English
The Buddhists laid great stress upon their division of the universe into the eighteen dhatus or elements, and used these categories to explain many of the functions of life, and just as the Vaisesikas, after enumerating their list of dravya or substances, proceeded to expound the list of gunas or qualities or attributes possessed by each of these substances, so did the Buddhists give a good deal of attention to the characteristics of each of the eighteen dhatus, even though the non-substantialist position of Buddhism made it impossible for them to carry out the theory of inherent attributes possessed by self-existent substances. Consequently, in place of a list of fundamental inherent gunas, the Buddhists, after enumerating their list of dhatus, merely attempted to place them in different logical groups ; e.g. those which are visible, and those which are invisible ; those which are denied (sasrava), and those which are not defiled (anasrava) ; those which are objective and those which are subjective, etc. For the most part, however, these classifications were of little philosophic import, so that we may rest content with referring the curious to the original authorities. COSMIC ANALYSIS 103 (B) THE OBJECTIVE CLASSIFICATION We now come to the consideration of the component parts of the universe classified and analysed from the objective standpoint. Here no longer does the human personality or the process of consciousness serve as the starting-point. Rather are the phenomena of life, both mental and physical, considered universally. Here, also, do the component parts of the universe receive a new designation. It is curious to note how many terms there are which we are forced to lender " elements " or " factors of existence". The difference in terminology has almost exclusive reference to the standpoint from which the analysis of the universe was made. A word must now be said con cerning their relationship. The skandhas or component parts of the human personality are for the most part aggregates or compounds and not them selves ultimate or simple factors of existence. Vedana and Samjna, to be sure, are treated as ultimates. The Sarvastivadins state, moreover, that all the various classes of vijnana constitute but one ultimate factor, but the other schools consider even the vijnana skandha as composite. Rupa and Samskara are certainly names for groups of elements and not true ultimate factors themselves. The dhatus come nearer to a scientific conception of ultimate factors, since all but one (dharma dhatu) are discrete, simple, ultimate elements. Dharma dhatu, however, is a generic term, and includes a great many discrete factors. With the enumeration of the dharmas, however, an attempt (even though not altogether successful) was made to enumerate those factors which are themselves the underlying units of the other groups, and to them, therefore, may we properly assign the term element or ultimate factor. The word factor rather than element has been chosen, inasmuch as the latter term has been usurped by the four Mahabhutas. The dharmas include not only these elements, but apply also to the mental and other spheres. 104 MANUAL OF BUDDHIST PHILOSOPHY The dliarma classification came to have more and more importance assigned to it in the subsequent developments of Buddhist philosophy, and finally usurped most of the attention previously given to the skandhas and dhatus. It is, therefore, imperative that careful investigation be made both of the meaning of the term and the objects denoted by it. The Meaning of Dharma. Dharma has been used in a great variety of senses. It has been well called the blank cheque of Indian thought. In the present instance, however, it has no relation to the more usual significance of truth, law, religion, duty, etc. Along with dhatu, and for similar reasons, it has been defined as " that which bears its own attributes ", meaning thereby ultimate entities possessed of their own characteristics, as opposed to groups of phenomena whose characteristics are derived from ultimate substances which underlie them. Being thus con trasted with phenomenal groups and constituting the factors of which such groups are composed, Mrs. Rhys Davids' rendering of the term by " phenomena " (in her trans, of the Dham. Sang.) is by no means happy, while her " mental states " is still less so, since many of the dharmas are not mental (as she herself admits). On the other hand, " ultimate factor " and " element " are equally liable to be misunderstood, for the doctrine of the dharmas never conflicts with the anti-substantialist position of Buddhism. Only the Asamskrta dharmas (Nirvana, etc.), which are purely transcendental, are uncaused and underived. The other dharmas are not like the eternal substances of the Jainas and Vaisesikas, which are uncaused, eternal, and possessed of certain inherent attributes which remain unchanged even though all of their manifested attributes undergo transformation. Every single one of the Samskrta dharmas or factors of phenomenal life are impermanent, caused, conditioned. Thus, for example, the atoms of the five sense organs and the five sense objects (each sense organ COSMIC ANALYSIS 105 and sense object is counted a dharma) are derived from the four elements, are in continuous dependence upon them, and are frequently destroyed and recreated. Moreover, the Buddhists do not like to admit that the dharmas are invisible substances (things in themselves) possessed of a number of inherent attributes which alone appear to us. That thing which we see is the sense object, and not merely some one aspect inherently existing in a self -constituted substance. It was probably for this reason that the name dharma (bearer of its own attribute) was given to it. As has been very wisely pointed out by Mrs. Rhys Davids, " This, to us, very obscure characterization may very likely mean that dharma, as phenomenon, is without substratum, and is not a quality cohering in a substance." 1 Dharmas themselves are phenomena in the sense that they are not eternal substances, but they are not phenomena in the usual Western sense of modes of other underlying substances. The sense organs are derived from and dependent upon the four Mahabhutas, but they are separate entities possessing their own characteristics, and not aspects, attributes, phases or modes of the Mahabhutas. They are ultimate in the sense that they are simple and not composed of finer heterogeneous units. Thus, for example, though the sense organs may be composed of atoms, every caksur indriya paramanu is uniform and homogeneous, so that all such paramanus together constitute but one dharma or factor of existence. They are thus ultimate when con trasted with the physical body, let us say, which consists of sense organ atoms, and sense object atoms, as well as the four Mahabhutas themselves. The propriety of the term " factor " as a rendering of dharma is also to be seen from two further considerations. One is the so-called permanence of the dharmas, and the other is the list of things which are called dharmas. 1 Dh. San. Intro., p. xxxiv (trans.). 106 MANUAL OF BUDDHIST PHILOSOPHY First, as regards their permanence (— • -£0 J£ *$ ^)- Supposing that no other form of organic existence were possible other than that which we see around us to-day, we could say that the eye is a permanent factor in human life, even though every single eye is necessarily impermanent, and subject to decay. In the same way the various dharmas are permanent factors in life, even though every one of them is constantly being destroyed and recreated. Second, as regards the curious list of dharmas which both the Sthaviravadins and Sarvastivadins enumerate. Both contain certain things which can be called neither mental nor material, though many of these are inconsistently classed by the Sthaviravadins under rupa skandha, while the Sarvastivadins enumerate them, more logically, as a separate group unconnected with either matter or mind. Among these are homogeneity, decay, vitality, birth. The Sarvastivadins say that these are not merely modes of other substances, but are themselves separate dharmas or ultimate factors of life. From the foregoing we may see that the conception of " dharma " is one of the most original contributions of Buddhism to the history of human thought, much in the same way as Plato's " Ideas " and Aristotle's " Forms ", or the doctrine of substance.