Schools Of Buddhism

Answer : There are many references to rebirth in the early Buddhist scriptures. Some English-speaking Buddhists prefer the term “rebirth” or “re-becoming” to “reincarnation” as they take the latter to imply a fixed entity that is reborn. It is said to be the “evolving consciousness” or “stream of consciousness” that reincarnates. The early Buddhist texts make it clear that there is no permanent consciousness that moves from life to life. The lack of a fixed self does not mean lack of continuity. In the same way that a flame is transferred from one candle to another, there is a conditioned relationship between one life and the next: they are neither identical nor completely distinct. While all Buddhist traditions seem to accept some notion of rebirth, there is no unified view about precisely how events unfold after the moment of death. The medieval Pali scholar Buddhaghosa labeled the consciousness that constitutes the condition for a new birth as described in the early texts “rebirth-linking consciousness”. Some schools conclude that karma continued to exist and adhere to the person until it had worked out its consequences. For the Sautrantika School each act “perfumed” the individual and led to the planting of a “seed” that would later germinate as a good or bad karmic result. Theravada Buddhism generally asserts that rebirth is immediate while the Tibetan schools hold to the notion of (intermediate state) that can last up to forty-nine days. Theravada Buddhism generally denies there is an intermediate state, though some early Buddhist texts seem to support it. One school that adopted this view was the Sarvastivada, who believed that between death and rebirth there is a sort of limbo in which beings do not yet reap the consequences of their previous actions but may still influence their rebirth. The death process and this intermediate state were believed to offer a uniquely favorable opportunity for spiritual awakening. Another view of rebirth describes the cycle of death and birth in the context of consciousness rather than the birth and death of the body. In this view, remaining impure aggregates, skandhas, reform consciousness. Buddhist meditation teachers suggest that observation reveals consciousness as a sequence of conscious moments rather than a continuum of awareness. Each moment is an experience of an individual mind-state such as a thought, a memory, a feeling or a perception. A mind-state arises, exists and, being impermanent, ceases, following which the next mind-state arises. Thus the consciousness of a sentient being can be seen as a continuous series of birth and death of these mind-states. Rebirth is the persistence of this process.

---

Answer : Atman

Ans (a): The second noble truth of Buddhism says that there are causes of sufferings. This can be better explained by the causal theory of Buddhism. The doctrine of pratîtyasamutpâda often translated as “dependent arising”, is a cardinal doctrine in Buddhism that refers to the causal relations between the psychophysical phenomena that sustain dukkha (dissatisfaction) in worldly experiences. It is variously rendered into English as “dependent arising”, “conditioned genesis”, “dependent co-arising” and “interdependent arising” and is an elaboration of the second Noble Truth. The Buddha begins his teaching by specifying the spiritual problem that he has considered, namely dukkha, loosely translated as suffering, stress or unsatisfactoriness. Life follows a trajectory quite independent of our dreams and desires. In general, pratîtyasamutpâda is the detailed exposition of the second Noble truth, which states that dukkha has a cause. It is due to ignorance of these causal factors that we roam about in samsara deluded, confused, dissatisfied and anxious. By developing factors completely contrary to those that sustain dukkha, and with the complete fading of the causes, one can attain complete liberation from suffering (nibbana). To understand the root cause of dukkha, the Buddha analyzed the causality of experience in a manner that broke from the dominant world view of his time. Unlike Aristotle or the dominant Samkhya view of causality, his perspective as recorded in the Pali Nikayas is that every phenomenon has a sustaining cause. Since the cause itself is another phenomenon it should also have something else for its sustenance. The life cycle according to Buddisht philosophy goes like this-

Former life

Ignorance

Formations (conditioned things)

Current life

Consciousness

Mind and body (personality or identity)

The six sense bases (five physical senses and the mind)

Contact (between objects and the senses)

feeling (registering the contact)

craving (for continued contact)

clinging

becoming (similar to formations)

Future life

Birth

Old age and death

This twelve-factor formula is the most familiar presentation, though a number of early sutras introduce lesser-known variants which make it clear that the sequence of factors should not be regarded as a linear causal process in which each preceding factor gives rise to its successor through a simple reaction. The relationship among factors is always complex, involving several strands of conditioning. For example, whenever there is ignorance, craving and clinging invariably follow, and craving and clinging themselves indicate ignorance. Among these sufferings are aging and death. Aging and death are experienced by us because birth and youth have been experienced. Without birth there is no death. One conditions the other in a mutually dependent relationship. Our becoming in the world, the process of what we call “life”, is conditioned by the attachment and clinging to ideas and projects. This attachment and clinging in turn cannot exist without craving as its condition. The Buddha understood that craving comes into being because there is sensation in the body which we experience as pleasant, unpleasant or neutral. When we crave something, it is the sensation induced by contact with the desired object that we crave rather than the object itself. Sensation is caused by contact with such objects of the senses. The contact or impression made upon the senses (manifesting as sensation) is itself dependent upon the six sense organs which themselves are dependent upon the psychophysical entity that a human being is.

---

Answer : Atman, the Sanskrit expression of Soul, Self, or Ego, is a permanent, everlasting and absolute entity, which is the unchanging substance behind the changing phenomenal world. Common beliefs say that soul is owned by each individual, created by God after death, (it) lives eternally either in hell or heaven, its destiny depending on the judgment of its creator. It goes through many lives till it is completely purified and becomes finally united with God or Brahman, Universal Soul or Atman, where it originates. In man it is the thinker of thoughts, feeler of sensations, and receiver of rewards and punishments for all its good or bad actions. Buddhism denies the existence of such a thought. The idea of Atman is an imaginary, false belief which has no corresponding reality. It is this belief of Atman where all the “me”, “mine”, selfish desire, craving, attachment, etc. comes from and where the evil begins. Atman was created for two reasons:

• For self-protection, man has created God where man could draw protection, safety or security from God.
• For self-preservation, man comes up with the idea of this immortal Soul, which lives eternally.

According to Buddhism, this Atman, “I”, Soul, or, Self is only a false belief and a mental projection of man. Anatta or No-Soul is a natural result of the analysis of the Five Aggregates and the theory of Conditioned Genesis. Analytically, man is composed of the Five Aggregates. After careful examination, there is nothing or no substance behind this so-called “I”, Atman, or Soul. Synthetically, nothing in the world is absolute. Everything is conditioned, relative, and interdependent - the Buddhist theory of relativity;

Citing a famous 4-line quote of Conditioned Genesis:

• When this is, that is;
• This arising, that arises;
• When this is not, that is not;
• This ceasing, that ceases.

---

Answer : Whatever their provenance, the Wisdom Sutras focus on shunyata, “emptiness.” Nagarjuna’s principle contribution to Buddhism was his systematization of the sutras’ teachings. Older schools of Buddhism maintained the Buddha’s teaching of anatman. According to this doctrine, there is no “self” in the sense of a permanent, integral, autonomous being within an individual existence. What we think of as our self, our personality and ego, are temporary creations of the skandhas. Shunyata is a deepening of the doctrine of anatman. In explaining shunyata, Nagarjuna argued that phenomena have no intrinsic existence in themselves. Because all phenomena come into being because of conditions created by other phenomena, they have no existence of their own and are empty of a permanent self. Thus, there is neither reality not not-reality; only relativity.

This emptiness is not nihilistic. All phenomena are void of self-essence, but it is incorrect to say that phenomena exist or don’t exist. Form and appearance create the world of myriad things, but the myriad things have identity only in relation to each other. Related to shunyata are the teachings of another of the great Mahayana Sutras, the Avatamsaka or Flower Garland Sutra. The Flower Garland is a collection of smaller sutras that emphasize the interpenetration of all things. That is, all things and all beings not only reflect all other things and beings but also all existence in its totality.

Another related doctrine is that of the Two Truths, absolute and relative truth. Relative truth is the conventional way we perceive reality; absolute truth is shunyata. From the perspective of the relative, appearances and phenomena are real. From the perspective of the absolute, appearances and phenomena are not real. Both perspectives are true. Along with Nagarjuna, other scholars important to Madhyamika were Aryadeva, Nagarjuna’s disciple, and Buddhapalita (5th century) who wrote influential commentaries on Nagarjuna’s work. Nagarjuna argued that all phenomena are empty of intrinsic existence in themselves.

Because all phenomena come into being because of conditions created by other phenomena, they have no existence of their own and are empty of a permanent self. Thus, there is neither reality not not-reality; only relativity. This emptiness, called shunyata, is sometimes called the Absolute because it includes all things and beings. It relates to the dharmakaya body of the Triyaka. According to the Mahayana teaching of shunyata, beings and things have no intrinsic existence in themselves. All phenomena come into being because of conditions created by other phenomena. Thus, they have no existence of their own and are empty of a permanent self. There is neither reality not not-reality; only relativity. This emptiness is not nihilistic.

All phenomena are void of self-essence, but it is incorrect to say that phenomena exist or don’t exist. Form and appearance create the world of myriad things, but the myriad things have identity only in relation to each other. Beyond identity, shunyata is an absolute reality that is all things and beings not manifested. This theory has been vehemently criticized by Shankarachaya but he didn’t give any precise argument against Madhyamika.

---

Answer : Buddhism is divided into many philosophical schools and has a vast literature. It is very difficult to say what exactly are the teachings of Buddha himself and what are the interpretations, amplifications and elaborations put upon them by the disciples. But there is a consensus among them on the four noble truths the core of the Buddha’s teachings. The four noble truths (arya satya) are:

Here is a suffering (dukha): Life is full of misery and pain. Even the so called pleasures are really fraught with pain. There is always fear lest we may lose the so called pleasures and their loss involves pain. Independence also results in pain. That there is suffering in this world is a fact of common experience. Poverty disease, old age, death, selfishness, meanness, greed, anger nature, quarrels, bickering, conflicts, exploitation are rampant in this world. That life is full of suffering none can deny.

There is a cause of suffering (dukha-Samudaya): Everything has a cause. Nothing comes out of nothing. The existence of every event depends upon its causes and conditions. Everything in this world is conditional, relative, limited. Suffering being a fact, it must have a cauase. It must depend on some conditions. This being, that arises. The causes being present the effect arises, is the causal law of dependent origination.

There is a cessation of suffering (dukha nirodha): Because everything arises depending on some causes and conditions therefore if there causes and conditions are removed the effect must also cease. The cause being removed the effect ceases to exist. Everything being conditional and relative is necessarily momentary and what is momentary must perish. That which is born must die. Production implies destruction.

There is a way leading to this cessation of suffering (Dukh-nirodha-gamini-pratipada): There is an ethical and spiritual path by following which misery may be removed and liberalization attained. This is the noble eight fold path.

---

Answer : The doctrine of pratityasamutpada or dependent origination is the foundation of all the teachings of the Buddha. It is contained in the second noble truth which gives as the cause of suffering and in the Third Noble Truth which shows the cessation of suffering. Suffering is Samsara, cessesion of suffering is Nirvana. Both are only aspects of the same reality. Pratityasamutpada, viewed from the point of view of relativity is Samsara; while viewed from the point of view of reality, it is Nirvana. It is relativity and dependent causation as well as the Absolute, for it is the absolute itself which acts as relative and acts as the binding thread giving them unity and meaning.

Pratityasamutpada tells as that in the empirical world dominated by the intellect everything is relative therefore impermanent. The causal formula is: ‘this being, that arises’, i.e., ‘Depending on the cause the effect arises’. Thus every object of thought is necessarily relative. And because it is relative, it is neither absolutely real absolutely unreal. All phenomenal things hang between reality and nothingness avoiding both the extremes. They are like the appearances of the Vedantic Avidya or Maya. It is in this sense that Buddha calls the doctrine the Middle Path, the Madhyama Pratipada which avoids both eternalism and minilism.

The doctrine of Pratityasamutapada or dependent origination is the central teaching of the Buddha and his other teachings can be easily deduced from it as corollaries. The theory of Karma is based on this, being an implication of the law of causation. Our present life is due to the impressions of the Karmas of the past life and it will shape our future life. Ignorance and karma go on determining each other in a vicious circle. Again the theory of Momentariness is also a corollary of Pratityasamutpada. Because things depend on their causes and conditions, because things are relative, dependent, conditional and finite, they must be momentary. The theory of causal efficiency is also based on it, because each preceding link is causally efficient to produce the succeeding link and thus the capacity to produce an effect becomes the criterion of existence.

---

Answer : Shunyavada is one of he most important schools of Buddhism. Nagarjuna is the first systematic expounder of Shunyavada. Shunyavadins call themselves madhyamikas or the follower of the Middle Path realized by Buddha during his Enlightment, which path, avoiding the errors of existence and non-existence, affirmation and negation, externalism and nihilism, also at once transcends both the extremes. Unfortunately the word ‘Shunya’ has been gravely misunderstood. The literal meaning of the much talked about word which is negation or void has been the cause of much misunderstanding. The word is used by the Mandhymikas in a different philosophical sense. Ignoring the real philosophical meaning of the world ‘Shunya’ and taking it only in its literal sense, main thinkers, eastern and western have unfortunately committed that horrible blunders which has led them to thoroughly misunderstood Shunyavada and to condemn it as hopeless scepticism and a self condemned nihilism.

Shunya, according to the Madhyamika does not mean a nothing or an empty void or a negative abyss. Shunya essentially mean indescribable as it is beyond the four categories of intellect. It is reality which ultimately transcends existence, non existence both and neither. It is neither affirmation nor negation nor both nor neither. Empirically it means relativity which is phenomena; absolutely it means reality which is release from plurality. The word is indescribable because it is neither existent nor non existent; the absolute is indescribable because it is transcendental and no category of intellect can adequately describe it. Everything is shunya appearances are Svabhava Shunya or devoid of ultimate reality and reality is prapancha Shunya or devoid of plurality.

Thus Shunya is used in a double sense. It means the relative as well as the absolute. It means relativity as well as plurality. It means Samsara as well as Nirvana. That which is phenomenal, that which is dependent and conditional and therefore relative cannot be called ultimately real. All appearances being relative have no real origination and are therefore devoid of ultimate reality. But they are not absolutely unreal. They must belong to reality. It is the real itself which appears. And this real is the absolute, the non dual Harmonious whole in which all plurality is merged. Shunya therefore does not mean void; it means, on the other hand, devoid, so far as appearances are concerned ‘of ultimate reality’ and so far as reality is concerned, of plurality. It is clearly wrong to translate it as relativity. The shunya vadins take ‘existence’, ‘is’, ‘affirmation ‘, ‘being’ in the sense of absolute existence or ultimate reality, it means Eternalism.

Those who maintain that the world exists are committing a great error because when we penetrate deep we find that this entire world with all its manifold phenomena is essentially relative and therefore ultimately unreal. And those who advocate non-existence or non-being are also committing a great error because they are denying even the phenomenal reality of the world. They are condemned by the Shunyavadins as nihilist. Eternalism and nihilism are both false. Intellect which is essentially discursive, analytic and relational involves itself in contradictions.

All that can be grasped by it is essentially relative. It gives us four categories existence, non existence both and neither – and involves itself in sixty two antinomies. It cannot give is reality. Reality transcends all the categories and reconciles all the antinomies of intellect. It is to be directly realized through spiritual experience. It is the non-dual absolute in which all plurality is merged. So must rise above the subject-object duality of the intellect and the plurality of the phenomena.

The opponents of the Shunyata say that because the arguments used for the existence of Shunyata are also unreal. And if they are not unreal, they undermine the Shunyavadin’s premises for then he at least maintains the reality of his arguments; And Shyunyavada has no pramana to establish itself. Nagarjuna replies that the Shunyata which denies the ultimate reality of all dharmas is true

Because the ultimate unreality of words and arguments does not render Shunyats unreal. By Shunyata we do not mean mere negation; by it we mean dependent origination or relativity.

Our arguments do not undermine our premises. We donot say; this particular arguments of ours is true while all others are false. We say: All arguments are ultimately unreal. Absolutely speaking, we have no thesis to prove and hence no words and no arguments. How can we be charged with defects then? But from the empirical standpoint we admit the reality of arguments because the phenomenal cannot be condemned by its own logic.

The validity of pramanas themselves cannot be established. A means of cognition (pramana), like fire cannot prove itself. It fire can enkindle itself, it will also burn itself. It fire can enkindle itself and other subjects, then sure darkness be established by another pramana for it will lead to infinite regress. A pramana cannot be proved by pramanas. If he now admits that pramanas, in their turn are to be proved by prameyas, his arguments amounts to this laughable position; a father begets a son; now that son in his turn, should beget his own father. And of course a pramana cannot be proved at random.

The validity of pramanas therefore can be established neither by themselves nor by other pramanas nor by prameyas nor by accident. Reality is above refutation, and non refutation Shunyavadins does not negate anything. There is nothing which can be negated. Even the charge that the Shunyavadin negates everything is made by their opponent. They, however, go beyond affirmation and negation.

---

Answer : The idea of liberation in Buddhist philosophy is called Nirvana. Nirvana is said to be a negative cessation or suffering. It is often composed with the extinction of the flame of a lamp. Just as a lamp when it becomes extinguished goes neither hither nor thither, neither to the earth nor to the sky, neither to this direction nor to that, it has been utterly blown out on account of the oil being consumed; similarly a sage obtains Nirvana when the desires and the passions have been consumed; he goes neither this way nor that, but obtains peace.

The very world ‘Nirvana’ means blowing out. It is the dissolution of the five skandhas. It is the cessation of all activities (chittavrttinirodha) and of all becoming (bhavanirodha). But there are many verses and passages in the Pali Canon which emphatically reject this negative conception of Nirvana. Here the real nature of Buddha’s teachings burst forth breaking the outward covering of the Hinayana. Nirvana is identified with positive bliss. It is said to be the highest and the indestructible state. It is the fearless goal. It gives happiness here and hereafter. It is the highest bliss. We are even told that to mistake Nirvana as annihilation is a ‘wicked heresy’. This repudiates the views of Rhys Davids, Oldenberg and Paul Dahlke and the earlier view of Mrs. Rhy Davids that Nirvana is only negative extinction. Unfortunately the Pali Canon gives both the negative and the positive descriptions of Nirvana and Hinayana inclines towards the former. There is a way leading to the cessation of suffering; there is an ethical and spiritual path by following which misery may be removed and liberation attained. This is the Noble Eight Fold Path. These are Right faith, Right resolve, Right speech, Right action, Right living, Right effort, Right thought and Right concentration. This leads to the state of Nivana which is of two types. First is Nirvana in the present life and second is Mahaparinirvana which can be attained only after the death of the individual.

---

Answer : Hinayana denies out rightly the existence of God whose place is taken by the Buddha and the theory of Karma. The so called soul is reduced to a series of fleeting ideas. The so called matter is nothing more than a series of momentary atoms of earth, water, fire and air. Everything is momentary. Change is the rule of the universe. Liberation is the extinction of all desires and passions. The most important doctrine of this school is Ksanabhangabada, i.e., the theory of Momentariness. Sometimes it is also called santanavada or the theory of flux or ceaseless flow. It is applicable to mind and mater alike, for both is momentary. Sometimes it is also referred to as Sanghatavada or the theory of segregates of which means that the so called ‘soul’ is only as aggregate of the five fleeing skandhas and the so called matter is only an aggregate of the momentary atoms. The denial of an eternal substance, spiritual as well as maperial, is called pudagal nairatmya.

Everything is momentary. Nothing is permanent. Body, sensation, perception, disposition, consciousness, all these are impermanent and sorrowful. There is neither being nor not being, but only becoming. Reality is a stream of becoming. Life is a series of manifestations of becoming. There is no thing which changes; only ceaseless. Change goes on. Everything is merely a link in the chain, a spoke in the wheel, transitory phase in the series. Everything is conditional, dependent, relative, pratityasamutpada. Everything is subject to birth and death, to production and destruction, to creation and decay. There is nothing human or divine that is permanent. Everything is sorrow; everything is devoid of self; everything is momentary, is said to be the roaring of the lion. Two classical similes are given to illustrate the doctrine of universal Momentariness, that of the stream of a river and that of the flame of a lamp.

Western empiricist Hume also said: ‘I never can catch ‘myself’, whenever I try, I stumble on this or that perception.’ Bergson said: Everything is a manifestation of the flow of E’lan Vital’. A river is not the same river the next moment. The water in which you have once taken your dip has flown away and has been replaced by water. A river is only a continuous flow of different waters. Similarly a flame is not one and the same flame. It is a series of different flames. One volume of water or one flame continually succeeds another volume of water or another flame. The rapidity of succession preserves continuity which is not broken. Similarity is mistaken as identity or sameness.

The so called ‘same flame’ is only a succession of so many similar flames, each flame lasting for a moment. The fact that a flame is a series of so many similar flames can be easily noticed when in a hurricane lantern, due to some defect, the succession of flames is obstructed and one flame succeeds another after a slight interval. Identity, therefore, is nothing but continuity of becoming. The seed becomes the tree through different stages. The child becomes the old man through different stages. Rapidity of succession gives rise to the illusion of unity or identity or permanence. ‘Just as a chariot wheel in rolling rolls only at one point of the tire, and in resting rests only at once point; in exactly the same way of life of a living being lasts only for the period of one thought. As soon as that thought has ceased the living being is said to have ceases. The wheel of the cosmic order goes on without maker, without beginning.

Buddha avoided the extremes of eternalism and nihilism. He denied the ultimate reality of the empirical self, though he asserted in empirical reality. But the theory of Momentariness is inconsistent with ethical life and with spiritual experience. If it is given universal application, it contradicts even the empirical life. To negate the distinction between the empirical and the absolute and to grant mistaken absolute application to Momentariness is not only to lose the absolute which is wantonly thrown away, but to lose even the empirical. The essential objection of king Milinda that if the soul is a flux of momentary ideas, then who it is that performs aces and who is that reaps their fruits remains uninsured. To maintain action without as agent is to have a marriage without a bride, an ‘alehouse without a customer’, a drama without an actor.

The charge of vicarious liability asserts itself. The momentary idea which performs an action vanishes without reaping its fruit, and another momentary idea reaps the fruit of an action it never performed. The ethical theory of Karma is thus thrown overboard. Bondage and liberation born become impossible. One momentary idea is bound and another is liberated. Suffering itself is momentary. So why should a person at all try to overcome suffering when he himself together with the suffering will vanish in the next moment.

Thus the first noble truth and the other three which presuppose it become useless. The noble eightfold path too becomes uninspiring. The very aim of the Buddha becomes defeated. Hinayana answers these charges by saying that the preceding link does not perish before transmitting its content to the succeeding link and so the continuity is never broken. The successions bear all the burden of the predecessor. The law of karma, being an impersonal force, makes action possible without an agents and transmigration without a transmigrating soul. Bondage means the flow of an impure series beginning with ignorance, while liberation means the transformation of this flow into that of a pure series beginning with knowledge. But all these answers are unrelenting. Knowledge itself becomes impossible without a synthesizing subject. Perception, conception, memory and recognition all become impossible without such a subject.

---

Answer : Kashanikavada, the theory of Momentariness is the mort important doctrine of Hinayaran. According to this fleeting idea the so called matter is nothing more than a series of momentary atoms of earth, water, fire and air. Everything is momentary. Change is the rule of the universe. Liberation is the extinction of all desires and passions. Therefore the theory of Momentousness is also called Sanatanvada or the theory of Flux or Ceaseless flow. It is applicable to wind and matter alike for both is momentary. Sometimes it is also referred to as Sanghatavada or the theory of Aggregates which means that the so-called soul is only the aggregate of the five fleeting skandhas and the so-called mater is only an aggregate of the momentary atoms. The denial of an eternal substance, spiritual as well as material is called Pudgala-nairatmya.

Kshanikavad says that everything is momentary. Nothing is permanent. Body, sensation, perception, disposition, consciousness, all these are impermanent and sorrowful. There is neither being nor not being, but only becoming. Reality is a stream of becoming. There is no thing which changes; only ceaseless change goes on. Everything is merely a link in the chain, a spoke in the wheel, a transitory phase in the series. Everything is conditional, dependent, relative, pratityasamutpada.But the theory of Momentariness or kshanikvada is inconsistent with ethical life and with spiritual experience. If it is given universal application, it contradicts even the empirical life.

To negate the distinction between the empirical and the absolute and to grant mistaken absolute application to Momentariness is not only to loose the absolute which is thrown away, but to lose even the empirical. The momentary idea which performs an option vanishes without reaping its fruit, and another momentary idea reaps the fruit of an action it never performed.

---

Answer : The doctrine of pratityasamutpada or dependent origination is the foundation of all the teachings of the Buddha. It is contained in the second noble truth which gives as the cause of suffering and in the Third Noble Truth which shows the cessation of suffering. Suffering is Samsara, cessesion of suffering is Nirvana. Both are only aspects of the same reality. Pratityasamutpada, viewed from the point of view of relativity is Samsara; while viewed from the point of view of reality, it is Nirvana. It is relativity and dependent causation as well as the Absolute, for it is the absolute itself which acts as relative and acts as the binding thread giving them unity and meaning.

Pratityasamutpada tells as that in the empirical world dominated by the intellect everything is relative therefore impermanent. The causal formula is: ‘this being, that arises’, i.e., ‘Depending on the cause the effect arises’. Thus every object of thought is necessarily relative. And because it is relative, it is neither absolutely real absolutely unreal. All phenomenal things hang between reality and nothingness avoiding both the extremes. They are like the appearances of the Vedantic Avidya or Maya. It is in this sense that Buddha calls the doctrine the Middle Path, the Madhyama Pratipada which avoids both eternalism and minilism.

The doctrine of Pratityasamutapada or dependent origination is the central teaching of the Buddha and his other teachings can be easily deduced from it as corollaries. The theory of Karma is based on this, being an implication of the law of causation. Our present life is due to the impressions of the Karmas of the past life and it will shape our future life. Ignorance and karma go on determining each other in a vicious circle. Again the theory of Momentariness is also a corollary of Pratityasamutpada. Because things depend on their causes and conditions, because things are relative, dependent, conditional and finite, they must be momentary. The theory of causal efficiency is also based on it, because each preceding link is causally efficient to produce the succeeding link and thus the capacity to produce an effect becomes the criterion of existence.

---

Answer : Nagarjuna is the first systematic expounder of Shunyavada. The world ‘Shunya’ has been gravely misunderstood. The literal meaning of the word which is negation or void has been the cause of much misunderstanding. The word is used by Madhyanmikas in a different philosophical sense. Ignoring the real philosophical meaning of the word ‘shunya’ and taking it only in its literal sense many thinkers, eastern and western have unfortunately committed the blunder. Shunya, according o the Madhyamika, does not mean nothing or empty or void. Shunya essentially means Indescribable as it is beyond the four categories of intellect. It is reality which ultimately trancends existence, non-existence, both the neither.

Empirically it means relativity which is phenomena; absolutely it means reality (tattava) which is release from plurality. Nagarjuna says that the Shunyata which denies the ultimate reality of all dharma is true because the ultimate unreality of words and arguments does not render shunyata unreal. By Shunyats do not mean mere negation; by it we mean Dependent Origination or Relativity. Our arguments do not undermine our premises. We donot say: This particular argument of ours is true while all others are false. We say: All arguments are ultimately unreal. Absolutely speaking we have no thesis to prove and hence no words and no arguments. How can we be charged with defects?

The Validity of pramanas themselves cannot be established. A means of cognition (pramana), like fire, cannot prove itself. If fire can enkindle itself, it will also burn itself. If fire can rekindle itself and other subjects, then surely darkness too will cover itself and other objects. A pramana cannot be established by another pramana for it will lead to infinite regress. A pramana cannot be proved by an object of cognition (prameya). The opponents admit that a prameys is to be proved by pramanas. If he now admits that pramanas, in their turn, are to be proved by prameyas, his arguments amount s to this laughable position. The validity of pramanas, therefore, can be established neither by themselves by another pramanas nor by prameyas nor by accident.

---

Answer : Shunyavada is one of he most important schools of Buddhism. Nagarjuna is the first systematic expounder of Shunyavada. Shunyavadins call themselves madhyamikas or the follower of the Middle Path realized by Buddha during his Enlightment, which path, avoiding the errors of existence and non-existence, affirmation and negation, externalism and nihilism, also at once transcends both the extremes. Unfortunately the word ‘Shunya’ has been gravely misunderstood. The literal meaning of the much talked about word which is negation or void has been the cause of much misunderstanding. The word is used by the Mandhymikas in a different philosophical sense. Ignoring the real philosophical meaning of the world ‘Shunya’ and taking it only in its literal sense, main thinkers, eastern and western have unfortunately committed that horrible blunders which has led them to thoroughly misunderstood Shunyavada and to condemn it as hopeless scepticism and a self condemned nihilism.

Shunya, according to the Madhyamika does not mean a nothing or an empty void or a negative abyss. Shunya essentially mean indescribable as it is beyond the four categories of intellect. It is reality which ultimately transcends existence, non existence both and neither. It is neither affirmation nor negation nor both nor neither. Empirically it means relativity which is phenomena; absolutely it means reality which is release from plurality. The word is indescribable because it is neither existent nor non existent; the absolute is indescribable because it is transcendental and no category of intellect can adequately describe it. Everything is shunya appearances are Svabhava Shunya or devoid of ultimate reality and reality is prapancha Shunya or devoid of plurality.

Thus Shunya is used in a double sense. It means the relative as well as the absolute. It means relativity as well as plurality. It means Samsara as well as Nirvana. That which is phenomenal, that which is dependent and conditional and therefore relative cannot be called ultimately real. All appearances being relative have no real origination and are therefore devoid of ultimate reality. But they are not absolutely unreal. They must belong to reality. It is the real itself which appears. And this real is the absolute, the non dual Harmonious whole in which all plurality is merged. Shunya therefore does not mean void; it means, on the other hand, devoid, so far as appearances are concerned ‘of ultimate reality’ and so far as reality is concerned, of plurality. It is clearly wrong to translate it as relativity. The shunya vadins take ‘existence’, ‘is’, ‘affirmation ‘, ‘being’ in the sense of absolute existence or ultimate reality, it means Eternalism.

Those who maintain that the world exists are committing a great error because when we penetrate deep we find that this entire world with all its manifold phenomena is essentially relative and therefore ultimately unreal. And those who advocate non-existence or non-being are also committing a great error because they are denying even the phenomenal reality of the world. They are condemned by the Shunyavadins as nihilist. Eternalism and nihilism are both false. Intellect which is essentially discursive, analytic and relational involves itself in contradictions.

All that can be grasped by it is essentially relative. It gives us four categories existence, non existence both and neither – and involves itself in sixty two antinomies. It cannot give is reality. Reality transcends all the categories and reconciles all the antinomies of intellect. It is to be directly realized through spiritual experience. It is the non-dual absolute in which all plurality is merged. So must rise above the subject-object duality of the intellect and the plurality of the phenomena.

The opponents of the Shunyata say that because the arguments used for the existence of Shunyata are also unreal. And if they are not unreal, they undermine the Shunyavadin’s premises for then he at least maintains the reality of his arguments; And Shyunyavada has no pramana to establish itself. Nagarjuna replies that the Shunyata which denies the ultimate reality of all dharmas is true

• Because the ultimate unreality of words and arguments does not render Shunyats unreal. By Shunyata we do not mean mere negation; by it we mean dependent origination or relativity.
• Our arguments do not undermine our premises. We donot say; this particular arguments of ours is true while all others are false. We say: All arguments are ultimately unreal. Absolutely speaking, we have no thesis to prove and hence no words and no arguments. How can we be charged with defects then? But from the empirical standpoint we admit the reality of arguments because the phenomenal cannot be condemned by its own logic.
• The validity of pramanas themselves cannot be established. A means of cognition (pramana), like fire cannot prove itself. It fire can enkindle itself, it will also burn itself. It fire can enkindle itself and other subjects, then sure darkness be established by another pramana for it will lead to infinite regress. A pramana cannot be proved by pramanas. If he now admits that pramanas, in their turn are to be proved by prameyas, his arguments amounts to this laughable position; a father begets a son; now that son in his turn, should beget his own father. And of course a pramana cannot be proved at random.

The validity of pramanas therefore can be established neither by themselves nor by other pramanas nor by prameyas nor by accident. Reality is above refutation, and non refutation Shunyavadins does not negate anything. There is nothing which can be negated. Even the charge that the Shunyavadin negates everything is made by their opponent. They, however, go beyond affirmation and negation.

---

Answer : Madhyamika admits the empirical reality of everything. It is only from the absolute standpoint that he declares the phenomenal to be unreal. Thus his doctrine transcends affirmation as well as negation. Reality (Paramartha Satya) according to Madhyamika motion is non-dual, blissful, beyond plurality and finite thought. It can only be directly realized. But it cannot be realized by denying the phenomenal which must be accepted as a practical necessity. Just as a person who decides to fetch water must have some vessel, similarly he who wants to rise to Nirvana must accept the phenomenal as relatively real. Ultimately there are two degrees of truth and reality. But phenomenally they exist. Chandrakirti compares phenomena to a staircase in which each step is higher thought which we reach the palace of reality.

Samvrti is covering. It hides the real nature of all things. It also means dependent origination (paraspara sambhavana) or relativity. It is a practical reality (samketa). It is ignorance (Avidya) or delusion (moha) which covers reality and gives a false view. The true aspect is reality or paramarthasatya; the false is appearance Samvriti Satya. A man of defective vision sees hair floating in the atmosphere. But his experience cannot predict the true experience of persons of good vision who sees no hair. Similarly phenomenal intellect cannot contradict pure knowledge. The empirical truth is only a means (Upaya); the absolute truth is the end (Upeya).

Chandrakirit further distinguishes two aspects in the phenomenal reality itself that which is phenomenally true (tathyasamvrti) and that reality itself that which is phenomenally false (mithyasamvrit). When people with rightly functioning sense-organs, recognize things as real, those things are phenomenally true, and those things which are perceived when the sense organs are not properly functioning, e.g. things in a dream, a mirage, hair in the atmosphere, double-moon etc. are phenomenally false. Thus Chandrakirji recognizes the pratibhasa and the Vayavahara of Vedanta by splitting Samjvrti into two. Ultimately however, everything phenomenal, because relative, is unreal. From this standpoint reality is equated with silence. But because the distinction between the phenomenal and the absolute is itself not absolute reality from the phenomenal standpoint is heard and preached.

---

Answer : It is generally believed that Asanga is the founder of Vijnanavada. He has given the following ten essential features of the Yogachera School.

• The Alayavijanana is immanent in all beings.
• There are three kinds of knowledge illusory, relative and absolute.
• The objective world and the subjective ego are only manifestations of the Universal consciousness (Alaya).
• Six perfections are emphasized.
• In order to realize Buddhahood we have to pass through the ten stages of Buddhisattvahood.
• Mahayan is far superior to Hinayana which is individualistic selfish and narrow and which has misunderstood the teaching of Buddha.
• The goal is to become one, through Bodhi, with the Dharmakaya or Buddha’s body of pure existence.
• The subject-object duality is to be transcended and unity with pure consciousness is to be attained.
• From the ultimate standpoint there is absolutely no difference between Samsara and Nirvana. The Nirvana is to be realized here and now by embracing (sameness) and by discarding plurality (nanatva).

Asang tries to prove that every phenomenal thing, being relative, is momentary. Everything which arises out of causes and conditions is necessarily momentary. It is important to remember that it is only the phenomenal which is declared to be momentary by Asanga and Vasubadhu. Momenariness does not even touch reality which is above all categories. Pure consciousness or universal self is not only admitted but is declared to be the only reality. By its very nature it is self luminous; all impurities are advenitiouns. Vasubandhu proves that reality is pure consciousness and external objects do not exist outside of thought, by refusing the objections of the opponents.

The opponents urge that if external objects do not exist then we cannot account for their spatial determination, their temporal determination, the indetermination of the perceiving stream of consciousness and the fruitful activity which follows their knowledge. It representations arise without there being any external sense-objects, then how is it that an object is seen in a particular place and a particular time. And how is it that all persons, and not one person only, present all that particular place and time perceive that particular object? And how is it that fruitful activity is possible? If things like food, water, cloth, poison, weapons etc. seen in a dream are purely imaginary and devoid of activity, it does not mean that real food and real water also cannot satisfy hunger and thirsts. External objects therefore must exist.

Vasubandhu replies that the four things mentioned by the opponent do not justify independent existence of external objects because they are found even in dreams and in hell where there are no external objects. Even in a dream things like a city, a garden a women a man etc. are seen in a city, a garden a women a man etc. are seen in a particular place and at a particular time and not in all places and at all times. Fruitful activity to results from unreal dreams objects, for the nearing of a dream tiger causes real fear and disturbs sleep and an erotic dream is followed by consciousness which is physically real. Again all those persons, and not one of them only, who on account of their bad deeds, go to hell, see the same river of etc. Thus there is indetermination of the stream of consciousness. So in dreams and in hell all these four things are present though these are no external objects. The internal guards cannot be real because they themselves do not suffer their agony of hell. The opponent admits that internal guards are produced by the force of the deeds of those persons who go to hell. But the force or the impression of the deed is in consciousness, while its result is wrongly imagined by the opponent to be consciousness. How can it be possible? The impression as well as the result of the deed must be in consciousness itself. Hence consciousness is the only reality. Consciousness manifests itself into subject as well us into object. It arises out of its own seed and then it manifests itself as an external object. Therefore Buddha said that there are two bases of cognition-internal and external. By knowing this one realizes that there is no ego and that there are no external objects, as both are only manifestations of consciousness.

It is generally believed that Vijnanavada is a crude subjectivism which denies the reality of the external objects and taxes them as the projections of the momentary Vijananas, that it denies the existence of the self and manitains that it is nothing over and above the momentary ideas that it maintains the doctrine of constant flux, and the reality, according to it, is only the individual momentary Vijana. Our exposition of Vijnanavada we are sure deals a death blow to all such and allied false noting. In no standard work of the Vijnanavada do we find any of these doctrines. It is a great irony of fate that shunyvada should be condemed as Nihilism and that Vijnanavada which is absolute Idealism should be concerned as subjectivisim advocating the doctrine of Universal flux. We have clearly shown that the application of the theory of Momenarisness is restricted by Vijnanavada to phenomena only. It is only the phenomenal which is momentary. And in this sphere momentariness is emphasized. But momentariness does not even touch reality.

Reality, truly speaking, transcends all the categories of the intellect. It is neither momentary nor permanent. But from the phenomenal point of view it must be described as the external, immortal and permanent background of all momentary phenomena. The reality of pure consciousness above, variously called a Alayavijana, Tathagatgarbha, chittamatra, Vijnaptimatrata, is emphatically maintained. The pure consciousness transcends the dualism of the subject and the object as well as the plurality of phenomena. It is the same as the self luminous self. Vijnanavada cannot be called subjectivism. It is not the individual consciousness as associated with other momentary functional ideas that creates the external world. The external world is declared to be a manifestation or modification of absolute consciousness when the external world is declared to be unreal what is meant is that it does not exist independently and outside of consciousness.

---

Answer : Pratityasamatapada is the crux of all the teachings of the Buddha. Pratityasamtapada refers to dependent origination. This doctrine is the second Noble truth which gives emphasis on the cause of sufferings, and in the third Noble truth which shows the cessation of suffering. Basically both are only the aspect of the same reality. Pratityasamatapada tells us that in the empirical world dominated by the intellect everything is relative, conditional, dependent, subject to birth and death and therefore impermanent.

All phenomenal things hang between reality and nothingness, avoiding both the extremes. They are like the appearances of Vedanta Avidya or Maya. It is in this sense that Buddha calls the doctrine the middle path Madhyama Pratipada which avoids both externalism and nihilism. He also identified it with the Dharma, the Law. He who sees the Pratityasamutapuda sees the Dharma. In this doctrine we get the twelve lines of the causal wheel of dependent origination.

1. Ignorance (Avidaya)
2. Impression of Karmic forces (Samskara)
3. Initial consciousness of the embryo (Vijnana)
4. Psyho (nama rupa)
5. Six sense experience (Vedana)
6. Thirst for sense enjoyment
7. Clinging to this enjoyment (Updudana)
8. Will to be born (bhava)
9. Birth or rebirth (Jati)
10. Old age and death (Jaramaran)
11. Sense objects contact
12. Sense experience

Out of these twelve links the first two are related to post life, the last two to future life and the rest to present life. This is life cycle of birth n death. This is the twelve- spoken wheel of dependent origination. This is the vicious circle of causation. It does not end with death. Death is only a beginning of new life, it is called Bhava-Chakra,Samsara-Chakra, Jnama marana chakra, Dharma-Chakra, Pratiyasamutapada chakra etc. It can be destroyed only when its root cause, Ignorance is destroyed. Dependent origination is the central teaching of the Buddha. The theory of Karma is based on this being an implication of the law of causation.

---