Mahayana Buddhism and Early Advaita Vedanta (Study)
by Asokan N. | 2018 | 48,955 words
This thesis is called: Mahayana Buddhism And Early Advaita Vedanta A Critical Study. It shows how Buddhism (especially Mahayana) was assimilated into Vedantic theorisation in due course of time. Philosophical distance between Mahayana Buddhism and Advaita-Vedanta became minimal with the advent of Gaudapada and Shankaracharya, who were both harbinge...
Chapter 2.5 - Atma Pariksha (examination)
Previously we were discussing the Svabhava and the physical and metaphysical identity of the individual. Hence in this Chapter, we have to explain and examine the life process conditioned by human actions-karma. Buddha analyses the human personality into five aggregate (Panca Skandha). And it constitutes the human personality underlying the empirical factors and thus there is no permanent and eternal self. Nagarjuna’s view is that these five factors serve as the basis for the conceptualization of self or soul. So it is referred to as aggregates of grasping (Upadana Skandha). Nagarjuna investigates the identity with the five aggregates and the self. He has not given any indication of a special intuitive faculty which recognizes (other than mind). He recognizes and admitted the sense experiences as the foundation of human knowledge. The impermanent aggregates constitute not only the human personality, but also the experiences.
The Buddha recognized consciousness (it includes awareness) not as a preexistence of mind, but as part of the human personality conditioned by factors such as sense-organs and the objects of perception. Self-awareness can be pursued to its extreme limit-construction of a self (Ahamkara) eventually leads to the belief in permanence. The other extreme is the rejection of self, leading to annihilation. Without falling into these two extremes, Nagarjuna presented the Buddha’s own ‘middle way philosophy’ which speaks of the appeasement (Shama), not the complete eradication of the ‘self’. This is meant that appeasement of the dispositions and appeasement of the objects–and then reaches the appeasement of obsessions–(Prapancopa-shama). Through the appeasement of the Self-Instinct, one eliminates the metaphysical notions of the self. Through the appeasement of the object one is able to realize the non-substantiality of phenomena and would not cling to them as ‘one’s own’. This process culminates the absence of selfishness (Nirmama) the absence of egoism (Nir-ahamkara). Through the cessation of grasping, obsessions are appeased, then a person does not get involved either in a motion of a permanent self or in a theory of complete annihilation. The realization that self-awareness is dependently arisen, is a realization that it is empty of a permanent substance (Svabhava-Shunya). It is the middle path that avoids eternalism and annihilation. Thus, the Buddha and his true followers knowing the conception of self (Atman), taught the non-self-theory which is the core of Buddhist metaphysics. By confirming to the concept of Atman one ends up in eternalism and by confirming to Anatman one reaches to annihilationlism.
When the sphere of thought has ceased that which is to be designated also cease to be. Like freedom, the nature of things is non-arisen and non-ceased. So in such a state one should experience. It is possible to assume that here is the identification of the unspeakable with emptiness (Shunyata). Generally referred to in negative terms as non-arisen, non-ceased (Anutppanna nirodha) which is then identified with both true nature (dharmata) and Nirvana. In other words absolute arising and absolute ceasing were to be accepted, these would negate empirical arising and ceasing which is the basis of “dependent arising “(pratitya samutpda).[1]
As far as Nagarjuna’s analysis is concerned, it has become clear that his negations are primarily pertained to metaphysics, whether it be the notion of a permanent and eternal self (Atman) or substance (Svabhava). Along with the negation of a permanent and eternal self, he also negated absolute otherness (Para-bhava). So, Nagarjuna rejected existence and non-existence, in the metaphysical sense. Man’s search for permanent entity, while he is equipped with limited epistemological resources, leave him with unresolved questions. He continues to doubt and then troubled. Looking for permanence he misses the empirically relevant questions. As such, he has no peace of mind. If he directs his attention to what is immediately given, and understands the human predicament in its context without being inquisitive about metaphysical questions, his mind would be peaceful, Shantam. The Buddha insisted that when a reflecting person understands the arising and ceasing of phenomena, all his doubts disappear. Such peace of mind is achieved. The criterion for deciding what is true in the context of dependent arising is the consequence or fruit (Artha). The Buddha maintained that ‘the truth is one there is no second’. He is referring to his pragmatic criterion of truth based upon the notion of dependent arising, not an absolute truth that transcends all forms of duality and plurality. Nagarjuna’s characterization of truth as ‘not having a variety of meanings’ reflects more the Buddha’s own conception of truth.
Therefore, after examining the epistemological means by which the conception of truth ‘as dependently arisen’ is arrived at Nagarjuna, in the following verse, which takes the metaphysical interpretations of the concept of dependence.
“Whatever that arises depending upon whatever that is not identical nor different from it. Therefore, it is neither annihilated nor eternal.” (Sut.18.10).[2]
As emphasized so often by Nagarjuna, absolute identity involves permanence and absolute difference implies annihilation. Dependent arising is the middle way adopted by Buddha and Nagarjuna in elucidating change and causation. That is without a variety of meanings or one single meaning, it is not annihilation nor is it eternal. Such is the immortal message of the Buddhas, the patrons of the world. They point to the fact that ‘the things are changing and are dependently arisen.’