Articles by alphabetic order
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
 Ā Ī Ñ Ś Ū Ö Ō
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0


Difference between revisions of "Buddhism and the Origin of Life"

From Tibetan Buddhist Encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page with " The Buddha did not give any specific teaching regarding the origin of the universe or of life. The question was said to be unanswerable from the level of ordinary munda...")
 
Line 1: Line 1:
 +
{{DisplayImages|53}}
  
  
Line 6: Line 7:
  
  
The Buddha did not give any specific teaching regarding the origin of the universe or of life. The
 
question was said to be unanswerable from the level of ordinary mundane intelligence In the
 
Aṅguttara Nikāya it is said: “The origin of beings revolving in saṃsāra, being cloaked by avijjā
 
(ignorance) is undiscoverable.” At the same time it is laid down, as a natural consequence of the
 
law of Dependent Origination (paṭicca samuppāda) that in the ceaseless cycle of cause and effect
 
there cannot be any link in the sequence that can be designated a first cause. Each effect in its
 
turn becomes a cause, and the beginning is nowhere apparent; it is a closed circle of related
 
conditions, each factor being dependent on the preceding ones.
 
  
  
The early Buddhists, because of this silence on the part of the Buddha, and His unwillingness
 
to attempt the hopeless task of explaining the inexplicable, took their ideas concerning the
 
nature of the universe from the Brahmanical teachings already current in India. These, because
 
of their remarkable correspondence to modern scientific concepts, are well worth examination.
 
In the first place, it must be realised that the Vedic teachings, because of the lack of technical
 
and scientific knowledge and the necessary vocabulary in which to express such modes of
 
thought, used allegory and symbolism, much of it being of a primitive and animistic kind. The
 
early Buddhists found the concepts of Brahman and Ātman unnecessary and, while adhering in
 
outline to the Brahmanical idea of the universe, they considered it to be self-sustained by laws
 
inherent in its own nature, the whole group of laws being part of the universal law of kamma,
 
or cause and effect. The universe consists of innumerable cakkavāḷas or world systems. These
 
come into being and pass away again in an endless cycle covering periods of millions of years,
 
called kappas and yugas.
 
  
The system of chronology is complicated and unthinkably immense, as
 
is the number of inhabited World-systems in this cosmic mechanism. It is unnecessary to go into
 
the divisions of time in detail, but a sufficient indication of their tremendous span can be gained
 
from the fact that a yuga is equivalent to several millennia, and that eight of these yugas,
 
representing a cycle, makes one small or antara kappa. Twenty small kappas constitute a middle
 
or asaṅkheyya kappa, and a full cycle of four middle kappas is called a great or mahā kappa, which
 
is the largest unit of calculation. Each great kappa is the cyclic period of a world-system, during
 
which the entire process of coming into being, existence, decay and destruction is brought into
 
operation. After the destruction of a world-system another immense period of time elapses, at
 
the end of which the process begins over again, the whole being repeated ceaselessly, without
 
beginning or end.
 
  
 +
The Buddha did not give any specific teaching regarding the origin of the universe or of life. Thequestion was said to be unanswerable from the level of ordinary mundane intelligence In theAṅguttara Nikāya it is said: “The origin of beings revolving in saṃsāra, being cloaked by avijjā(ignorance) is undiscoverable.” At the same time it is laid down, as a natural consequence of thelaw of Dependent Origination (paṭicca samuppāda) that in the ceaseless cycle of cause and effectthere cannot be any link in the sequence that can be designated a first cause. Each effect in itsturn becomes a cause, and the beginning is nowhere apparent; it is a closed circle of relatedconditions, each factor being dependent on the preceding ones.
 +
 +
The early Buddhists, because of this silence on the part of the Buddha, and His unwillingnessto attempt the hopeless task of explaining the inexplicable, took their ideas concerning thenature of the universe from the Brahmanical teachings already current in India. These, becauseof their remarkable correspondence to modern scientific concepts, are well worth examination.
 +
 +
In the first place, it must be realised that the Vedic teachings, because of the lack of technicaland scientific knowledge and the necessary vocabulary in which to express such modes ofthought, used allegory and symbolism, much of it being of a primitive and animistic kind. Theearly Buddhists found the concepts of Brahman and Ātman unnecessary and, while adhering inoutline to the Brahmanical idea of the universe, they considered it to be self-sustained by lawsinherent in its own nature, the whole group of laws being part of the universal law of kamma,or cause and effect. The universe consists of innumerable cakkavāḷas or world systems. Thesecome into being and pass away again in an endless cycle covering periods of millions of years,called kappas and yugas.
  
Turning to the Brahmanical theory we find a similar general pattern of events. Vedanta
+
The system of chronology is complicated and unthinkably immense, as
teaches that the cycles of the universe are divided into the “days and nights of Brahmā.” In the
 
beginning the whole of the basic material substance of the universe is evenly distributed
 
throughout space. This material substance is called Prakṛti (matter) and is to be considered as
 
atomic units in a state of almost complete balance and almost complete inertia. Gradually, over
 
unimaginable aeons of time, a slight movement in this vast ocean of matter gathers impetus and
 
gradually the mass comes to life. In Vedantic phraseology it is said that Prakṛti is animated by
 
Puruṣa or Spirit; the Brahman is manifesting through the material substance. This substance
 
becomes differentiated into worlds, and living beings appear. Cosmic evolution then comes into
 
play and the cycle of the universe runs its course, through development and degeneration to
 
decay. When the period of the cycle is completed the universe disintegrates and returns to the
 
same state of undifferentiated material elements as before. Again the process repeats itself,
 
without beginning and without end.
 
  
 +
is the number of inhabited World-systems in this cosmic mechanism. It is unnecessary to go intothe divisions of time in detail, but a sufficient indication of their tremendous span can be gainedfrom the fact that a yuga is equivalent to several millennia, and that eight of these yugas,representing a cycle, makes one small or antara kappa. Twenty small kappas constitute a middleor asaṅkheyya kappa, and a full cycle of four middle kappas is called a great or mahā kappa, whichis the largest unit of calculation. Each great kappa is the cyclic period of a world-system, duringwhich the entire process of coming into being, existence, decay and destruction is brought intooperation. After the destruction of a world-system another immense period of time elapses, atthe end of which the process begins over again, the whole being repeated ceaselessly, withoutbeginning or end.
  
The Buddhist view is much the same, except that, as stated before, in place of the Brahman or
+
Turning to the Brahmanical theory we find a similar general pattern of events. Vedantateaches that the cycles of the universe are divided into the “days and nights of Brahmā.” In thebeginning the whole of the basic material substance of the universe is evenly distributedthroughout space. This material substance is called Prakṛti (matter) and is to be considered asatomic units in a state of almost complete balance and almost complete inertia. Gradually, overunimaginable aeons of time, a slight movement in this vast ocean of matter gathers impetus andgradually the mass comes to life. In Vedantic phraseology it is said that Prakṛti is animated byPuruṣa or Spirit; the Brahman is manifesting through the material substance. This substancebecomes differentiated into worlds, and living beings appear. Cosmic evolution then comes intoplay and the cycle of the universe runs its course, through development and degeneration todecay. When the period of the cycle is completed the universe disintegrates and returns to thesame state of undifferentiated material elements as before. Again the process repeats itself,without beginning and without end.
any controlling deity Buddhism substitutes the law of cause and effect; one universe or world�system arises from the kamma, or causal genesis, of the one preceding it.
 
  
 +
The Buddhist view is much the same, except that, as stated before, in place of the Brahman orany controlling deity Buddhism substitutes the law of cause and effect; one universe or world�system arises from the kamma, or causal genesis, of the one preceding it.
  
 
The Visuddhimagga summarises the process thus:
 
The Visuddhimagga summarises the process thus:
 +
 
“ Na h’ettha devo brahmā va
 
“ Na h’ettha devo brahmā va
saṃsārass’atthi kārako,
 
Suddhadhammā pavattanti
 
Hetusambhārapaccayāti “
 
  
 +
saṃsārass’atthi kārako,
 +
 +
Suddhadhammā pavattanti
  
“There is no god or Brahmā who is the creator of this world. Empty phenomena roll
+
Hetusambhārapaccayāti “
on, all subject to causality.”
 
  
 +
“There is no god or Brahmā who is the creator of this world. Empty phenomena rollon, all subject to causality.”
  
The astronomers Jeans and Eddington are among those who have attempted some speculation
+
The astronomers Jeans and Eddington are among those who have attempted some speculationregarding the origin of the universe. Eddington, calculating the recession of the spiral nebulaefrom the colour changes in the spectrum, has formed the theory that the entire universe is inprocess of expansion. The countless planets and solar systems comprising it are governed by thelaw of cosmic attraction and repulsion, which is a law inherent in the nature of matter. It is thislaw which holds together all the material substance of which the universe is composed, from thesmallest atomic units to the largest planet. It is believed that in the course of expansion of theuniverse one of two things will, eventually, happen: either it will reach its maximum point ofexpansion and the law of cosmic repulsion will cause the atomic elements to scatter throughoutspace, or else the law of cosmic attraction will gain the upper hand and the process will bereversed, causing the universe to shrink back on itself.
regarding the origin of the universe. Eddington, calculating the recession of the spiral nebulae
 
from the colour changes in the spectrum, has formed the theory that the entire universe is in
 
process of expansion. The countless planets and solar systems comprising it are governed by the
 
law of cosmic attraction and repulsion, which is a law inherent in the nature of matter. It is this
 
law which holds together all the material substance of which the universe is composed, from the
 
smallest atomic units to the largest planet. It is believed that in the course of expansion of the
 
universe one of two things will, eventually, happen: either it will reach its maximum point of
 
expansion and the law of cosmic repulsion will cause the atomic elements to scatter throughout
 
space, or else the law of cosmic attraction will gain the upper hand and the process will be
 
reversed, causing the universe to shrink back on itself.  
 
  
 
In either case, the ultimate result will
 
In either case, the ultimate result will
probably be the same; that is, the atomic elements will become uniformly distributed
 
throughout space. Eddington has also hazarded the guess that this is the primal state from
 
which the universe first took form, that is to say that his imaginative picture of it before
 
“creation” is very similar to that of the Vedantic and Buddhist conception. Again, we are to
 
imagine the whole of space filled with atoms, electrons and neutrons in an almost perfect state
 
of balance and homogeneity. In this undifferentiated mass there is only a slight movement or
 
vibration, but over incalculable aeons the movement becomes more pronounced as the law of
 
cosmic attraction and repulsion comes into play. Gradually the even distribution of substance
 
forms clots, masses of electronic particles being drawn together, so that in time whirling masses
 
of gaseous matter are formed, and from these emerge what astronomers call the “island
 
universes“ - that is to say, systems forming themselves round a central nucleus, like our own
 
solar system. It is obvious that this process, as in the Buddhist system, can be repeat over and
 
over again.
 
  
 +
probably be the same; that is, the atomic elements will become uniformly distributedthroughout space. Eddington has also hazarded the guess that this is the primal state fromwhich the universe first took form, that is to say that his imaginative picture of it before“creation” is very similar to that of the Vedantic and Buddhist conception. Again, we are toimagine the whole of space filled with atoms, electrons and neutrons in an almost perfect stateof balance and homogeneity. In this undifferentiated mass there is only a slight movement orvibration, but over incalculable aeons the movement becomes more pronounced as the law ofcosmic attraction and repulsion comes into play. Gradually the even distribution of substanceforms clots, masses of electronic particles being drawn together, so that in time whirling massesof gaseous matter are formed, and from these emerge what astronomers call the “islanduniverses“ - that is to say, systems forming themselves round a central nucleus, like our ownsolar system. It is obvious that this process, as in the Buddhist system, can be repeat over andover again.
  
In this way science does away with the need for a creator god, but still it has not explained
+
In this way science does away with the need for a creator god, but still it has not explainedthe origin of the movement in the inert matter, which carries the process forward. Buddhismexplains it as being kamma, that is, the principle of the indestructibility of force or energy. Themovement is the residuum of activity from the previous universe, which never entirely ceases,though that universe itself has ceased to exist. When we examine the operation of kamma as itfunctions in the rebirth of living organisms it becomes possible to relate it to the cosmic processand trace the parallel between the kamma of a sentient being and the kamma of materialphenomena.
the origin of the movement in the inert matter, which carries the process forward. Buddhism
 
explains it as being kamma, that is, the principle of the indestructibility of force or energy. The
 
movement is the residuum of activity from the previous universe, which never entirely ceases,
 
though that universe itself has ceased to exist. When we examine the operation of kamma as it
 
functions in the rebirth of living organisms it becomes possible to relate it to the cosmic process
 
and trace the parallel between the kamma of a sentient being and the kamma of material
 
phenomena.
 
  
 +
From this comparison of modern scientific ideas and the teachings of over two thousandyears ago it will be seen how strikingly they agree. The question then arises: How was itpossible for the sages of that remote period to penetrate the illusion of material substance andfind that it was composed of electronic forces, and to form so accurate an idea of the nature ofthe universe and its processes? The answer can only lie in the belief that they were able to raisetheir consciousness beyond the sphere of the mundane, through the practise of jhāna ormeditation. They had no laboratory equipment, no microscopes or telescopes and nomathematical formulae to guide them; and, when they had made their discovery they had notechnical language or common basis of knowledge by which to impart their discoveries toothers. It would indeed have been hopeless for the Buddha to attempt a description of thenature of the universe on these lines; no one of His time would have been capable ofunderstanding Him.
  
From this comparison of modern scientific ideas and the teachings of over two thousand
 
years ago it will be seen how strikingly they agree. The question then arises: How was it
 
possible for the sages of that remote period to penetrate the illusion of material substance and
 
find that it was composed of electronic forces, and to form so accurate an idea of the nature of
 
the universe and its processes? The answer can only lie in the belief that they were able to raise
 
their consciousness beyond the sphere of the mundane, through the practise of jhāna or
 
  
  
meditation. They had no laboratory equipment, no microscopes or telescopes and no
+
That is why He refused to answer questions concerning the origin of the world or whether itwas eternal or not eternal. Had He given an affirmative reply or a negative one to eitherquestion it would have been in a sense untrue. The Buddha’s reply, in effect, was that suchquestions were not conducive to release from rebirth; but the implication always remained thatthe true knowledge could be gained by oneself, through insight, though it could not beimparted to others. The Iddhi, or so-called “supernatural powers” gained by the Arahats weresimply the knowledge of hidden laws of the universe and how to make use of them, but byBuddha they were regarded as only another and greater obstacle to the attainment of freedomand the quenching of desire.
mathematical formulae to guide them; and, when they had made their discovery they had no
 
technical language or common basis of knowledge by which to impart their discoveries to
 
others. It would indeed have been hopeless for the Buddha to attempt a description of the
 
nature of the universe on these lines; no one of His time would have been capable of
 
understanding Him.
 
  
 +
The law of causality is like an iceberg; only one eighth of it or less is visible above the surface.
 +
 +
We observe the effects while remaining ignorant of the causes, just as when we switch on theelectric current and the light appears. The scientist Max Planck wrote: “What sense is there,then, it may be asked, in talking of definite causal relations in regard to causes where nobody inthe world is capable of tracing their function? The answer to that question is simple. As has beensaid again and again, the concept of causality is something transcendental—quite independentof the nature of the researches, and it would be valid if there were no perceiving subject at all… .We must distinguish between the validity of its [application]. This means that even the scientisthas to admit causes beyond his comprehension. The Buddha stated: “Whether Buddhas arise ordo not arise (to perceive and reveal the Law) the law of causality, the principle of thedependence of this upon that, the causal sequence of events, remains a fixed and unalterablelaw.”
  
That is why He refused to answer questions concerning the origin of the world or whether it
+
“The concept of causality is something transcendental.” This is a significant phrase indeed,coming from a scientist. It is just in this transcendental concept of the causal law that Buddhismestablishes the moral principle of kamma. The materialist rejects the idea of God and Soul; andbecause he sees no evidence of a spiritual or other purpose in life, he rejects all belief in themoral order of the universe as well. Buddhism also is independent of a theistic creator and of asoul or ego principle, but Buddhism maintains the validity of the moral law.
was eternal or not eternal. Had He given an affirmative reply or a negative one to either
 
question it would have been in a sense untrue. The Buddha’s reply, in effect, was that such
 
questions were not conducive to release from rebirth; but the implication always remained that
 
the true knowledge could be gained by oneself, through insight, though it could not be
 
imparted to others. The Iddhi, or so-called “supernatural powers” gained by the Arahats were
 
simply the knowledge of hidden laws of the universe and how to make use of them, but by
 
Buddha they were regarded as only another and greater obstacle to the attainment of freedom
 
and the quenching of desire.
 
  
 +
Buddhism admits
  
The law of causality is like an iceberg; only one eighth of it or less is visible above the surface.
+
the infinite multiplicity of worlds and the apparent insignificance of man—yet man is the mostsignificant of all beings, according to Buddhism, man is of more significance than the gods. Whyis this? Because the gods are merely enjoying temporarily the results of good actions in the past,but man is the master of his own destiny—on the battlefield of his own mind he can conquer theten thousand world-systems and put an end to saṃsāra, just as did the Buddha. But to do thishe must understand the nature of kamma. The principle that governs his internal and externalworld.
We observe the effects while remaining ignorant of the causes, just as when we switch on the
 
electric current and the light appears. The scientist Max Planck wrote: “What sense is there,
 
then, it may be asked, in talking of definite causal relations in regard to causes where nobody in
 
the world is capable of tracing their function? The answer to that question is simple. As has been
 
said again and again, the concept of causality is something transcendental—quite independent
 
of the nature of the researches, and it would be valid if there were no perceiving subject at all… .
 
We must distinguish between the validity of its [application]. This means that even the scientist
 
has to admit causes beyond his comprehension. The Buddha stated: “Whether Buddhas arise or
 
do not arise (to perceive and reveal the Law) the law of causality, the principle of the
 
dependence of this upon that, the causal sequence of events, remains a fixed and unalterable
 
law.
 
  
 +
According to the Aṅguttaranikāya,23 to believe that the cause of happiness or misery is God,Chance or Fate, leads to inaction. Our spiritual evolution depends upon ourselves and ourselvesalone. If there is any force behind the moral laws, any exercise of free-will in the choice betweengood and evil, right and wrong, it stands to reason that there must be the possibility ofadvancing or degenerating, evolution. If progress upwards were a mechanical process and aforegone conclusion, there would be no point in any freedom of choice in a world of opposites.
  
“The concept of causality is something transcendental.” This is a significant phrase indeed,
+
The Threes, No. 61; translated in Aṅguttara Nikāya, An Anthology. Part I, (The Wheel No. 155/158), p.
coming from a scientist. It is just in this transcendental concept of the causal law that Buddhism
 
establishes the moral principle of kamma. The materialist rejects the idea of God and Soul; and
 
because he sees no evidence of a spiritual or other purpose in life, he rejects all belief in the
 
moral order of the universe as well. Buddhism also is independent of a theistic creator and of a
 
soul or ego principle, but Buddhism maintains the validity of the moral law.  
 
  
  
Buddhism admits
 
the infinite multiplicity of worlds and the apparent insignificance of man—yet man is the most
 
significant of all beings, according to Buddhism, man is of more significance than the gods. Why
 
is this? Because the gods are merely enjoying temporarily the results of good actions in the past,
 
but man is the master of his own destiny—on the battlefield of his own mind he can conquer the
 
ten thousand world-systems and put an end to saṃsāra, just as did the Buddha. But to do this
 
he must understand the nature of kamma. The principle that governs his internal and external
 
world.
 
  
 +
The nineteenth-century Darwinists believed that the course of biological evolutionrepresented a steady upward progression from rudimentary to complex forms of life, and hencefrom primitive social structures to higher states of civilization. On this too-facile assumption,with its essentially materialistic basis, they built up an edifice of optimistic belief in the destinyof mankind.
  
According to the Aṅguttaranikāya,23 to believe that the cause of happiness or misery is God,
+
It was thought that humanity itself would automatically improve with the increaseof knowledge, and perhaps evolve into a yet higher species. Later knowledge showed that theirsupposition was fundamentally false; they did not at that time know enough about theprocesses of natural selection or the history of the various links in the biological chain.
Chance or Fate, leads to inaction. Our spiritual evolution depends upon ourselves and ourselves
 
alone. If there is any force behind the moral laws, any exercise of free-will in the choice between
 
good and evil, right and wrong, it stands to reason that there must be the possibility of
 
advancing or degenerating, evolution. If progress upwards were a mechanical process and a
 
foregone conclusion, there would be no point in any freedom of choice in a world of opposites.
 
23 The Threes, No. 61; translated in Aṅguttara Nikāya, An Anthology. Part I, (The Wheel No. 155/158), p.
 
43.
 
  
The nineteenth-century Darwinists believed that the course of biological evolution
+
Evolution, we now know, does not move consistently upwards nor, as Karl Marx postulated, inan ascending spiral. It progresses in waves, and the currents produced by it are continuallychanging direction, often turning back to their point of origin. Some species improve, whileothers degenerate and disappear.
represented a steady upward progression from rudimentary to complex forms of life, and hence
 
from primitive social structures to higher states of civilization. On this too-facile assumption,
 
with its essentially materialistic basis, they built up an edifice of optimistic belief in the destiny
 
of mankind. It was thought that humanity itself would automatically improve with the increase
 
of knowledge, and perhaps evolve into a yet higher species. Later knowledge showed that their
 
supposition was fundamentally false; they did not at that time know enough about the
 
processes of natural selection or the history of the various links in the biological chain.
 
Evolution, we now know, does not move consistently upwards nor, as Karl Marx postulated, in
 
an ascending spiral. It progresses in waves, and the currents produced by it are continually
 
changing direction, often turning back to their point of origin. Some species improve, while
 
others degenerate and disappear.  
 
  
 
Evolution may be depicted on a graph as a succession of
 
Evolution may be depicted on a graph as a succession of
ascending and descending curves, but its most representative form is that of a circle. Whatever
 
steady upward movement there may be is more an individual movement than a collective one.
 
It is essentially the individual that evolves, and the illusion of collective evolution follows upon
 
the appearance of groups (e.g., the human species) whose individual members have reached a
 
certain level of being with sufficient uniformity to constitute a type. This comes about through
 
the operation of incalculable factors in their past personal history, which science does not take
 
into account because they are not normally open to scientific investigation. Those unknown
 
factors are the kammas, or activities, which relate man’s being to the moral principles of the
 
universe.
 
  
 +
ascending and descending curves, but its most representative form is that of a circle. Whateversteady upward movement there may be is more an individual movement than a collective one.
  
If it were true that evolution takes place solely on a physical basis and is consistently
+
It is essentially the individual that evolves, and the illusion of collective evolution follows uponthe appearance of groups (e.g., the human species) whose individual members have reached acertain level of being with sufficient uniformity to constitute a type. This comes about throughthe operation of incalculable factors in their past personal history, which science does not takeinto account because they are not normally open to scientific investigation. Those unknownfactors are the kammas, or activities, which relate man’s being to the moral principles of theuniverse.
progressive, all human beings at any specific stage would display uniform characteristics; it is
 
only by taking the individualist and spiritual view that we can explain the appearance of a
 
Buddha, or, indeed of any lesser leader who has shown himself to be far in advance of his
 
contemporaries.
 
  
 +
If it were true that evolution takes place solely on a physical basis and is consistentlyprogressive, all human beings at any specific stage would display uniform characteristics; it isonly by taking the individualist and spiritual view that we can explain the appearance of aBuddha, or, indeed of any lesser leader who has shown himself to be far in advance of hiscontemporaries.
 +
 +
The analogy of a wave or ripple, travelling in a circle, is perhaps the best symbol of theindividual evolutionary current. Just as in biological evolution there are advances andrecessions, successes and failures, so in spiritual evolution the individual sometimes rises andsometimes falls. There is no stability and no constant direction to his course. Because of hisactions he may take birth as a human being, only to fall from that relatively high estate tobecome once more an animal.
  
The analogy of a wave or ripple, travelling in a circle, is perhaps the best symbol of the
 
individual evolutionary current. Just as in biological evolution there are advances and
 
recessions, successes and failures, so in spiritual evolution the individual sometimes rises and
 
sometimes falls. There is no stability and no constant direction to his course. Because of his
 
actions he may take birth as a human being, only to fall from that relatively high estate to
 
become once more an animal.
 
  
 
This is what the Buddha called “drifting in the ocean of saṃsāra”
 
This is what the Buddha called “drifting in the ocean of saṃsāra”
and those who see the processes of biological evolution also as a purposeless, meaningless
+
 
drifting, can trace a close correspondence between the manifested material laws and the
+
 
invisible spiritual ones that motivate them. The materialist who declares that life has no ultimate
+
and those who see the processes of biological evolution also as a purposeless, meaninglessdrifting, can trace a close correspondence between the manifested material laws and theinvisible spiritual ones that motivate them. The materialist who declares that life has no ultimatepurpose is making a safe deduction from the evidence available to him.  
purpose is making a safe deduction from the evidence available to him. In the material sense it
+
 
has no purpose, and can never arrive at a state of perfection. But he is only considering the
+
In the material sense ithas no purpose, and can never arrive at a state of perfection. But he is only considering thematerial aspect of life and ignoring its spiritual undercurrents, which are in reality the truedetermining factors behind phenomenal appearances. It is to those that we have to turn whenwe seek for a meaning and objective in our mundane existence. Knowledge—or rather, paññā—gives us sight of the goal and the means of attaining it. We do not find the meaning of lifewithin the circle of evolutionary Processes, but outside it.
material aspect of life and ignoring its spiritual undercurrents, which are in reality the true
 
determining factors behind phenomenal appearances. It is to those that we have to turn when
 
we seek for a meaning and objective in our mundane existence. Knowledge—or rather, paññā—
 
gives us sight of the goal and the means of attaining it. We do not find the meaning of life
 
within the circle of evolutionary Processes, but outside it.
 
  
  
  
The astronomer Jeans has voiced the spirit of modern scientific logic in his conclusion that the
+
The astronomer Jeans has voiced the spirit of modern scientific logic in his conclusion that themore we come to know of the universe and its Workings, the more surely are we driven to thebelief that it is in some way the manifestation of thought, or of some kind of mental processcomparable to our own. Where other scientists quarrel with his view is on the ground that itappears to savour of a return to the discarded idea of a personal creator-god.  
more we come to know of the universe and its Workings, the more surely are we driven to the
 
belief that it is in some way the manifestation of thought, or of some kind of mental process
 
comparable to our own. Where other scientists quarrel with his view is on the ground that it
 
appears to savour of a return to the discarded idea of a personal creator-god. It is precisely here
 
that Buddhism bridges the gulf between religious and scientific thought. For Buddhism, while
 
endorsing the view that the ultimate basis of the universe is mind, does not require a god, or
 
  
any external agency, to provide that mind. The processes of the evolving (saṃvatta) and
+
It is precisely herethat Buddhism bridges the gulf between religious and scientific thought. For Buddhism, whileendorsing the view that the ultimate basis of the universe is mind, does not require a god, orany external agency, to provide that mind. The processes of the evolving (saṃvatta) anddevolving (vivatta) universe are carried on by the mental activities of the sentient beings that area part of it. It is this mind-force, not that of any god, that causes the physical universe tomaterialise and go through the stages of growth, decay and dissolution.
devolving (vivatta) universe are carried on by the mental activities of the sentient beings that are
 
a part of it. It is this mind-force, not that of any god, that causes the physical universe to
 
materialise and go through the stages of growth, decay and dissolution.
 
  
  
The starting-point of all mental and bodily activities is craving—the taṇhā of Buddhist
+
The starting-point of all mental and bodily activities is craving—the taṇhā of Buddhistphilosophy. In the lowest grades of evolution this craving is supreme, and there it meanscravings of purely sensual and material kind. The individual evolves spiritually by rising abovethese, but at any stage of his progress be is liable to become possessed once more by the lowerforms of craving, and so may sink down again.  
philosophy. In the lowest grades of evolution this craving is supreme, and there it means
 
cravings of purely sensual and material kind. The individual evolves spiritually by rising above
 
these, but at any stage of his progress be is liable to become possessed once more by the lower
 
forms of craving, and so may sink down again. As a human being he becomes a battleground in
 
which the lower cravings struggle against higher ones, represented by cravings that we may
 
class as intellectual, aesthetic or even spiritual. When the higher cravings triumph we call it in
 
modern parlance “sublimation,” but this sublimation is merely the replacement of grosser
 
cravings by more intellectualised ones. To put an end to the aimless drifting in saṃsāra, even
 
these sublimated cravings must be abandoned.  
 
  
 +
As a human being he becomes a battleground inwhich the lower cravings struggle against higher ones, represented by cravings that we mayclass as intellectual, aesthetic or even spiritual. When the higher cravings triumph we call it inmodern parlance “sublimation,” but this sublimation is merely the replacement of grossercravings by more intellectualised ones. To put an end to the aimless drifting in saṃsāra, eventhese sublimated cravings must be abandoned.
  
 
They are called rūpa-rāga and arūpa-rāga—desire
 
They are called rūpa-rāga and arūpa-rāga—desire
for life in the worlds of form and in the formless, purely intellectualised spheres For example,
 
the artist who has sublimated his lower instincts into an aesthetic appreciation of the beauty of
 
nature and the human form, provided he has lived in accordance with moral laws (which
 
sublimation enables him to do), is likely to re-manifest in the sphere of the rūpa deva-lokas, where
 
beauty of form is the characteristic quality. But a philosopher, or ascetic who has sublimated his
 
instincts into a love of abstract thought, meditation or any such activity divorced from material
 
contexts, qualifies himself for rebirth in the arūpa Brahmā-lokas where existence is non-material
 
and consists purely of zones of mental force. This is the highest type of evolutionary existence in
 
saṃsāra, in which craving is reduced to its lowest ebb and most etherealised form; yet, because
 
craving is still present, the being who has attained this condition may still continue to drift in
 
the currents of saṃsāra. Complete release from the cycle of existence only comes with
 
destruction of craving and the ego-delusion. This is Nibbāna.
 
  
 +
for life in the worlds of form and in the formless, purely intellectualised spheres For example,the artist who has sublimated his lower instincts into an aesthetic appreciation of the beauty ofnature and the human form, provided he has lived in accordance with moral laws (whichsublimation enables him to do), is likely to re-manifest in the sphere of the rūpa deva-lokas, wherebeauty of form is the characteristic quality.
 +
 +
But a philosopher, or ascetic who has sublimated hisinstincts into a love of abstract thought, meditation or any such activity divorced from materialcontexts, qualifies himself for rebirth in the arūpa Brahmā-lokas where existence is non-materialand consists purely of zones of mental force. This is the highest type of evolutionary existence insaṃsāra, in which craving is reduced to its lowest ebb and most etherealised form; yet, becausecraving is still present, the being who has attained this condition may still continue to drift inthe currents of saṃsāra. Complete release from the cycle of existence only comes withdestruction of craving and the ego-delusion. This is Nibbāna.
  
From the foregoing account of the physical universe as it is viewed by Buddhism and modern
+
From the foregoing account of the physical universe as it is viewed by Buddhism and modernscience—that is, as a cyclic process extending over unimaginable aeons—we see that it isincorrect to equate the beginning of life with the beginning of the earth, the solar system or eventhis particular universe. The question still remains in what way did life originate, however farback in time its beginning may have been?
science—that is, as a cyclic process extending over unimaginable aeons—we see that it is
 
incorrect to equate the beginning of life with the beginning of the earth, the solar system or even
 
this particular universe. The question still remains in what way did life originate, however far
 
back in time its beginning may have been?
 
  
 +
Science does not provide any solution. It puts forward a tentative theory that sentient lifeappeared on this earth through a technical process combined with the action of cosmic rays andthe heat of the sun. But this is only a theory, and may-well be modified, though it is interestingto note in passing that the Buddhist doctrine that living beings appeared through the action oftejo (kinetic energy) combined with: utu (utuja meaning arisen from seasonable circumstancesand physical law of causation), offers a similar explanation so far as mundane life is concerned.
  
Science does not provide any solution. It puts forward a tentative theory that sentient life
+
This, in any case, only carries speculation back to the beginning of life on this planet, but theactual origin we seek is the beginning of life from a point where there was no preceding cause,and this cannot be found.
appeared on this earth through a technical process combined with the action of cosmic rays and
 
the heat of the sun. But this is only a theory, and may-well be modified, though it is interesting
 
to note in passing that the Buddhist doctrine that living beings appeared through the action of
 
tejo (kinetic energy) combined with: utu (utuja meaning arisen from seasonable circumstances
 
and physical law of causation), offers a similar explanation so far as mundane life is concerned.
 
This, in any case, only carries speculation back to the beginning of life on this planet, but the
 
actual origin we seek is the beginning of life from a point where there was no preceding cause,
 
and this cannot be found.
 
Theistic religion also fails to answer the question. In ascribing the origin of living creatures to
 
a Creator-god it still leaves unanswered the problem of how and why the god himself came into
 
being. If a god can exist, though uncreated, there is no reason why the other phenomena of the
 
universe should not exist without having been created also.
 
  
 +
Theistic religion also fails to answer the question. In ascribing the origin of living creatures toa Creator-god it still leaves unanswered the problem of how and why the god himself came intobeing. If a god can exist, though uncreated, there is no reason why the other phenomena of theuniverse should not exist without having been created also.
  
The actual truth is that the idea of the necessity for creation or, in other words, the search for
+
The actual truth is that the idea of the necessity for creation or, in other words, the search fora beginning of the causal process, springs from the limitations of the human mind, which canonly conceive phenomenal things in their arising, decay and dissolution. In the circle of causallinks there is no First Cause.  
a beginning of the causal process, springs from the limitations of the human mind, which can
 
only conceive phenomenal things in their arising, decay and dissolution. In the circle of causal
 
links there is no First Cause. The universe could not have been created out of nothingness
 
  
 +
The universe could not have been created out of nothingnessbecause in a condition of void, empty of phenomena and events, there could be no pro-existenceof time. As a concept, time can only exist in relation to physical bodies and their movements inspace; this is the basis of Einstein’s “space-time continuum.”
  
because in a condition of void, empty of phenomena and events, there could be no pro-existence
+
It is apparent, therefore, that timecould not have existed prior to the existence of the physical universe on which it depends. But,for an act of creation to take place, there must be time already in existence because creationrequires the three phases of time; i. e., past (before the thing created came into being), present(the phase of its momentary existence) and future (the time of its continued existence andultimate cessation).
of time. As a concept, time can only exist in relation to physical bodies and their movements in
 
space; this is the basis of Einstein’s “space-time continuum.” It is apparent, therefore, that time
 
could not have existed prior to the existence of the physical universe on which it depends. But,
 
for an act of creation to take place, there must be time already in existence because creation
 
requires the three phases of time; i. e., past (before the thing created came into being), present
 
(the phase of its momentary existence) and future (the time of its continued existence and
 
ultimate cessation).  
 
  
 
Without the existence of time in these three phases there could not be any
 
Without the existence of time in these three phases there could not be any
point at which a thing not existing previously could come into being. And without the physical
+
 
universe there cannot be any concept of time unrelated to change, spatial movement or events.
+
 
All human reasoning ends in a paradox because it follows the periphery of a circle, the sphere
+
point at which a thing not existing previously could come into being. And without the physicaluniverse there cannot be any concept of time unrelated to change, spatial movement or events.
embracing time, space and phenomena. All that reason can do is to show that the process of
+
 
saṃsāra is without any discoverable beginning and that a first cause, in the sense in which we
+
 
understand it, is not only unnecessary, but impossible. The truth can only be gained by Insight,
+
All human reasoning ends in a paradox because it follows the periphery of a circle, the sphereembracing time, space and phenomena. All that reason can do is to show that the process ofsaṃsāra is without any discoverable beginning and that a first cause, in the sense in which weunderstand it, is not only unnecessary, but impossible. The truth can only be gained by Insight,in accordance with the teachings of the Exalted Buddha, which means rising above the realm ofrelative and conditioned factors. That point being gained, it will be found that there is noanswer to the problem, but that the problem never existed, save as an illusory product ofIgnorance (avijjā)
in accordance with the teachings of the Exalted Buddha, which means rising above the realm of
+
 
relative and conditioned factors. That point being gained, it will be found that there is no
+
 
answer to the problem, but that the problem never existed, save as an illusory product of
+
 
Ignorance (avijjā)
+
 
 +
 
 +
 
 +
 
 +
 
 +
{{E}}
 +
[[Category:Buddhist Cosmology]]

Revision as of 08:27, 30 June 2019

Mindewtyy.jpg






The Buddha did not give any specific teaching regarding the origin of the universe or of life. Thequestion was said to be unanswerable from the level of ordinary mundane intelligence In theAṅguttara Nikāya it is said: “The origin of beings revolving in saṃsāra, being cloaked by avijjā(ignorance) is undiscoverable.” At the same time it is laid down, as a natural consequence of thelaw of Dependent Origination (paṭicca samuppāda) that in the ceaseless cycle of cause and effectthere cannot be any link in the sequence that can be designated a first cause. Each effect in itsturn becomes a cause, and the beginning is nowhere apparent; it is a closed circle of relatedconditions, each factor being dependent on the preceding ones.

The early Buddhists, because of this silence on the part of the Buddha, and His unwillingnessto attempt the hopeless task of explaining the inexplicable, took their ideas concerning thenature of the universe from the Brahmanical teachings already current in India. These, becauseof their remarkable correspondence to modern scientific concepts, are well worth examination.

In the first place, it must be realised that the Vedic teachings, because of the lack of technicaland scientific knowledge and the necessary vocabulary in which to express such modes ofthought, used allegory and symbolism, much of it being of a primitive and animistic kind. Theearly Buddhists found the concepts of Brahman and Ātman unnecessary and, while adhering inoutline to the Brahmanical idea of the universe, they considered it to be self-sustained by lawsinherent in its own nature, the whole group of laws being part of the universal law of kamma,or cause and effect. The universe consists of innumerable cakkavāḷas or world systems. Thesecome into being and pass away again in an endless cycle covering periods of millions of years,called kappas and yugas.

The system of chronology is complicated and unthinkably immense, as

is the number of inhabited World-systems in this cosmic mechanism. It is unnecessary to go intothe divisions of time in detail, but a sufficient indication of their tremendous span can be gainedfrom the fact that a yuga is equivalent to several millennia, and that eight of these yugas,representing a cycle, makes one small or antara kappa. Twenty small kappas constitute a middleor asaṅkheyya kappa, and a full cycle of four middle kappas is called a great or mahā kappa, whichis the largest unit of calculation. Each great kappa is the cyclic period of a world-system, duringwhich the entire process of coming into being, existence, decay and destruction is brought intooperation. After the destruction of a world-system another immense period of time elapses, atthe end of which the process begins over again, the whole being repeated ceaselessly, withoutbeginning or end.

Turning to the Brahmanical theory we find a similar general pattern of events. Vedantateaches that the cycles of the universe are divided into the “days and nights of Brahmā.” In thebeginning the whole of the basic material substance of the universe is evenly distributedthroughout space. This material substance is called Prakṛti (matter) and is to be considered asatomic units in a state of almost complete balance and almost complete inertia. Gradually, overunimaginable aeons of time, a slight movement in this vast ocean of matter gathers impetus andgradually the mass comes to life. In Vedantic phraseology it is said that Prakṛti is animated byPuruṣa or Spirit; the Brahman is manifesting through the material substance. This substancebecomes differentiated into worlds, and living beings appear. Cosmic evolution then comes intoplay and the cycle of the universe runs its course, through development and degeneration todecay. When the period of the cycle is completed the universe disintegrates and returns to thesame state of undifferentiated material elements as before. Again the process repeats itself,without beginning and without end.

The Buddhist view is much the same, except that, as stated before, in place of the Brahman orany controlling deity Buddhism substitutes the law of cause and effect; one universe or world�system arises from the kamma, or causal genesis, of the one preceding it.

The Visuddhimagga summarises the process thus:

“ Na h’ettha devo brahmā va

saṃsārass’atthi kārako,

Suddhadhammā pavattanti

Hetusambhārapaccayāti “

“There is no god or Brahmā who is the creator of this world. Empty phenomena rollon, all subject to causality.”

The astronomers Jeans and Eddington are among those who have attempted some speculationregarding the origin of the universe. Eddington, calculating the recession of the spiral nebulaefrom the colour changes in the spectrum, has formed the theory that the entire universe is inprocess of expansion. The countless planets and solar systems comprising it are governed by thelaw of cosmic attraction and repulsion, which is a law inherent in the nature of matter. It is thislaw which holds together all the material substance of which the universe is composed, from thesmallest atomic units to the largest planet. It is believed that in the course of expansion of theuniverse one of two things will, eventually, happen: either it will reach its maximum point ofexpansion and the law of cosmic repulsion will cause the atomic elements to scatter throughoutspace, or else the law of cosmic attraction will gain the upper hand and the process will bereversed, causing the universe to shrink back on itself.

In either case, the ultimate result will

probably be the same; that is, the atomic elements will become uniformly distributedthroughout space. Eddington has also hazarded the guess that this is the primal state fromwhich the universe first took form, that is to say that his imaginative picture of it before“creation” is very similar to that of the Vedantic and Buddhist conception. Again, we are toimagine the whole of space filled with atoms, electrons and neutrons in an almost perfect stateof balance and homogeneity. In this undifferentiated mass there is only a slight movement orvibration, but over incalculable aeons the movement becomes more pronounced as the law ofcosmic attraction and repulsion comes into play. Gradually the even distribution of substanceforms clots, masses of electronic particles being drawn together, so that in time whirling massesof gaseous matter are formed, and from these emerge what astronomers call the “islanduniverses“ - that is to say, systems forming themselves round a central nucleus, like our ownsolar system. It is obvious that this process, as in the Buddhist system, can be repeat over andover again.

In this way science does away with the need for a creator god, but still it has not explainedthe origin of the movement in the inert matter, which carries the process forward. Buddhismexplains it as being kamma, that is, the principle of the indestructibility of force or energy. Themovement is the residuum of activity from the previous universe, which never entirely ceases,though that universe itself has ceased to exist. When we examine the operation of kamma as itfunctions in the rebirth of living organisms it becomes possible to relate it to the cosmic processand trace the parallel between the kamma of a sentient being and the kamma of materialphenomena.

From this comparison of modern scientific ideas and the teachings of over two thousandyears ago it will be seen how strikingly they agree. The question then arises: How was itpossible for the sages of that remote period to penetrate the illusion of material substance andfind that it was composed of electronic forces, and to form so accurate an idea of the nature ofthe universe and its processes? The answer can only lie in the belief that they were able to raisetheir consciousness beyond the sphere of the mundane, through the practise of jhāna ormeditation. They had no laboratory equipment, no microscopes or telescopes and nomathematical formulae to guide them; and, when they had made their discovery they had notechnical language or common basis of knowledge by which to impart their discoveries toothers. It would indeed have been hopeless for the Buddha to attempt a description of thenature of the universe on these lines; no one of His time would have been capable ofunderstanding Him.


That is why He refused to answer questions concerning the origin of the world or whether itwas eternal or not eternal. Had He given an affirmative reply or a negative one to eitherquestion it would have been in a sense untrue. The Buddha’s reply, in effect, was that suchquestions were not conducive to release from rebirth; but the implication always remained thatthe true knowledge could be gained by oneself, through insight, though it could not beimparted to others. The Iddhi, or so-called “supernatural powers” gained by the Arahats weresimply the knowledge of hidden laws of the universe and how to make use of them, but byBuddha they were regarded as only another and greater obstacle to the attainment of freedomand the quenching of desire.

The law of causality is like an iceberg; only one eighth of it or less is visible above the surface.

We observe the effects while remaining ignorant of the causes, just as when we switch on theelectric current and the light appears. The scientist Max Planck wrote: “What sense is there,then, it may be asked, in talking of definite causal relations in regard to causes where nobody inthe world is capable of tracing their function? The answer to that question is simple. As has beensaid again and again, the concept of causality is something transcendental—quite independentof the nature of the researches, and it would be valid if there were no perceiving subject at all… .We must distinguish between the validity of its [application]. This means that even the scientisthas to admit causes beyond his comprehension. The Buddha stated: “Whether Buddhas arise ordo not arise (to perceive and reveal the Law) the law of causality, the principle of thedependence of this upon that, the causal sequence of events, remains a fixed and unalterablelaw.”

“The concept of causality is something transcendental.” This is a significant phrase indeed,coming from a scientist. It is just in this transcendental concept of the causal law that Buddhismestablishes the moral principle of kamma. The materialist rejects the idea of God and Soul; andbecause he sees no evidence of a spiritual or other purpose in life, he rejects all belief in themoral order of the universe as well. Buddhism also is independent of a theistic creator and of asoul or ego principle, but Buddhism maintains the validity of the moral law.

Buddhism admits

the infinite multiplicity of worlds and the apparent insignificance of man—yet man is the mostsignificant of all beings, according to Buddhism, man is of more significance than the gods. Whyis this? Because the gods are merely enjoying temporarily the results of good actions in the past,but man is the master of his own destiny—on the battlefield of his own mind he can conquer theten thousand world-systems and put an end to saṃsāra, just as did the Buddha. But to do thishe must understand the nature of kamma. The principle that governs his internal and externalworld.

According to the Aṅguttaranikāya,23 to believe that the cause of happiness or misery is God,Chance or Fate, leads to inaction. Our spiritual evolution depends upon ourselves and ourselvesalone. If there is any force behind the moral laws, any exercise of free-will in the choice betweengood and evil, right and wrong, it stands to reason that there must be the possibility ofadvancing or degenerating, evolution. If progress upwards were a mechanical process and aforegone conclusion, there would be no point in any freedom of choice in a world of opposites.

The Threes, No. 61; translated in Aṅguttara Nikāya, An Anthology. Part I, (The Wheel No. 155/158), p.


The nineteenth-century Darwinists believed that the course of biological evolutionrepresented a steady upward progression from rudimentary to complex forms of life, and hencefrom primitive social structures to higher states of civilization. On this too-facile assumption,with its essentially materialistic basis, they built up an edifice of optimistic belief in the destinyof mankind.

It was thought that humanity itself would automatically improve with the increaseof knowledge, and perhaps evolve into a yet higher species. Later knowledge showed that theirsupposition was fundamentally false; they did not at that time know enough about theprocesses of natural selection or the history of the various links in the biological chain.

Evolution, we now know, does not move consistently upwards nor, as Karl Marx postulated, inan ascending spiral. It progresses in waves, and the currents produced by it are continuallychanging direction, often turning back to their point of origin. Some species improve, whileothers degenerate and disappear.

Evolution may be depicted on a graph as a succession of

ascending and descending curves, but its most representative form is that of a circle. Whateversteady upward movement there may be is more an individual movement than a collective one.

It is essentially the individual that evolves, and the illusion of collective evolution follows uponthe appearance of groups (e.g., the human species) whose individual members have reached acertain level of being with sufficient uniformity to constitute a type. This comes about throughthe operation of incalculable factors in their past personal history, which science does not takeinto account because they are not normally open to scientific investigation. Those unknownfactors are the kammas, or activities, which relate man’s being to the moral principles of theuniverse.

If it were true that evolution takes place solely on a physical basis and is consistentlyprogressive, all human beings at any specific stage would display uniform characteristics; it isonly by taking the individualist and spiritual view that we can explain the appearance of aBuddha, or, indeed of any lesser leader who has shown himself to be far in advance of hiscontemporaries.

The analogy of a wave or ripple, travelling in a circle, is perhaps the best symbol of theindividual evolutionary current. Just as in biological evolution there are advances andrecessions, successes and failures, so in spiritual evolution the individual sometimes rises andsometimes falls. There is no stability and no constant direction to his course. Because of hisactions he may take birth as a human being, only to fall from that relatively high estate tobecome once more an animal.


This is what the Buddha called “drifting in the ocean of saṃsāra”


and those who see the processes of biological evolution also as a purposeless, meaninglessdrifting, can trace a close correspondence between the manifested material laws and theinvisible spiritual ones that motivate them. The materialist who declares that life has no ultimatepurpose is making a safe deduction from the evidence available to him.

In the material sense ithas no purpose, and can never arrive at a state of perfection. But he is only considering thematerial aspect of life and ignoring its spiritual undercurrents, which are in reality the truedetermining factors behind phenomenal appearances. It is to those that we have to turn whenwe seek for a meaning and objective in our mundane existence. Knowledge—or rather, paññā—gives us sight of the goal and the means of attaining it. We do not find the meaning of lifewithin the circle of evolutionary Processes, but outside it.


The astronomer Jeans has voiced the spirit of modern scientific logic in his conclusion that themore we come to know of the universe and its Workings, the more surely are we driven to thebelief that it is in some way the manifestation of thought, or of some kind of mental processcomparable to our own. Where other scientists quarrel with his view is on the ground that itappears to savour of a return to the discarded idea of a personal creator-god.

It is precisely herethat Buddhism bridges the gulf between religious and scientific thought. For Buddhism, whileendorsing the view that the ultimate basis of the universe is mind, does not require a god, orany external agency, to provide that mind. The processes of the evolving (saṃvatta) anddevolving (vivatta) universe are carried on by the mental activities of the sentient beings that area part of it. It is this mind-force, not that of any god, that causes the physical universe tomaterialise and go through the stages of growth, decay and dissolution.


The starting-point of all mental and bodily activities is craving—the taṇhā of Buddhistphilosophy. In the lowest grades of evolution this craving is supreme, and there it meanscravings of purely sensual and material kind. The individual evolves spiritually by rising abovethese, but at any stage of his progress be is liable to become possessed once more by the lowerforms of craving, and so may sink down again.

As a human being he becomes a battleground inwhich the lower cravings struggle against higher ones, represented by cravings that we mayclass as intellectual, aesthetic or even spiritual. When the higher cravings triumph we call it inmodern parlance “sublimation,” but this sublimation is merely the replacement of grossercravings by more intellectualised ones. To put an end to the aimless drifting in saṃsāra, eventhese sublimated cravings must be abandoned.

They are called rūpa-rāga and arūpa-rāga—desire

for life in the worlds of form and in the formless, purely intellectualised spheres For example,the artist who has sublimated his lower instincts into an aesthetic appreciation of the beauty ofnature and the human form, provided he has lived in accordance with moral laws (whichsublimation enables him to do), is likely to re-manifest in the sphere of the rūpa deva-lokas, wherebeauty of form is the characteristic quality.

But a philosopher, or ascetic who has sublimated hisinstincts into a love of abstract thought, meditation or any such activity divorced from materialcontexts, qualifies himself for rebirth in the arūpa Brahmā-lokas where existence is non-materialand consists purely of zones of mental force. This is the highest type of evolutionary existence insaṃsāra, in which craving is reduced to its lowest ebb and most etherealised form; yet, becausecraving is still present, the being who has attained this condition may still continue to drift inthe currents of saṃsāra. Complete release from the cycle of existence only comes withdestruction of craving and the ego-delusion. This is Nibbāna.

From the foregoing account of the physical universe as it is viewed by Buddhism and modernscience—that is, as a cyclic process extending over unimaginable aeons—we see that it isincorrect to equate the beginning of life with the beginning of the earth, the solar system or eventhis particular universe. The question still remains in what way did life originate, however farback in time its beginning may have been?

Science does not provide any solution. It puts forward a tentative theory that sentient lifeappeared on this earth through a technical process combined with the action of cosmic rays andthe heat of the sun. But this is only a theory, and may-well be modified, though it is interestingto note in passing that the Buddhist doctrine that living beings appeared through the action oftejo (kinetic energy) combined with: utu (utuja meaning arisen from seasonable circumstancesand physical law of causation), offers a similar explanation so far as mundane life is concerned.

This, in any case, only carries speculation back to the beginning of life on this planet, but theactual origin we seek is the beginning of life from a point where there was no preceding cause,and this cannot be found.

Theistic religion also fails to answer the question. In ascribing the origin of living creatures toa Creator-god it still leaves unanswered the problem of how and why the god himself came intobeing. If a god can exist, though uncreated, there is no reason why the other phenomena of theuniverse should not exist without having been created also.

The actual truth is that the idea of the necessity for creation or, in other words, the search fora beginning of the causal process, springs from the limitations of the human mind, which canonly conceive phenomenal things in their arising, decay and dissolution. In the circle of causallinks there is no First Cause.

The universe could not have been created out of nothingnessbecause in a condition of void, empty of phenomena and events, there could be no pro-existenceof time. As a concept, time can only exist in relation to physical bodies and their movements inspace; this is the basis of Einstein’s “space-time continuum.”

It is apparent, therefore, that timecould not have existed prior to the existence of the physical universe on which it depends. But,for an act of creation to take place, there must be time already in existence because creationrequires the three phases of time; i. e., past (before the thing created came into being), present(the phase of its momentary existence) and future (the time of its continued existence andultimate cessation).

Without the existence of time in these three phases there could not be any


point at which a thing not existing previously could come into being. And without the physicaluniverse there cannot be any concept of time unrelated to change, spatial movement or events.


All human reasoning ends in a paradox because it follows the periphery of a circle, the sphereembracing time, space and phenomena. All that reason can do is to show that the process ofsaṃsāra is without any discoverable beginning and that a first cause, in the sense in which weunderstand it, is not only unnecessary, but impossible. The truth can only be gained by Insight,in accordance with the teachings of the Exalted Buddha, which means rising above the realm ofrelative and conditioned factors. That point being gained, it will be found that there is noanswer to the problem, but that the problem never existed, save as an illusory product ofIgnorance (avijjā)