English
Buddhism distinguished itself from most other systems by applying the doctrine of causality and non-substantiality to the mind as well as to the body. We are told, moreover, that even the Buddhas are subject to causality : — " Even the Buddhas of the three ages (past, present, and future) have not been and shall not be able to alter this great law." 1 This is a very important point, inasmuch as it is a doctrine which distinguishes Buddhism from practically every other religion. In most other systems of thought, though the causal relationship is in some way recognized, the higher powers, especially the Supreme Being, are considered superior to this law, and are able, as shown by their miracles, temporarily to abrogate it. Buddhism, though accepting the possibility of miracles, seeks to correlate them with causality. The favourite theory of the higher law is intro duced. Just as physical scientists by increased knowledge are able to bring about results which to an ordinary man seem marvellous, so, according to Buddhism, do sages by means of past karma gain certain powers which enable them to control the elements. To the Buddhist, increase in the power of vision by means of the telescope is neither more nor less miraculous than increase of vision (clairvoyance) by means of the cultivation of the psychic faculties. Even in Mahayana, 1 FromS. Kuroda's small pamphlet," Outlines of Mahayana Buddhism " — section on Causality. 168 MANUAL OF BUDDHIST PHILOSOPHY where the Buddhas accomplish the salvation of sentient beings, this salvation must be effected through causal agencies. One final point deserves attention — all schools of Buddhism agree that nothing can be produced by the action of a single cause, that every dharma is the product of at least two causes. In the first instance this doctrine was probably directed against the doctrine of Isvara or the creating deity, but in later times it came to imply that to produce an effect a cause requires adventitious aid from without. It is not, therefore, true to say that every cause necessarily has an effect, because some single causes, finding no favourable conditions, never come to fruition. It is possible, moreover, for a strong cause to render a weak cause barren. Applications of Causal Law. The Buddhists applied their theory of causality in two ways. The first was from the point of view of the groups of dharmas taken as a whole, more particularly the personality, human or otherwise. The second was from the point of view of each of the dharmas taken separately. The first, therefore, we may call synthetic, the second analytical.1 The first aspect was prominent even in the early period of Buddhist philosophy, and was merely the development of the theory of karma, showing how, for certain causal reasons, a man would be reborn at death in one of the heavens or hells. The later schools did little more than systematize or formularize the older doctrines. This aspect of causality was largely centred around the old rune, known as the Pratitya- samutpada. The second aspect only became prominent in the Abhidharma period. Here an attempt was made to distinguish and define the fundamental types of causes, and show how the various kinds of personalities and all other combinations come into being by the action of these types of causes upon the various single dharmas. 1 For further discussion of these two points of view, see Wei Shih, pp. 212 and 217. COSMIC DYNAMICS 169 Each one of these aspects is of great importance in the history of Buddhist philosophy, and deserves a special section to itself. II. THE LAW OF CAUSALITY APPLIED TO THE INDIVIDUAL The Chain of Causation. We have seen the personality to be a constantly changing compound formed and fashioned under the influence of Karma. The question now arises, what is the exact way in which the personality is evolved and disintegrated ? The Buddhist answer to this question is to be found in the Pratitya- samutpada or twelve-fold chain of causation. In all variations of Buddhism it is seldom that sermons lack mention of the time-honoured rune. In spite of its popularity, it seems difficult to ascribe to it logical exactitude, though the uses which have been made of it are innumerable. It is at one and the same time an abstract table of the sequence of cause and effect, and a list of the concrete stages in the supposed history of the origin, maintenance, disintegration, and persistence or transmigration of the individual ego, while in Mahayana it is used to explain the whole process of development of the objective world, including the factors of existence or dharmas from the universal essence of mind.1 In the Visuddhi Magga we are shown how the good Buddhist is not content with accepting lif e at its face value, but attempts to solve the problem of origination : " The monk who is desirous of knowledge enters on a search for the causes of the dependence of name and form, just as the skilful physician seeing a disease will search to find how it arose. At first he reflects as follows : * Name and Form cannot be without a cause as they are the same everywhere, at all times, and for all people.' Having made this reflection, he begins to investigate the causes and dependences of Form, as follows : ' When this body comes into existence it does not arise in the midst of lotuses — nor of jewels — (etc.), but ill-smelling, 1 Cf . e.g. part iii of jgJ fjf ffij ( =• Mahayana Sraddhotpada Sastra). 170 MANUAL OF BUDDHIST PHILOSOPHY disgusting, and repulsive, it arises between the stomach and the lower intestines ... As it comes into being, these four — ignorance, desire, attachment, and action — are the cause of it, inasmuch as they produce it. Food is the dependence, inasmuch as it supports it. These five are its causes and dependences . . .?1 " Having thus grasped the dependence of form, he then grasps the dependence of Name, as follows : ' In dependence upon the eye, and with respect to form, arises Visual Con sciousness (and so on, through the other six phases of consciousness)/ When he has thus perceived the dependent manner of the existence of Name and Form, he reaches the insight : ' As Name and Form have at the present a dependent manner of existence, so also had they in past time, so will they have in the future/ " (Warren, Bud. in Trans.) By a similarly continued process of psychological analysis we find in the end the conclusion reached that Name and Form in its origin and dissolution is a part of a universal chain of causation. This process is recorded in a sutra of the Northern tradition, the Siitra on Cause and Effect in the Past and the Present (No. 666), which is really a life of the Buddha. The passage in question runs as follows : — " At this time, the third night of his meditation, the Bodhisattva examined the nature of sentient beings and for what reason old age and death exist. Then be saw that old age and death have birth for their origin, for apart from birth there is no old age and death. Again, this birth does not arise because of God, or of itself, or without cause, but arises because of causes and conditions, for it is derived from existence or deed-process in the Kama dhatu, the Rupa dhatu, or the Arupa dhatu. Then he examined this three-fold deed- process and how it arose, and saw that it was derived from four fold Attachment ? Then he examined this four-fold Attachment and how it arose, and saw that it was derived from Desire. Then he examined this Desire and how it arose, and saw that 1 Quoted from Warren's Bud. in Trans. COSMIC DYNAMICS 171 it was derived from Feeling. Then he examined this Feeling and how it arose, and saw that it was derived from Sensation. Then he examined this Sensation and how it arose, and saw that it was derived from the Six Sense Organs. And whence came these Six Sense Organs ? He saw they are derived from the Material and Mental aspects of the personality (Name and Form). Then he examined Name and Form and how it arose, and saw that it was derived from Consciousness. Then he examined Consciousness and how it arose, and saw that it was derived from Action. Then he examined Action and how it arose, and saw that it was derived from Ignorance . . . Moreover, if Ignorance be annihilated, then is Action annihilated. If Action be annihilated, then is Conscious ness annihilated. If Consciousness be annihilated, then is Name and Form annihilated.