Early Buddhist Theory of Knowledge c14.47

c14.47

(739) The importance of eliminating subjective bias and of getting rid of habits of mind that cause people to fall into error is often stressed. It was the Sceptics who paid the greatest attention to this subject. The first school of Sceptics said that truth cannot be arrived at and it was always a subjective factor such as attachment (chando), passion (rāgo), hate (doso), or repulsion (paṭigho), which makes one accept a proposition as true (*v. supra*, 159). We have already seen that the Buddha’s attitude to the debate (*v. supra*, 688) was similar to that of the Sceptics, most of whom avoided debate because of the vexation that it caused (*v. supra*, 338) We similarly see the influence of the above doctrine of the Sceptics where it is said that there are ‘four ways of falling into injustice’ or untruth (agati-gamanāni, A II 18), namely out of attachment (chanda-), hatred (dosa-), ignorance (moha-), and fear (bhaya-), the arhat or the ‘ideal person’ in Buddhism is not misled in any of these four ways (D. III.133). The difference from Scepticism is that this does not result in Buddhism in total scepticism with regard to the possibility of truth. One's emotions, whether it be one's likes or dislikes, can distort the truth and the Buddha warns his disciples: 'If others were to speak ill of me, the Dhamma and the Order, do not bear any hatred or ill-will towards them or be displeased at heart... for if you were to be enraged and upset, will you be able to know whether these statements (criticisms) of others were fair or not?'¹ On the other hand, 'if others were to speak in praise of me, my Dhamma or my Order, you should not be happy, delighted and elated at heart... for if you were to be happy, delighted and elated, it will only be a danger to you...'.² The Buddha himself claims to be neither pleased at the praise of others nor displeased at their abuse. He encourages his disciples to develop this same attitude (tatra ce... pare Tathāgatam akkosanti... tatra... Tathāgatassa na hoti āghāto... tatra ce... pare Tathāgatam sakkaronti... na hoti ānando... Tasmātiha... tumhe ce pi pare akkoseyyum... tatra tumhehi na āghāto... karaṇīyo... pare sakkareyyum... tatra tumhehi na ānando... karaṇīyam, M. I.140). When Sāriputta, his own disciple, says in praise of him: 'I have such faith in the Exalted One that I do not think that there ever has been, nor will there ever be a recluse or brahmin who has greater understanding and knowledge than the Exalted One',³ he quietly rebukes him with the remark, 'have you examined the minds of the perfectly enlightened Exalted Ones of the past... the future... or my own mind in the present'.⁴ To this Sāriputta replies that he has not. The Buddha thereupon remarks, 'then why have you uttered a statement so grand, bold, made a categorical claim and uttered a lion's roar to the effect that "I have such faith..."'⁵ This incident displays the basically objective attitude of the Buddha, who demanded that for statements to be significant and true, they must be based on evidence that warrants their assertion and not on the grounds of our subjective prejudices.