Critical considerations regarding Buddhism
Although it was meant to bring a whole new perspective on
what Hinduism had to say on Ultimate Reality, man and liberation, Theravada
Buddhism could not escape some basic inconsistencies. Let us summarize the most
debated:
Reincarnation without a self
One of the key elements in Theravada Buddhism is the denial of a self (atman). The illusion of personal existence (puggala) is considered to be the product of five aggregates (skandha), which are in a cause-effect relationship and suffer from constant becoming. Therefore, human existence is nothing but impermanence (anitya), a constant process of transformation devoid of any abiding principle. By reducing individual beings to a mere heap of aggregates which suffer from constant becoming, and by analysing these aggregates, the Buddha does not find any trace of a permanent self (Digha Nikaya 15; Samyutta Nikaya 22,59). The rejection of a self is considered important mostly for practical reasons. One should not engage in philosophical debates concerning the existence of a self (as well as the character of the universe and the existence of an Ultimate Reality), because this will only generate suffering and lead one astray from seeking liberation (Majjhima-nikaya 1,426).
But if there is no self, what reincarnates from one existence to another? Buddha stated that only karma passes from one life to another, determining a new configuration of the five aggregates in the next existence. Therefore samsara works without implying a self, relying only on a causal chain of determination. Such a strange definition of reincarnation has naturally raised strong objections from the opponents of Buddhism. Not only they contradict it, but even the Buddhist scriptures contain passages that are inconsistent with the lack of a self. Some of them seem to confirm the continuity of personal existence, or at least of an impersonal self along the reincarnation process. For instance, although the five aggregates are supposed to break apart after death and personhood supposed to vanish, it is stated that the dead will be judged by Yama, the god of death, and afterwards sent into hell and tormented for his sins (Khuddaka-nikaya 10,1,59). There are also many verses in the Dhammapada that mention personal post-mortem existence:
Some people are born again; evil-doers go to hell; righteous people go to heaven; those who are free from all worldly desires attain Nirvana. (Dhammapada 9,126. See also 10,140; 22,306-311.)
If speaking of someone going to hell or heaven does not mean an identical being, what role does this teaching play in Buddhism? If it is not an identical being going to hell, who is actually punished there and for what? Also, if terms such as hell, gods, and self are mere conventions of speech, as it is sometimes suggested, what is their actual meaning and role in the Buddha's teaching? There is no doubt that this Vedic reminiscence is totally inconsistent with the Buddhist doctrine of no-self.
On the other hand, if there is no self, on what basis could the Buddha have said, "This is my last birth, I will have no further existence" (Majjhima-nikaya 3)? Whose last birth is it, if there is no self to rebirth? There are also the texts in Khuddaka-nikaya 10 and the Jataka tales, referring to the previous lives of Buddha and his friends, in which each one's identity is always known, and the supranormal power of recollecting past lives attained in concentration (Digha Nikaya 12), that suggest that a certain core of personal identity must exist and be reincarnated from one life to the next. The text in the Digha Nikaya says:
He recollects his manifold past lives, i.e., one birth, two births, three births, four, five, ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, one hundred, one thousand, one hundred thousand, many aeons of cosmic contraction, many aeons of cosmic expansion, many aeons of cosmic contraction and expansion, [recollecting], 'There I had such a name, belonged to such a clan, had such an appearance. Such was my food, such my experience of pleasure & pain, such the end of my life. Passing away from that state, I re-arose there. There too I had such a name, belonged to such a clan, had such an appearance. Such was my food, such my experience of pleasure & pain, such the end of my life. Passing away from that state, I re-arose here.' Thus he recollects his manifold past lives in their modes and details.
The liberation of no self
The Buddhist term for liberation (nirvana) derives from the verbal root va (lit. "to blow") and the negation nir, from which its significance corresponds to the blowing out of a candle. Once man attains nirvana, the five aggregates are scattered forever at death without entering a new combination again. This corresponds to a total extinction of any ontological element that could define human existence. The scriptures state:
When a man is free from all
sense pleasures and depends on nothingness he is free in the supreme freedom
from perception. He will stay there and not return again. It is like a flame
struck by a sudden gust of wind. In a flash it has gone out and nothing more
can be known about it. It is the same with a wise man freed from mental
existence: in a flash he has gone out and nothing more can be known about him.
When a person has gone out, then there is nothing by which you can measure him.
That by which he can be talked about is no longer there for him; you cannot say
that he does not exist. When all ways of being, all phenomena are removed, then
all ways of description have also been removed.
(Sutta Nipata 1072-76)
Here is how the Buddha illustrated the destiny of the liberated being to the wanderer Vacchagotta, using the famous illustration of the extinguished fire:
And suppose someone were to ask
you, 'This fire that has gone out in front of you, in which direction from here
has it gone? East? West? North? Or south?' Thus asked, how would you reply?
That doesn't apply, Master Gotama. Any fire burning dependent on a
sustenance of grass and timber, being unnourished -- from having consumed that
sustenance and not being offered any other -- is classified simply as 'out'
(unbound).
Even so, Vaccha, any physical form by which one describing the Tathagata
would describe him: That the Tathagata has abandoned, its root destroyed, like
an uprooted palm tree, deprived of the conditions of existence, not destined
for future arising.
(Aggi-Vacchagotta Sutta, Majjhima Nikaya 72)
Therefore, nirvana is not just the cessation of hatred, infatuation, birth, old age, death, sorrow, lamentation, misery, grief, despair, etc., as modern Buddhist writers suggest. It is not just the cooling off and extinguishing of these things, and as a result, the ultimate peace one experiences when all conflicts are gone, but rather the extinction of any element that could define human existence. Unfortunately, nirvana also implies the extinction of the agent who experiences "hatred, infatuation, birth, old age, death, sorrow, lamentation, misery, grief, despair, etc.".
Once the adherent of Theravada Buddhism has attained nirvana, he becomes an arhat (“living enlightened one”). His karma is considered extinct and at the time of his death he will cease to exist. However, from a Buddhist point of view, this perspective isn't horrifying at all, because it represents the cessation of an illusion. When human existence is blown out, nothing real disappears because life itself is an illusion. Nirvana is neither a re-absorption in an eternal Ultimate Reality, because such a thing isn't stated in the Scriptures, nor the annihilation of a self, because there is no self to annihilate. It is rather an annihilation of the illusion of an existing self.
The Pali canon recollects an instance when Yamaka, one of the monks accompanying the Buddha, reached the conclusion that nirvana represents annihilation. He taught: "As I understand the Teaching explained by the Blessed One, a monk with no more effluents, on the break-up of the body, is annihilated, perishes, and does not exist after death" (Samyutta Nukaya 22,85). Another monk, Sariputta, explained that he had reached the wrong conclusion, following an interesting line of reasoning. He first offered an analysis of the aggregates, proved that they are inconstant, then proved that neither of them truly represents the Buddha, and finally said: "And so, my friend Yamaka - when you can't pin down the Tathagata as a truth or reality even in the present life - is it proper for you to declare, 'As I understand the Teaching explained by the Blessed One, a monk with no more effluents, on the break-up of the body, is annihilated, perishes, & does not exist after death'?" In other words, as long as you cannot claim that the Buddha is a truth or reality, neither can the annihilation theory be held. But this raises a new contradiction. How can any other of the many claims and doctrines enunciated by the Buddha be true if the founder himself was not a truth or reality?
Unlike in Hindu pantheism, which defines liberation as the fusion of atman
with Brahman, no one and nothing is attaining liberation. This means that nirvana
is a state of supreme bliss and freedom without any subject to experience it.
Paradoxically, Buddhism confers reality to this ultimate stage of moving toward
extinction, and the only proof of it, as expected, is the mystical experiences
one has on the way toward it. As the one engaged on the way to nirvana
experiences gradual liberation from illusory attachments, by extrapolation it
is speculated that there will follow a moment of reaching total freedom from
the present conditioned state. However, this reasoning is false, because the
domain of definition for freedom (personal existence) ends before
reaching the desired result. Nirvana is a state beyond any description,
knowledge and experience, with nobody and nothing left to reach it. It is the
liberation of an illusory combination of impermanent elements.
The meaning of morality
Following other impersonal Eastern religions, Buddhism values morality as an instrument for transcending personal existence, which is seen as the major hindrance to attaining liberation. Morality has no ultimate importance, but is only an instrument used for developing a detached status toward personal attachments and interests in life. Moral perfection (sila), i.e. right speech, action and livelihood, aims at annihilating one's false attachments to the world of illusion, by no way encouraging one's social involvement. As long as man is not an everlasting entity (a personal soul in theistic religions, or an impersonal atman in pantheism), but a mere mechanism which appears and disappears according to its karma, compassion toward one's neighbour is absurd. According to Buddhist teaching, bad habits such as envy, anger, gossip and pride must be abandoned, but not because other people may be hurt by them, but because they feed one's false ego and the thirst (trishna) for experiencing personal existence.
Although there are some texts that may suggest the contrary, such as the following in the Dhammapada:
All tremble at violence; all
fear death. Putting oneself in the place of another, one should not kill nor
cause another to kill.
All tremble at violence; life is dear to all. Putting oneself in the place
of another, one should not kill nor cause another to kill. (Dhammapada 129-130)
"putting oneself in the place of another" cannot represent here a real interest in one's neighbor welfare, as it cannot be consistent with the urge for obliterating personal existence. As there are no real subjects that can share love and compassion with one another, the moral demands serve only as an instrument for attaining liberation by the one who "puts himself in the place of another".
Because of its radical way of defining human existence, Theravada Buddhism
is criticized for developing a fatalist view of life. One can hardly become
socially involved in a world that is nothing but impermanence. Buddhism can be
followed best by monks, in retreat, away from any kind of social involvement.
As a result, contrary to its claims, Buddhism cannot solve the problem of human
suffering but only ignore it by redefining its meaning; it cannot help one have
a positive role in society but only a passive one; and it cannot give strength
for overcoming life's stress and tensions but only teach withdrawal from its
harsh realities.
Buddhist meditation and its experiences
The actual techniques used for attaining liberation belong to three categories: meditations (jhana), contemplations (samapatti) and concentrations (samadhi). The most important are those belonging to the second category, the contemplations, revealed by the Buddha in the famous Satipatthana-sutta (Majjhima-nikaya 10, Digha-nikaya 22). The four contemplation exercises focus on the physical body (kaya), the feelings (vedana), the mental states (citta) and the mental objects (dhamma). The false attachments they produce must be destroyed so that one can understand their impermanent nature.
As was the case in Yoga, psychologist Elizabeth Hillstrom points out in her book Testing the Spirits that instead of being glimpses of the impermanent nature of things, the experiences that accompany Buddhist contemplation on the mental states (citta samapatti) can be explained as misperceptions of the surrounding reality due to imposing on the senses and mind an abnormal way of functioning:
As meditators passively watch
their own mental states come and go without trying to control them, these begin
to fluctuate more and more rapidly and unpredictably. After a while this
chaotic activity creates the strong impression that the mental events are
springing into life on their own, from some separate source, rather than the
observer's own mind. As meditators persist with this practice, they also notice
that there is a definite separation between the mental events being observed
and the mind that is doing the observing. As meditation progresses still
further, both the mental events and the observing mind begin to seem alien and
impersonal, as if they do not really belong to the observer. At about this
point the meditator's sense of "self" becomes confused and weakened,
and finally it disappears entirely for brief periods of time. This experience
of dissolution strongly reinforces the Buddhist notion that there actually is
no such thing as an "I" or "myself" - that such concepts
are actually false constructions of the mind.
At still deeper levels, meditators eventually reach a stage in which their
awareness of events and the events themselves seem inextricably bound together
and the whole scene churns in a wild state of flux. Ideas, images and thoughts
seem to appear and then dissolve into nothingness with great rapidity. At this
point every aspect of mental life (and the physical world itself) seems
impermanent, transitory and alien, and disturbed meditators desperately want it
all to stop. Relief finally comes when meditators break through Nirvana, a
state in which all awareness of physical and mental phenomena ceases, at least
for a short time. Reaching this stage ostensibly produces permanent changes in
consciousness. Inner processes are set in motion which fill the meditator with
equanimity and bliss. These presumably destroy defiling mental states like
self-interest, ambition, greed and hatred, and ensure advanced placement in the
next life. When interpreted through Eastern lenses, these experiences strongly
reinforce the Buddhist belief that the physical universe, our concepts of self
and even our inner mental life are only illusions.
(E. Hillstrom, Testing the Spirits, IVP, 1995, p. 114-15)
The meditator's prior expectations, as induced by the guru,
as well as the refusal of any conscious control over the process, probably
contribute to a great extent to one's accepting the truthfulness of these
experiences. However, as long as they depend heavily upon forcing the mind to
work in improper conditions, they could rather represent perceptions of
defective cognitive phenomena than true perceptions of an Ultimate Reality.
Mahayana Buddhism and Hindu pantheism
According to the doctrine of momentariness (kshanikavada), not only the self is to be considered illusory, but also the five aggregates and all other aspects of the world. All things are impermanent and follow a continuous process of becoming. Therefore from an ontological point of view, everything is but a succession of transitory moments. The true nature of the world is the void (shunya), which is not non-existence or nothingness, but an Ultimate Reality free of any limitation, duality or determination. Like the Hindu Brahman, the void can be characterized only by refusing any positive attributes. Although Buddhism rejects the major definitions of Hindu Vedanta, the void is nothing but an acceptance of Brahman in disguise.
Following the pattern of Hindu pantheism, the world is considered to be the
manifestation of shunya, which is altogether the fundamental nature
(also called Buddha Nature) of any being that has to be discovered
through mystical introspection. Also, nirvana is explained by some
modern Buddhist authors by using the analogy of the waves on the ocean. The
waves have an individual existence only on the surface, but their essence is
fundamentally interconnected. Consequently, nirvana is explained as a
cessation of separate existence and a discovery of a deeper level of connection
with an impersonal Ultimate Reality, also called Reality itself. This is
nothing but an actualization of the atman-Brahman identity, and
therefore much of the criticism addressed to pantheism is valid here as well.
The boddhisattvas and grace
Instead of seeking nirvana just for himself and becoming an arhat, as Theravada Buddhism demands, the disciple of Mahayana Buddhism aims to become a bodhisattva, a being that postpones his own entrance into parinirvana (final extinction) in order to help other humans also attain it. As was the case with the Hindu avatars of Vishnu, the bodhisattvas are mediators between man and Ultimate Reality. Through devotion and proper moral conduct humans receive their grace and attain liberation. This new development has been interpreted as a penetration of the Hindu bhakti tradition into Buddhism.
However, we meet here the same contradiction between karma and grace as in theistic Hinduism. For instance, according to the Tibetan Book of the Dead, although the bodhisattvas offer their help to the dead person in order that he may attain a better new birth or even final liberation, he is unable to accept it because of the projection of his bad karma and the attraction of “samsaric impurities”, which make him fall deeper and deeper into the intermediary state (bardo). For this reason it is wrong to pretend that the bodhisattvas save the dead through their grace, as only the merits he has accumulated during lifetime make him able to accept the “rays of grace”. Therefore, it is either karma that rules one's existence and journey toward liberation, or the grace of the bodhisattvas. The two elements are hard to reconcile.
On the other hand, due to the rejection of any abiding principle that could define human existence, the idea of grace becomes absurd. Who is suffering and who needs the boddhisattvas' grace in order to be liberated, if personal existence is nothing but illusion? S. Dasgupta comments on this absurd situation:
The saint (bodhisattva) is firmly determined that he will help an infinite number of souls to attain nirvana. In reality, however, there are no beings, there is no bondage, no salvation; and the saint knows it but too well, yet he is not afraid of this high truth, but proceeds on his career of attaining for all illusory beings illusory emancipation from illusory bondage. The saint is actuated with that feeling and proceeds in his work on the strength of his paramitas, though in reality there is no one who is to attain salvation in reality and no one who is to help him attain it (S. Dasgupta, Indian Philosophy, vol. 1, p. 127).