Buddhist Spectrum

The law of cause and effect

Ven. Piyadassi Thera

'Dependent Origination', Paticca-Samuppada, is a basic teaching of Buddhism. The doctrine therein being so deep and profound, it is not possible within the limited scope of this essay to make an extensive survey of the subject. Based solely on the teaching of the Buddha an attempt is made here to elucidate this doctrine, leaving aside the complex details involved.

Scholars and writers have in various forms rendered this term into English. 'Dependent Origination', 'Dependent Arising', 'Conditioned Co-production', 'Causal Genesis'. 'Conditioned Genesis' are some renderings. Throughout this essay the term 'Dependent Origination' is used. Dependent Origination is not a discourse for the unintelligent and superficial, nor is it a doctrine to be grasped by speculation and mere logic put forward by hair-splitting disputants. Hear these words of the Buddha.

'Deep, indeed, Ananda, is this Paticca-Samuppada and deep does it appear. It is through not understanding, through not penetrating this doctrine, that these beings have become entangled like a matted ball or thread, become like munja grass and rushes, unable to pass beyond the woeful states of existence and sansara, the cycle of existence.`

Those who fail to understand the real significance of this; all-important doctrine mistake it to be a mechanical law of causality, or, even a simple simultaneous arising, nay a first beginning of all things, animate and inanimate. Be it remembered that there is no First Cause with a capital 'F' and a capital 'C' in Buddhist thought, and Dependent Origination does not attempt to dig out or even investigate a first cause. The Buddha emphatically declared that the first beginning of existence is something inconceivable, and that such notions and speculations of a first beginning may lead to mental derangement. If one posits a 'First Cause' one is justified in asking for the cause of that 'First Cause;' for nothing can escape the law of condition and cause which is patent in the world to all but those who will not see.

According to Aldous Huxley, Those who make the mistake of thinking in terms of a first cause are fated never to become men of science. But as they do not know what science is, they are not aware that they are losing anything. To refer phenomena back to a first cause has ceased to be fashionable, at any rate in the West... we shall never succeed in changing our age of iron into an age of gold until we give up our ambition to find a single cause for all our ills, and admit the existence of many causes acting simultaneously, of intricate corelations and reduplicated actions and reaction.

A Creator - God, who rewards and punishes the good deeds and ill deeds of the creatures of his creation has no place in Buddhist thought. A theist, however, who attributes beings and events to an omnipotent Creator-God would emphatically say, 'It is God's will; it is sacrilege to question the Authority.'

This god-idea stifles the human liberty to investigate, to analyze, to scrutinize, to see what is beyond this naked eye, and retards insight.

Let us grant for argument's sake that 'X' is the 'first cause' Now does this assumption of ours bring us one bit nearer to our goal, our deliverance? Does it not close the door to it? Buddhism, on the other hand, states that things are neither due to one cause (ekahetuka) nor are they causeless (a-hetuka) the 12 factors of Paticca-Samuppada and the twenty four conditioning relations (Paccaya) shown in the patthana, the seventh and the last book of the Abhidhamma pitaka, clearly demonstrate how things are, 'multiple-caused' (aneka-hetuka); and in stating that things are neither causeless nor due to one single cause, Buddhism antedated modern science by 25 centuries.

We see a reign of natural law-beginningless causes and effects and naught else ruling the universe. Every effect becomes in turn a cause and it goes on forever (as long as ignorance and craving are allowed to continue).

A coconut, for instance, is the principle cause or near cause of a coconut tree, and that very tree is again the cause of many a coconut tree.

'X' has two parents, four grandparents, and thus the law of cause and effect extends unbrokenly like the waves of the sea-ad infinitum.

It is just impossible to conceive of a first beginning. None can trace the ultimate origin of anything, not even of a grain of sand, let alone of human beings. It is useless and meaningless to go in search of a beginning in a beginningless past. Life is not an identity, it is a becoming. It is a flux of physiological and psychological changes.

``There is no reason to suppose that the world had a beginning at all. The idea that things must have a beginning is really due to the poverty of our imagination.

Therefore, perhaps, I need not waste any more time upon the argument about the first cause.``

Instead of a 'First Cause', the Buddha speaks of Conditionality. The whole world is subject to the law of cause and effect, in other words, action and result. We cannot think of anything, in this cosmos that is causeless and unconditioned.

As Viscount Samuel says, 'There is no such thing as chance. Every event is the consequence of previous events; everything that happens is the effect of a combination of multitude of prior causes; and like causes always produce like effects. The Laws of Causality and of the Uniformity of Nature prevail everywhere and always.`

Buddhism teaches that all compounded things come into being, presently exist, and cease (uppada, thiti and bhanga), dependant on conditions and causes. Compare the truth of this saying with that oft-quoted verse of Arahath Assaji, one of the Buddha's first five disciples, who crystallized the entire teaching of the Buddha when answering the questions of Upatissa who later became known as Arahath Sariputta.

His question: 'What is your teacher's doctrine? What does he proclaim?'

And this was the answer:

Ye dhamma hetuppabhava tesan hetun tathagato aha

Tesan ca yo nirodho evan vadi mahasamano

Whatsoever things proceed from a cause,

The Tathagata has explained the cause thereof,

Their cessation, too, He has explained.

This is the doctrine of the Supreme Sage

Though brief, this expresses in unequivocal Words Dependent Origination, or Conditionality.

Our books mention that during the whole of the first week, immediately after His enlightenment, the Buddha sat at the foot of the Bodhi tree at Gaya, experiencing the supreme bliss of Emancipation. When the seven days had elapsed He emerged from that Samadhi, that state of concentrative thought, and during the first watch of the night thought over the Dependent Origination in direct order thus: 'When this exists, that comes to be; with the arising of this, that arises, namely.. dependent on ignorance, volitional formations; consciousness... and so on... Thus is the arising of this whole mass of suffering.

Then in the middle watch of the night, He pondered over the Dependent Origination in reverse order thus; 'when this, does not exist, that does not come to be; with the cessation of this, that ceases, namely; with the utter cessation of ignorance, the cessation of volitional formations... and so on... Thus is the cessation of this whole mass of suffering.`

Immature science and universal Buddhism

Keerthi Wijayatunga B.Sc. (Eng.)

There have been a lot of efforts from various individuals to compare science and Buddhism. Some say Buddhism starts where science ends. Some say the most scientific religion is Buddhism. Science is ever-changing, growing and diversifying. Buddhism is 2,500 years old and had already undergone a lot of changes from the time of the Buddha. There is discussion about authentic Buddhism. Therefore, is it correct to compare science and Buddhism?

Buddhism today, is a religion followed by millions around the world. What the Buddha taught was Buddhism and was not for everyone like any branch of science. You cannot make a whole population doctors, engineers or any other professionals. Those who study a particular discipline would only understand the content of each. Likewise, The Buddha has clearly declared his teaching is for those who practice the art of development of Panna, (Panna wantassa maya dhamma), and not for those who do not. The unique path for the accomplishment of this objective was discovered by the Buddha and he called it the Noble Eightfold Path (Ariya atthangika magga, Majjima patipada or Dhamma cakka).

Mundane

The noble eightfold path is used to separate mind (Nama) from the body (Rupa). This separation is called Namarupa pariccheda. Body is mundane and made of ever changing (Anicca) physical matter, grows old, catches deceases and dies. Whereas, the mind is super mundane, not made of physical matter, always new, never grows old and passes to a new body at death. As it is useless to treat the body which cannot be cleaned permanently and protected from deceases the Buddha found the mind can be cleaned permanently and made to live permanently if it is separated from the body.

Ultimate objective of Buddhism, therefore, is to grow and fulfill wisdom and finally live in it or Nibbana without a body (Panna paripurin vepullattanca sayan abhinna sacchikatwa upasampajja viharati). The Buddha further states that what is great for the eternal life in Nibbana is wisdom (Pannahu jeevin jeevita mahu setthan).

Science cannot prove itself as scientific. With all ultra modern technology and scientific instrumentation, still the final decision making has to be done reducing to five senses: eye, ear, nose, tongue and body.

Delusion

The Buddha called the five senses as 'fools' and said associating with them leads to the delusion of self, 'I'. He taught to give up the use of five senses (Asevanaca balanam) and use the mind directly instead (Panditananca sevana) for decision making or to see the 'truth'.

According to the Buddha science is non-science or Avijja. Using mind directly and avoiding use of senses (Panna), the Buddha called Vijja or science. The one who is not associating with five senses is said to dwell in science (Vijja carana sampanno).

Buddhism is the teaching of mind. It is correct to say the Buddha discovered the mind. Earlier everybody thought memory (Vinnana) as the mind. Vinnana is what all lay beings (Putujjana) call as mind. It is not the mind but the mind's storage of memory, knowledge and experiences.

The mind is seen in a step-by-step process in the Noble Eightfold Path. The first time one sees or experiences the mind they become the first saint (Sotapanna).

Realization

The second time the second saint (Sakadagami) etc. The mind is seen and comprehended fully only by the fourth saint or the Arahath. This is called realization of Four Noble Truths. Four Noble Truths are really the cross-section of the mind.

Every activity, be it bodily, verbal or mental, is done by appearing or rolling the mind from Rupa, Vedana, Sanna, Sankhara to Vinnana (form, sensation, recognition, judgment and memory) called the five aggregates. This can be realized by looking at something in front and closing the eyes and looking at what is automatically memorized. We perceive 'the world' by rolling the mind separately in each of five senses.

Because of this reason the Buddha called the body from head to toes containing mind and Vinnana as 'the world' (Imasminca byama matte kalebare sasannamhi samanake lokanca pannapemi).

Fraction

Mind cannot move a fraction of a millimeter out from the body and is bound to it by 10 bonds called Dasa samyojana. No one can imagine anything which had not been seen or experienced earlier. All what we think is simply accessing of store of memory called Vinnana.

Anything we do is preceded by thinking of how to do (accessing Vinnana) and ends by memorizing what was done (storing in Vinnana).

The lay (Putujjana) mind has no escape from this cycle as, each activity whether good (wholesome) or bad (unwholesome), ends up in continuous accumulation of Vinnana and further extending Samsara.

The continuous process of appearing or rotating in this cycle is always taking place attached to the body (Rupa). Therefore, the lay mind is always 'attached' to a Rupa and in fact cannot escape from it.

Finally, mind leaves (Bhanga) the particular Rupa by storing all what was experienced as Rupa, Vedana, Sanna, Sankhara and Vinnana. Therefore this is the third plane of mind activity called Vinnana. This is also called Arupa bhoomi since every physical Rupa (matter) is stored as images (Arupa). This attached rolling in three Bhoomis is what the lay mind is only capable of and is called Avijja carana or fifteen Caranas of the mind.

Discovery

If the three planes are magnets, the mind is like a steel ball moving from one plane to the other starting from and ending at Arupa bhoomi.

The Buddha's discovery, the noble eight fold path is to train the mind to keep out from all three planes and to come to the centre of the triangle shown and is hence called Majjima Patipada.

It is the mind which has the desire to see, hear, taste etc. But the mind cannot do them by itself directly. It uses the poor, physical sense organs for those purposes.

Each and every mind has four desires or requirements: see (Dhitta), hear (Suta), and touch (Muta) and to know (Vinnata). All these are done by 'rolling to five' (Papanca) in the respective sense organ.

Science utilizes this mind process of 'rolling to five' in all its activities.

keertiwijet@gmail.com

On right speech

Abhaya Sutta: to Prince Abhaya:

Thanissaro Bhikkhu

In this discourse, the Buddha shows the factors that go into deciding what is and is not worth saying.

The main factors are three: whether or not a statement is true, whether or not it is beneficial, and whether or not it is pleasing to others.

The Buddha himself would state only those things that are true and beneficial, and would have a sense of time for when pleasing and unpleasing things should be said. Notice that the possibility that a statement might be untrue yet beneficial is not even entertained.

This discourse also shows, in action, the Buddha's teaching on the four categories of questions and how they should be answered (see AN 4.42). The prince asks him two questions, and in both cases he responds first with a counter-question, before going on to give an analytical answer to the first question and a categorical answer to the second.

Each counter-question serves a double function: to give the prince a familiar reference point for understanding the answer about to come, and also to give him a chance to speak of his own intelligence and good motives.

Save face

This provides him with the opportunity to save face after being stymied in his desire to best the Buddha in argument.

The Commentary notes that the prince had placed his infant son on his lap as a cheap debater's trick: if the Buddha had put him in an uncomfortable spot in the debate, the prince would have pinched his son, causing him to cry and thus effectively bringing the debate to a halt.

The Buddha, however, uses the infant's presence to remove any sense of a debate and also to make an effective point.

Taking Nigantha Nataputta's image of a dangerous object stuck in the throat, he applies it to the infant, and then goes on to make the point that, unlike the Niganthas - who were content to leave someone with a potentially lethal object in the throat - the Buddha's desire is to remove such objects, out of sympathy and compassion. In this way, he brings the prince over to his side, converting a potential opponent into a disciple.

Squirrels' Sanctuary

Thus this discourse is not only about right speech, but also shows right speech in action.

I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Rajagaha in the Bamboo Grove, the Squirrels' Sanctuary.

Then Prince Abhaya went to Nigantha Nataputta and on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there, Nigantha Nataputta said to him, "Come, now, prince. Refute the words of the contemplative Gotama, and this admirable report about you will spread afar: 'The words of the contemplative Gotama - so mighty, so powerful - were refuted by Prince Abhaya!'"

"But how, venerable sir, will I refute the words of the contemplative Gotama - so mighty, so powerful?"

"Come now, prince. Go to the contemplative Gotama and on arrival say this: 'Lord, would the Tathagata say words that are unendearing & disagreeable to others?'

If the contemplative Gotama, thus asked, answers, 'The Tathagata would say words that are unendearing & disagreeable to others,' then you should say, 'Then how is there any difference between you, lord, and run-of-the-mill people?

Contemplative Gotama

For even run-of-the-mill people say words that are unendearing and disagreeable to others.' But if the contemplative Gotama, thus asked, answers, 'The Tathagata would not say words that are unendearing and disagreeable to others,' then you should say, 'Then how, lord, did you say of Devadatta that "Devadatta is headed for destitution, Devadatta is headed for hell, Devadatta will boil for an eon, Devadatta is incurable"? For Devadatta was upset and disgruntled at those words of yours.' When the contemplative Gotama is asked this two-pronged question by you, he won't be able to swallow it down or spit it up. Just as if a two-horned chestnut1 were stuck in a man's throat: he would not be able to swallow it down or spit it up. In the same way, when the contemplative Gotama is asked this two-pronged question by you, he won't be able to swallow it down or spit it up."

Blessed One

Responding, "As you say, venerable sir," Prince Abhaya got up from his seat, bowed down to Nigantha Nataputta, circumambulated him, and then went to the Blessed One.

On arrival, he bowed down to the Blessed One and sat to one side.

As he was sitting there, he glanced up at the sun and thought, "Today is not the time to refute the Blessed One's words. Tomorrow in my own home I will overturn the Blessed One's words." So he said to the Blessed One, "May the Blessed One, together with three others, acquiesce to my offer of tomorrow's meal."

The Blessed One acquiesced with silence.

Then Prince Abhaya, understanding the Blessed One's acquiescence, got up from his seat, bowed down to the Blessed One, circumambulated him, and left.

Non-staple foods

Then, after the night had passed, the Blessed One early in the morning put on his robes and, carrying his bowl and outer robe, went to Prince Abhaya's home. On arrival, he sat down on a seat made ready. Prince Abhaya, with his own hand, served and satisfied the Blessed One with fine staple and non-staple foods. Then, when the Blessed One had eaten and had removed his hand from his bowl, Prince Abhaya took a lower seat and sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the Blessed One, "Lord, would the Tathagata say words that are unendearing and disagreeable to others?"

"Prince, there is no categorical yes-or-no answer to that."

"Then right here, lord, the Niganthas are destroyed."

"But prince, why do you say, 'Then right here, lord, the Niganthas are destroyed'?"

"Just yesterday, lord, I went to Nigantha Nataputta and... he said to me...'Come now, prince. Go to the contemplative Gotama and on arrival say this: "Lord, would the Tathagata say words that are unendearing and disagreeable to others?"... Just as if a two-horned chestnut were stuck in a man's throat: he would not be able to swallow it down or spit it up.

To be continued