former tendency was represented by the Sarvāstivādins, the men who asserted that “all exists”; who were opposed by nearly all others, though the extreme transcendental view was not universally accepted. Before taking up the opposition, we must inquire what Buddha’s own position was.

Buddha always explicitly repudiated the two extremes, the Permanence-view (Sassata-vāda) and the Nihilistic view (Uccheda-vāda), that is, the views which either assert or deny the reality of the external world per se. He once said to his great disciple, Kaccāna:

“The world, for the most part, holds either to a belief in being or to a belief in non-being. But for one who, in the light of the perfect insight, considers how the world arises, belief in the non-being of the world passes away. And for one who, in the light of the perfect insight, considers how the world ceases, belief in the being of the world passes away. … That all is existent is one extreme; that all is non-existent is another extreme. The Tathāgata, avoiding the two extremes, preaches his truth, which is the Middle Path.”
(Samyutta, 12. 15; Warren, p. 165.)

The former view is that of common-sense realism, which Buddha refuted by showing how change and decay actually go on before our eyes. Buddha opposed this kind of realism, not by denying reality altogether, but by demanding a change in the conception of reality, a transfer of the idea of reality from the conception of permanent external existence to that of becoming ruled by the law of causation. On the other hand, the nihilistic theory differs from Buddha’s position in a very subtle manner, because Buddha rejects the idea of permanence, yet sees reality in things and processes; both being Dharmas by virtue of the same law. He accepts the assertion that nothing exists in the sense that nothing persists by itself; but he rejects the same assertion by making a counter-affirmation that reality consists in the stability and order of truth, of the law of causation. This is what he called the Middle Path, as he preached the Middle Path in his ethics, rejecting both the hedonistic life and ascetic self-mortification.

The Buddhist realism above referred to was in fact not so materialistic as it was believed to be by the opposing schools. Yet it concentrated its effort upon an analysis of the Dharmas, as if they were merely external existences, and neglected the significance of Buddha’s Tathāgataship, which consisted in his having grasped the truth of existence in his enlightened mind. The realists missed the point in their conception of Dharma because they proceeded to its analysis, apart from the ideal interpretation of the Dharmas as given by Buddha himself. Thus, this school of realists was controverted by adducing the personal example of Buddha, and by emphasizing the significance of faith in him as the Tathāgata, in the conception and interpretation of reality. In other words, the opposition took the orthodox course of never separating the conception of Dharma from the personality of Buddha as the Truth-winner and Truth-revealer.

Now, not speaking of the extreme transcendentalism, the orthodox theory of the Middle Path may be formulated in the following way:

Buddha has unquestionably said that the truth-order exists and works, regardless of whether a Tathāgata appears, or not. But, who among Buddhists could, without his revelation of Dharma, have realized that truth? In fact, the external-realist asserts the truth-order in consequence of Buddha’s teaching; and Buddha taught this because the truth was grasped by him. This we say, not merely in the sense that Buddha is our authority in this matter, but in the sense that the truth-order would remain a meaningless entity or process, unless there were at least one man who had realized it and interpreted its meaning. Undoubtedly, the truth-order may be working, even while you or I do not realize it. Yet it has become known to us through Buddha’s revelation, and then in our own enlightenment. Enlightenment and revelation are the essential factors in the nature of the truth-order because the conception truth-order does not mean a dead entity, nor a merely external order, but implies a realization of its import in the enlightened mind, which represents the ideal order of existence.

Otherwise expressed, the world, the realm of truths (dharmadhātu), as a whole, is the stage on which the beings in the world attain their own Dharmatā; and therefore, the world, subsisting by itself, but without knowing its own meaning – its own truth-order – is an imperfect manifestation of its real nature. Only a half, and the inferior half, of reality, of the real nature of existence, is rightly to be conceived as the merely external existence; the other half, the essential and integral half, is first revealed to us when we bring to light our own real nature. It is a realization of the Dharmatā, on my part or yours; this is, however, not a merely individual work, but the enlightenment of an individual mind as a part of the world, nay, as the key to the revelation and realization of its real nature. Reality (Sanskrit, dharma-tathatā, dharma-svabhāva) is nothing but a full realization of the true nature; and in the true nature of the world, the ideal interpretation plays no less part than what is erroneously called external existence. The conception of reality becomes meaningless, unless an integral part, or aspect, is realized through at least one individual. What then is the significance of enlightenment on the part of an individual?

Here is conspicuously shown the significance of Buddha’s attainment and revelation, by which he plays an integral part in the world’s truth-order, and herein lies the importance of his personality as the Truth-winner and Truth-revealer. It is in his person that the real import of existence has come to light; it is in his enlightenment in the fundamental nature (dharmatā) of the world that the cosmos has found its own mouthpiece, the representative, the embodiment, of its truth-order; it is through his revelation that the world, including ourselves and many other beings of different sorts, has gained the key to the interpretation and comprehension of its real meaning. Knowing and seeing, enlightenment and revelation – all are nothing but the essential nature of the truth-order, by which the meaning of existence, and therefore of reality, is made explicit, or can be evolved. Wherefore it is said:

“The Exalted One knows knowing, sees seeing; he is the One who has become the eyes (of the world); he is the One who has become knowledge (or enlightenment); he is the One who has become truth; he is the One who has become Brahmā (the highest deity of Brahmanism); he is the instructor, the revealer, the One who pours out good, the One who gives immortality; the Lord of Dharma, that is the Tathāgata.” (Samyutta, 35. 116, etc.)

Buddha, the Tathāgata, is the prototypical representative of the seer, of the knower, of the one who has realized his own true nature, together with that of the whole world. In short, Buddha’s enlightenment is the interpretation of the world, which means not simply a process in an individual mind but plays an integral part in the existence of the world, being a revelation of its own meaning – a self-realization of the world, so to speak. This is the view of the Middle Path.

The Fundamental Tenets of Buddhism Concerning Reality – Part 1 of 3

Buddhism is a comprehensive system of thought. In it we find a materialistic school, which denied the existence of the mind and affirmed the reality of the external world; there was also an extreme idealistic school, which explained all perceptions and phenomena as illusions. Moreover, in Buddhist thought, philosophical theories are intricately interwoven with religious faith regarding the person of the founder; and, similarly, the various ways of practicing contemplation are inseparable from ethical considerations which bear upon the religious, or ecclesiastical, community. The mind is minutely analyzed; yet Buddhist psychology was not a theoretical study but was considered to be a means of introspection in meditation, which in turn very much influenced the psychological theories in question. The law of causation was the chief tenet of Buddhist cosmology; but for Buddhism this conception was highly teleological, being understood in the sense of moral retribution. Morality is taught, of course; and every Buddhist is expected to observe its rules; the moral ideal, however, was not limited to human life, but extended to all kinds of existence, visible and invisible. A religious ethic, or a philosophical religion, or a religious philosophy – each one of these designations may be applied to Buddhism; while in the numerous schools within it different points have been given prominence.

Thus, to abstract a phase of Buddhist thought, apart from other factors, is as if one were to dissect a human body into parts and treat one of them as a unit. As a Buddhist simile expresses it, none of the numerous diamonds studded on a net can be touched without affecting all the others. Yet I shall try here to take up one aspect of Buddhist thought concerning reality. It would be an altogether hopeless task, if there were not a certain continuity of thread even in the meshes of a net. And this continuity is given in the conception of Dharma, which means “law,” or “truth.” This is one of the Buddhists Trinity, the others being Buddha and Sangha, that is, the person of the founder and the community of believers. This Trinity is the foundation of the Buddhist religion, and none of the three is perfect apart from the others. It will presently appear how the Buddhist conception expressed in the idea of Dharma is supported by, and connected with, the faith in Buddha, the revealer of truth. But I shall start with the idea of Dharma, apart from the other terms of the Trinity.

Dharma is a very flexible term in Buddhist terminology. It meant originally, in the Brahmanic idea, “what endures,” that is the law of social order. Buddha adopted this term, divorced from its association with social sanction, and used it to designate his teachings about the truths of existence. These teachings were expressed in words and preserved in writings, although to the Buddhist they were not merely letters or words, but truths, and therefore things, as well. Buddha is the revealer of truths as they are in reality, and the doctrines are proclaimed in accordance with the reality of things. That is the reason why the word Dharma, especially when used in the plural, means things, or conditions, or realities, both mental and physical. These things and conditions are not products of chance but exist and change according to the definite order of laws, or truths. This order of truth is expressed pre-eminently by the law of causation, which is assumed by Buddhism to be universal and irrevocable throughout all changes of the world. “That being present, this comes to be; because that has arisen, this arises” – this is the keynote of the Buddhist view of the world. The law of causation is applied to the physical and mental orders of existence, to the subjective and objective aspects of our being. It is the essential nature of things and processes that they are through and through ruled by the same Dharma of causation.

Partly because of the assumption of universal causality, and partly because of its religious ideal of communion, Buddhism assumes the basic unity of existence, notwithstanding the fact that it admits apparent diversity. We comprehend the Dharma of the external existence because the same Dharma is inherent in us; we understand other people because they are beings subsisting by the same Dharma. Thus, the fundamental nature of all Dharmas is one and the same. The fundamental nature of existence, in this sense of unity, is called dharmatā, that is, the essential quality of being subject to the laws of existence. Dharmas exist and become such as they are (yathābhūtam), and yet they are one in nature and in relation. Everything that is born and grows is subject to age, ills, and death – this is the essential nature of things. All Buddhas, of the past, present, and future, have attained, and will attain, the highest freedom by treading the same way of perfection – this is the universal qualification (dharmatā) of Buddhas. Buddha’s teachings and injunctions aim at the purification of the mind and are efficacious to lead us up to the supreme enlightenment – this is the invariable import of the Dharma. The term Dharmatā applies to every one of these aspects of the universal nature. The same idea is expressed adverbially by the word tathatayā, that is, in accordance with nature, and as a noun by tathatā, i.e., “as it is,” or “Thatness.” Therefore, Buddha is called Tathāgata, the One who has attained the Truth of existence, the Dharmatā or Tathatā of the world, and has come to reveal the same truth to us. He is the Truth-winner and Truth-revealer. Because the Dharmatā is the same in him and us, his truth is revealed to us, and we are enlightened by the same truth.

The Dharma is the truth revealed by Buddha, the Lord of Truth; yet he is not the creator of it. We are enlightened by the truths taught by him, but we can be thus enlightened because our existence and nature are based on the same Dharmatā that is found in Buddha himself. The final Dharmatā is the fountain of Buddhist attainment and revelation, for Buddha as well as for ourselves. The world of Dharmas is a perpetually flowing stream; foam and flakes float on its surface, but one can attain the tranquil ocean of Nirvāṇa by pursuing the course of the stream; after all, one and the same is the water in the fountain, in the stream, and in the ocean. Seen in this way, the fundamental Dharmatā of things and beings is the source of illusion as well as of enlightenment, of vices as well as of virtues. One who does not realize this unity is in illusion, while one who has grasped the Dharmatā or Tathatā, is a Buddha. It is said:

All are subject to the laws (dharmas) of ill,
Of age, as well as of death;
Beings exist according to the laws.
(yathā dhammā, tathā sttā). (Anguttara, v. 57.)

The deluded are distressed by these changes, while the enlightened man is not troubled by them because he knows the truth. The Truth is permanent, even independent of persons who are troubled by it, or are enlightened in it. Again, it is said:

“Where there is birth, age and death necessarily follow. This realm (of causal nexus) is perpetual, regardless of the Tathāgata’s appearing or not appearing (in this world); and the stability of truth and the order of truth follow their necessary and natural concatenation. The Tathāgata has comprehended this and penetrated into the Truth; having comprehended and penetrated into it, he announces and preaches it, makes it known, establishes and reveals it, and makes it clear and visible.”
(Samyutta, 12. 20.)