LATE VEDIC & EARLY BUDDHIST COSMOLOGIES
&
The “all”
________
.
Indian cosmologies are defined by Buddha in SN 12.48 (no parallel in other books; thus dubious).
Note:
Is there a conclusive relationship between the existence of Sat (real Being) at creation (as seen below), and what exists (atthi) later on?, is the question.
|
‘Sabbamatthī’ti kho, brāhmaṇa, jeṭṭhametaṃ lokāyataṃ”. ‘Sabbaṃ natthī’ti kho, brāhmaṇa, dutiyametaṃ lokāyataṃ” ‘Sabbamekattan’ti kho, brāhmaṇa, tatiyametaṃ lokāyataṃ”. ‘Sabbaṃ puthuttan’ti kho, brāhmaṇa, catutthametaṃ lokāyataṃ. SN 12.48 |
What are the different cosmological views in Veda and Mahābhārata (Mokṣadharma)?:
Description of the unmanifested state of the cosmos is formulated in the Nāsadīya sūkta (Rig Veda):
|
THEN was not non-existent nor existent: there was no realm of air, no sky beyond it. nasadasinno sadasittadanim - nasidrajo no vyoma paro yat Ṛg veda X 129.1 |
.
Two cosmological views are formulated in late Veda; namely in the Chandogya upaniṣad:
|
'In the beginning, 'my dear,' there was that only which is, one only, without a second. Others say, in the beginning there was that only which is not, one only, without a second; and from that which is not, that which is was born. CU VI.2.1 |
The second view is what has been brought out in the Taittriya upaniṣad, as follows:
|
Non-being (nothingness), verily, this in the beginning was. Thence, indeed, was the being born. That created itself by itself; thence is That the self-cause called. asadvā idamagra āsīt | tato vai sadajāyata | tadātmānaṃ svayamakuruta | tasmāttatsukṛtamucyata iti. असद्वा इदमग्र आसीत् । ततो वै सदजायत । तदात्मानं स्वयमकुरुत । तस्मात्तत्सुकृतमुच्यत इति TU II-vii-1 |
The first wiew is what has been brought out in the Brihadaranyaka Upaniṣad, as follows:
|
In the beginning, this (universe) was but the self of a human form (puruṣa). He reflected and found nothing else but himself. He first uttered, ‘I am he.’ Therefore he was called Aham (I). ātmaivedamagra āsītpuruṣavidhaḥ, so'nuvīkṣya nānyadātmano'paśyat, so'hamasmītyagre vyāharat, tato'haṃnāmābhavat. BU I-IV-1 --- This (self) was indeed brahman in the beginning. It knew only I as ‘I am Brahmaṇ.’ Therefore It became all. brahma vā idamagra āsīt, tadātmānamevāvet, aham brahmāsmīti | tasmāttatsarvamabhavat ब्रह्म वा इदमग्र आसीत्, तदात्मानमेवावेत्, अहम् ब्रह्मास्मीति । तस्मात्तत्सर्वमभवत् BU I-IV-10 |
Note:
There is no Self (Atta or Atman) in Buddhism, because what might be wrongly called a "self" in Buddhism would be the fabricated man (satta) by nāmarūpa; a sort of Jivatma (individual self) in the Brahmanic model.
The Buddhist "self" could also correspond to the puruṣa of the Brihadaranyaka Upaniṣad; (the Parmatma (Supreme Self) of the Kaṭha Upaniṣad). But this pseudo Buddhist "self" is not pervading the whole cosmos as in the Brahmanic view - and there is no such thing as a oneness between the Jivatma (individual self) and the Parmatma (Supreme Self) in Buddhism.
The pseudo Buddhist "self" is just dependently arisen from Ignorance - and particularly dependently co-arisen from the constituents of nāmarūpa. And because it is dependently arisen and co-arisen, it cannot be called a (pervading) Self; as per Brahmanic definition.
There is no Self whatsoever in paṭiccasamupāda. Neither what would approximate a parmatma+jivatma (Self), or a jivatma (self) in the Brahmanic tradition.
Note: Ignorance is the first link of Paṭiccasāmupada - It is important to note that Buddha greatly differed with what is stated in Aitareya Upanishad III-i-3; namely that the Parmatma (Supreme Self) is equated with knowledge (consciousness):
Everything are various names only of Knowledge (Prajnānam = ~consciousness as knowledge);
Everything is led (produced) by knowledge.
It rests on Knowledge. The world is led by Knowledge. Knowledge is its cause.
Knowledge is Brahman.
For the Buddha, everything originates from Ignorance - not from knowledge.
In fact, knowledge (as consciousness/viññāṇa) comes, after Ignorance has set the saṅkhāras in saṅkhāra nidanā in motion. What viññāṇa knows first (at inception,) is the outcome of the saṅkhāras in saṅkhāra nidanā.
Which is far from the upanishadic view that consciousness (as Brahman/Prajnā) is the origination and end of it all.
---
The Buddhist "self" is not either, an outcome of the nothingness (asat,) as defined in the Taittriya upaniṣad; for there is something above nothingness in Buddhism; namely the nevasaññānāsaññāyatana - the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception.
What Buddha said about the "all" is the following:
|
Bhikkhus, I will teach you the all And what, bhikkhus, is the all? The eye and forms, the ear and sounds, the nose and odours, the tongue and tastes, the body and tactile objects, the mind and mental phenomena. This is called the all. SN 35.23 |
And how the Brahmanic Self ("All") is defined, is brought out in the Taittriya upaniṣad:
|
The knower of Brahman attains the highest. brahmavidāpnoti param ब्रह्मविदाप्नोति परम् On that, this has been chanted: “Real (truth), wisdom, infinite is Brahman;....” tadeṣā'bhyuktā | satyaṃ jñānamanantaṃ brahma तदेषाऽभ्युक्ता । सत्यं ज्ञानमनन्तं ब्रह्म Whoso knoweth the one hid in the cave in the highest heaven attains all desires together, as Brahman, as the Wise. yo veda nihitaṃ guhāyāṃ parame vyoman | so'śnute sarvān kāmān saha | brahmaṇā vipaścitā ||” iti यो वेद निहितं गुहायां परमे व्योमन् । सोऽश्नुते सर्वान् कामान् सह । ब्रह्मणा विपश्चिता ॥” इति From That, verily,—from This Self—is ākāśa (ether/space) born; from ākāśa, the air; from the air, fire; from fire, water; from water, earth; from earth, plants; from plants, food: from food, man. tasmādvā etasmādātmana ākāśaḥ saṃbhūtaḥ | ākāśādvāyuḥ | vāyoragniḥ | agnerāpaḥ | adbhyaḥ pṛthivī | pṛthivyā oṣadhayaḥ | oṣadhībhyo'nnam | annāt puruṣaḥ तस्माद्वा एतस्मादात्मन आकाशः संभूतः । आकाशाद्वायुः । वायोरग्निः । अग्नेरापः । अद्भ्यः पृथिवी । पृथिव्या ओषधयः । ओषधीभ्योऽन्नम् । अन्नात् पुरुषः He, verily, is this man, formed of food-essence. sa vā eṣa puruṣo'nnarasamayaḥ स वा एष पुरुषोऽन्नरसमयः TU II.1 (Ananda valli) |
.
What must be considered now, is that Buddha believed there was something beyond human experience:
|
And whatever recluses and brahmins at present experience painful, racking, piercing feelings due to exertion, this is the utmost, there is none beyond this. Yepi hi keci etarahi samaṇā vā brāhmaṇā vā opakkamikā dukkhā tibbā kharā kaṭukā vedanā vedayanti, etāvaparamaṃ, nayito bhiyyo.
But by this racking practice of austerities I have not attained any states beyond man (uttari manussadhammā), any distinction in knowledge and vision worthy of the noble ones. Could there be another path to enlightenment? Na kho panāhaṃ imāya kaṭukāya dukkarakārikāya adhigacchāmi uttari manussadhammā alamariyañāṇadassanavisesaṃ. Siyā nu kho añño maggo bodhāyā’ti? MN 36 |
.
The manifest & the unmanifest (Avyakata).
In Buddhism, the unmanifested (Avyakata) is above the unfashioned (Nibbana - Asankhata)
The unfashioned (Nibbana - Asankhata) is about the subtle (SN 43.17), the "hard to see" (SN 43.18), the invisible (SN 43.20), etc (see SN 43).
The unmanifested (Avyakata), on the other hand, is the undeclared. That which cannot be classified and even talked about. (see SN 44).
A higher dimension (unmanifest) is formulated in the Maṇḍūkya upaniṣad:
|
Turīya* is not that which is conscious of the internal (subjective) world, nor that which is conscious of the external (objective) world, nor that which is conscious of both, nor that which is a mass of all sentiency, nor that which is simple consciousness, nor that which is insentient. (It is) unseen (by any sense organ), not related to anything, incomprehensible (by the mind), uninferable, unthinkable, indescribable, essentially of the nature of Consciousness constituting the Self alone, negation of all phenomena, the Peaceful, all Bliss and the Non-dual. This is what is known as the fourth (Turīya). This is the Ātman and it has to be realized. MāU VII *The three states of consciousness in the case of ordinary men are: waking, dream, and sound sleep. The fourth state, realisable by Yogins alone, is called Turiya. |
This whole (kṛtsna) is non-dual - It is characterized in the Brihadaranyaka Upaniṣad:
|
As a lump of salt is without interior or exterior, entire, and purely saline in taste, even so is the Self without interior or exterior, entire, and pure knowledge (prajñā) alone. (The self) comes out (as a separate entity) from these elements, and (this separateness) is destroyed with them. After attaining (this oneness) it has no more (particular) consciousness (saṃjñā). This is what I say, my dear. So said Yājñavalkya. sa yathā saindhavaghano'nantaro'bāhyaḥ kṛtsno rasaghana eva, evaṃ vā are'yamātmānantaro'bāhyaḥ kṛtsnaḥ prajñānaghana eva; etebhyo bhūtebhyaḥ samutthāya tānyevānuvinayaṣyatiti, na pretya saṃjñāstītyare bravīmīti hovāca yājñavalkyaḥ स यथा सैन्धवघनोऽनन्तरोऽबाह्यः कृत्स्नो रसघन एव, एवं वा अरेऽयमात्मानन्तरोऽबाह्यः कृत्स्नः प्रज्ञानघन एव; एतेभ्यो भूतेभ्यः समुत्थाय तान्येवानुविनयष्यतिति, न प्रेत्य संज्ञास्तीत्यरे ब्रवीमीति होवाच याज्ञवल्क्यः BU IV.5.13 |
.
Liberation is the process of going back to the unmanifested (Avyakata), through the unfashioned (Nibbana/Asankhata).
.
The brahminic cosmology that Buddha was confronted with, was based on the following:
Unmanifested (avyakta) > space > wind > fire > water > earth.
|
Space arose from the imperishable, from space came wind, from wind came fire, from fire came water, and from water the earth was created. Living creatures were born on the earth. Mokṣadharma - Mbh XII.202 |
The speculative tradition of early Brahminism, developed a contemplative tradition at a later date.
Brahma was to be reached through quiescent meditation, from the gross elements (earth, water, fire, etc..), back to the unmanifested.
|
The practitioners of yoga perceive that supreme, absolute being. Ignorant men do not perceive that which abides in the individual self, for their faculties of intelligence incline towards sense objects. mahadd hi paramam bhūtam yat prapaśyanti yoginah. Mokṣadharma - Mbh XII |
Yoga was the dicipline of an inner concentration to reach a quiescent meditation practice.
|
When the five instruments of knowledge stand still together with the mind, and when the intellect does not move, that is called the highest state. This, the firm holding back of the senses, is what is called Yoga. Katha Upaniṣad VI.10–11 |
Note:
The Buddha differs on the above. He advocated the abandonment of the "five instruments of knowledge" SN (35.24/25).
There was not for him, a higher state in the stilling of these five objects; but a higher state in the stilling of the saṅkhāras in Saṇkhāra nidanā.
We will see below that this is a major difference between the Brahmanic view and Buddha's view.
Buddha believed that the "six instruments of knowledge" had an active part to play in their own abandonment, and the abandonment of the khandhas; so as to reach the higher dimensions, namely: viññāṇañcā (infinity of consciousness), ākiñcaññā (nothingness) and nevasaññānāsaññā (neither perception nor non-perception).
.
The yogin who wished to attain union with Brahma had to reproduce the process of world dissolution - from the element earth; back to space and beyond.
Brahminic meditators believed that liberation was achieved by means of a meditative progression through the material elements and a few higher states of consciousness beyond them.
|
Earth, Wind, Space, Water, and fire forming the fifth, are the great essences. These are (the causes of) the origin and the destruction of all creatures. (see Mbh XII.286-291) |
Buddha declined the conventional meditative practice of a sole quiescent meditation, common among the Brahmins; and although he kept the principle of the dhatus (earth, water, fire, wind, space - and added the dhatu-consciousness to them), He emphasized mindfulness and the releasing insight. He also emphasized the possibility that the meditator could be liberated in life (and not just at death time;) and He could care less about what would happen after liberation and death; for that was not explainable.
Ākiñcañña (nothingness) and nevasaññānāsaññā (neither perception nor non-perception) were thought to be liberating by Buddha's teachers Kālāma & Rāmaputta. But Buddha declined the fact of just reaching liberation through a sole quiescent meditative practice. Mindfulness and Insight was to be paired with that.
Moreover, He believed the abandonment of all the formless sphere to be necessary for a full liberation; namely:
ākāsānañcāyatana the sphere of the infinity of space
viññāṇañcāyatana the sphere of the infinity of consciousness
ākiñcaññāyatana the sphere of nothingness
nevasaññānāsaññāyatana the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception.
.
.
NOTES
____
I
|
"'Having directly known the all (sabba) as the all, and having directly known the extent of what has not been experienced through the allness of the all, I wasn't the all, I wasn't in the all, I wasn't apart from the all, I wasn't "The all is mine." I didn't affirm (praise) the all. |
The major difference with a purely empiricist reading of the "all", is that Buddhism includes the intelligible in the equation. Yet an intelligible that comes from the a priori that is saṅkhāra nidāna; to become a sensuous intelligible.
Kant made a distinction between the sensible and the intelligible - but Buddhism collapsed them in one level; namely the five senses plus the "intellect" (mano).
Mano experiences what has been inherited from the saṅkhāra nidāna (perception and feeling - cittasaṅkhāra). It experiences something that has not been experienced through the earthness of earth ... the liquidity of liquid ... the fieriness of fire ... the windiness of wind ... the allness of the all.
Therefore, the question is: "Is there any all-encompassing cosmological implication in the "all" in SN 35.23?
Isn't Buddha referring to the *all paṭiccasamuppāda*, when he compares his metaphysical appraisal of the origin and nature of the universe, with the other cosmologies?.
While the *all* (sabba) seems to represent only a part of the saḷāyatana. The sensuous part.
People should just read the suttas as they are given; namely, the "all" (a.k.a. the "dyad" (dvaya) - SN 35.92) is eye & form, ear & sound, etc. - that is to say: the two āyatanāne (external & internal spheres of sense) in saḷāyatana.
The definition of the "world" (loka) adds the following to the former definition: "eye-consciousness & things (dhamma) to be cognized by eye-consciousness" (idem for ear, etc.) (SN 35.68) .
---
Some people seem to have a hard time to understand that, what the world is, is that which perceives, then conceives of it; (whose result it feeds back to viññāṇa nidāna; then viññāṇa nidāna to nāmarūpa nidāna).
Some people want the "WHOLE" thing to take place in the "world" (as per Buddhist definition).
|
That by which one is a perceiver of the world (lokasmi-plane of beings), a conceiver of the world — this is called the world in the Noble One’s Discipline. |
|
Yena kho, āvuso, lokasmiṃ lokasaññī hoti lokamānī — ayaṃ vuccati ariyassa vinaye loko. |
"That by which" perception and thinking is done, is called the world.
But what "MAKES" the world is nāmarūpa. Nāmarūpa "MAKES" the eye, the ear, ... the forms, the sounds, ... - That is to say the saḷāyatana.
And what is at the inception of all this: It is ------ > IGNORANCE.
|
Yet it is just within this fathom-long body, with its perception & intellect (thoughts), that I declare that there is the world, the rising of the world, the cessation of the world, and the path of practice leading to the cessation of the world." |
|
Api cāhaṃ, āvuso, imasmiṃyeva byāmamatte kaḷevare sasaññimhi samanake lokañca paññāpemi lokasamudayañca lokanirodhañca lokanirodhagāminiñca paṭipadanti. |
|
AN 4.45 - SN 2.26 |
The arising (samudaya) - (and not the "origination") - of the world is due to the descent (avakkanti) of nāmarūpa.
For where there is a descent of nāmarūpa, the six sense spheres (bases) come to be (SN 12.39).
The arising of the world takes place right there (in the saḷāyatana).
And the cessation is right there too.
And the path of practice leading to that cessation is right there too.
And what is at the origination of all this: It is --------> IGNORANCE.
And what does it take for the saḷāyatana to come to be? > Avijja (ignorance) > saṅkhāra > viññāṇa > nāmarūpa. As defined in the paṭiccasāmuppada.
The Buddhist's "world" is not what we, westerners, consider the "world" (the cosmos).
The Buddhist "world" is just the scope of saḷāyatana - how it arises, how it fades; and how you make it fade.
That is the Buddhist's "world".
The Buddhist's "cosmos" is the manifested (Vyakata), the unfashioned (Asankhata),and the unmanifested (Avyakata). The Buddha cared about the two former; and particularly about the first one (Vyakata), as a means of liberation. And he would not even speak of the latter; for it was indescribable.
The "all" (sabba), is just a part of the "world". The "all" is the two āyatanāne (external & internal spheres of sense) in saḷāyatana. The "all" does not comprise the different consciousnesses (sense-consciousness) [eye-consciousness, ear consciousness, ... mind-consciousness]; and the things (dhammas) cognized by that sense-consciousness.
There are no other possible means of actualisation (& realization of ignorance), than the "all"; a.k.a. two spheres of senses (āyatanāne).
I suppose that's what is meant in SN 35.23.
________
II
Is there a higher dimension that is separate of us as observers?
(Buddhist's cosmology and modern physics)
Modern physics, by laying down that there is an invariance of the speed of light; and through the fact that time & space have to alter themselves to accommodate this variance, might lead one to assume that time & space are the imputed developments of light, and contingent to light.
Which would go along with the early Buddhist's creed, that consciouness without feature/signs (anidassana viññāṇa,) is "luminous all around" (MN 140) - with the sphere of space (ākāsānañcāyatana) - (timespace bundle) being contingent to that consciousness.
How time and space behave (relativity,) and how particles behave (quantum) depend on the observer. The perceived object and the perceiver are not separated. This is what we learn from the descent of nāmarūpa and the saḷāyatana. The Buddhist's "world" (loka) is just that.
There is no inherent existence to timespace, or to the way particles behave - but these existences come from our own experience; from the observer.
Douse the observer (asmi/being,) and carry it off, back to the light (anidassana viññāṇa,) and beyond to the unmanifested.
.
In Plato's cave allegory, would turning the shadows off (and everything that pertain to them), unveil a higher reality?
________
.
khandhāyatanadhātuyo
She taught me the Dhamma:
aggregates, sense spheres, & elements.
Thig 5.8
________
.
.
Home
*