Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Buddhist Philosophy in India and Ceylon c24.s1: 1. The Problem of Salvation

Buddhist Philosophy in India and Ceylon c24.s1

Language
English

1. The Problem of Salvation

c24.s1.1

THE metaphysics of the Mahāyāna in the incoherence of its systems shows clearly enough the secondary interest attaching to it in the eyes of the monks, whose main interest was concentrated on the attainment of release; the Mahāyāna no less than the Hīnayāna is concerned vitally with this practical end, and its philosophy is of value merely in so far as it helps men to attain their aim.

c24.s1.2

Now the knowledge of the ultimate truth, whatever the system, is not to be regarded as adequate to secure for man the release for which he hopes. It is true that both Vijñānavāda and Madhyamaka assert that release is possible, despite the formidable or insuperable difficulties which the metaphysics of either system presents to such an event. But both realize far too clearly the substantial existence of the world of phenomena to be under the impression that mere knowledge is always and in every case the mode of attaining enlightenment. There is a precise parallel between their view and that of the Vedānta; at a definite stage in the progress of the saint, there comes the period when the true knowledge is of decisive value in winning him release, but it is at the due stage only that such a result can be achieved. The Vedāntin must not neglect the duties of the world in which he lives, or ignore the devotion due to Brahmā; the Buddhist equally must not think that mere knowledge of the void¹ dispenses him from the practice of the noblest of virtues, that of charity. Granted that it is true that in ultimate truth there is no distinction between virtue and vice, between infection of thought and purification, the vicious man so taught will pursue the way to destruction, while the good man will realize that all action is unreal, and will continue to do good, but with absolute detachment and freedom from desire of any kind.

c24.s1.3

¹ Or of the Brahman in the case of the Vedāntin. Compare the *Bhagavadgītā* doctrine of action; Poussin, JA. 1903, ii. 385 ff. See Ç., p 117, citing the *Ratnacūḍa Sūtra*.

c24.s1.4

The end, it is true, is the destruction of the illusion which veils the absolute void, or the void intellect, but it is impossible to deal with the illusion by the simple process of denying its reality. If there is no reality in consciousness, as the Madhyamaka asserts, nonetheless we must face the necessity of removing the illusion of reality, and the problem therefore is not seriously altered or simplified.¹ We must lay aside our knowledge that experience is false, because it is experience, and that all ideas on examination prove unreal because of the antinomies they contain, and pursue a knowledge (darçana), inferior indeed but indispensable, which will take account of the facts of experience, and find a path or vehicle or means to attain to the deliverance which is desired.

c24.s1.5

¹ BCA. ix. 4 ff.

c24.s1.6

In a concrete form the problem may be posed as the method of reversing the chain of causation, and thus terminating the constant stream of lives. In the Hīnayāna the process, as we have seen, is simple enough in its operation. Each intellectual series or individual stands by himself as a causal sequence; there is no room in the conception for either the intervention of a deity, for freedom of will, or for human solidarity. It is the great achievement of the Mahāyāna that it has succeeded without too great violence to earlier ideas in finding a place both for human freedom and for solidarity among men and beings of higher order of merit. The method to attain such an end was presented by the floating character of the distinction between relative truth and imaginary knowledge; either was, from the point of view of absolute truth, without validity, and the boundary line between the two classes was difficult to draw, affording the Mahāyāna the opportunity to redefine the conception of truth and advance to the rank of relative reality matters once relegated to the position of mere imagination.

c24.s1.7

In accord with the Hīnayāna, the Mahāyāna holds that the mode of stopping the activity of the chain of causation demands essentially the co-operation of intuition (*prajñā*) and merit (*puṇya*). Intuition, viewed as the cause of release, involves study, reflection, meditation, and the diverse forms of applications of active attention (*smṛty-upasthāna*);¹ merit includes the inferior perfections of morality, generosity, and patience, and with this are connected the taking of refuge in the jewels, the Buddha, the law, and the order. Strictly speaking, merit is a means, but intuition as cause and merit are reciprocally means to each other, and their common aim is the attainment of intuition as fruition—that is, illumination (*bodhi*), the definite cessation of the activity of thought, or release.²

c24.s1.8

¹ See Mvy. 38; *Dharmasaṃgraha*, 44; Ç., ch. xiii, xiv for details.

c24.s1.9

² BCAP. ix. 1. The possibility of a sterile act is recognized in KV. xii. 2.

Linked texts (6)