Transmigration, Karma, and Enlightenment
When asked why the wind circle upholding the Sumeru realm did not disperse, Indian scholars said that it was held together by the force of the karma (“action”) of living beings. Indians believed that all action leaves behind results; good actions leave good results, and evil actions leave evil results. Therefore, action does not disappear as soon as it is completed. An unseen force remains, the consequence of both individual actions and the actions of all living beings taken together. Buddhism calls the entirety of action, including its results, combined karma or common karma. It is this combined karma that prevents the wind circle from dispersing.
The ideas of karma and transmigration are the foundation of Buddhist cosmology, whose purpose is to illuminate their nature and relationship to human existence. Unlike the modern scientific view of the cosmos, Buddhist cosmology is meaningless without the human element.
The Six Destinations of Rebirth
Transmigration (samsara) means the repeated cycle of birth and death in this realm of delusion. Literally “flowing together,” samsara is an expression of living beings buffeted by waves and at the mercy of water, perhaps a powerful river whose current carries us from place to place. As we have seen, rebirth has five or six destinations. The Abhidharmakosa gives five—the inhabitants of hells, hungry spirits, animals, human beings, and devas. This is the Sarvastivadin point of view; other schools gave six, the above five plus the asuras.' In Chinese and Japanese Buddhism, the version favoring six paths gained popularity, and the expression “transmigration among the six paths” is well known throughout East Asia. According to the Commentaiy on the Great Perfection of Wisdom Sutra, the six paths are divided into three good and three bad, and further into superior, ordinary, and inferior (see figure 14).
It is obvious how the inhabitants of hells, hungry spirits, and animals could be considered bad destinations in the realm of delusion. Asuras and human beings on the other hand, .though good destinations, are also inhabitants of the realm of delusion. The unclean nature of human existence is emphasized in a meditation called “contemplation of impurity,” in which meditation subjects include human excreta and the internal organs. (Genshin has a good example of this in Essentials of Salvation^) Zen priests also call the human being a bag of dung.
The gods, too, are inhabitants of the realm of delusion. They may have received the most pleasant existence of the six paths, but they are still subject to the three poisons of greed, anger, and ignorance, so they may eventually fall into the realms of the hells or the hungry spirits. The Sutra of Cause and Effect in the Past and Present (Kuo-ch’u-hsien-tsai-yin-kuo-ching, trans, into Chinese 5th century) says, “When fortune is exhausted, there comes suffering; on the six paths of transmigration, eventually suffering accumulates.”2 Because the inhabitants of the six paths of rebirth, including the devas, all dwell in the realm of desire, they are all subject to suffering.
The idea of rebirth is also reflected in biographies of the Buddha. The Buddha experiences a variety of previous births, during which he practices his religious discipline and appears as a perfected being. The Jatakas, tales of the Buddha’s former lives, relate how he amasses great numbers of virtues. In some of them, he is shown as having been born previously as a monkey or a deer.
The Force of Karma
Of equal importance to the idea of transmigration is the concept of karma. Karma (also harman] means “action,” and it consists of both action and its power of influence. “Action” does not refer just to bodily movements, but also includes the actions of speech and mind. An action’s power of influence is not confined to this life but extends to future lives as well.
Karma affects the destiny of the entire natural realm, not only that of the individual. For example, when the universe is about to come into being, a subtle wind begins to stir, and what causes it to quicken is “the indirect force of the karma of the various living beings.” The water circle that eventually develops is prevented from dispersing because “it is maintained by the force of the karma of all living beings.” This force also creates the hells and the heavens. In Buddhism, this combined karmic force is called common karma.3
Karma functions automatically, without the need of some kind of godlike arbitrator. Meritorious acts give rise to good results, and evil causes adverse results. This is a law analogous to natural law. Each person receives upon him- or herself the retributions or rewards for his or her own acts. That is why Buddhist texts do not say “to be punished” or “to be thrown into hell,” as though a god were the agent, but rather “to receive retribution” and “to fall into hell.” Similarly, we will see in chapter 4 that those whose retribution in hell has not been completed will, at the end of this universe, be moved to a hell in another universe.
wish, instead, to examine the idea of transmigration in the nonBuddhist philosophies that arose in India and Greece at much the same time as Buddhism. This will, perhaps, serve as a stepping stone to further study for interested readers.
The idea of transmigration hardly appears in the Hindu Rg Veda (12th 8th century B.C.E.), though by the time the new religious movements arose in the sixth to fifth centuries B.C.E., most of the important ones included a philosophy of transmigration, outstanding examples being Buddhism, Jainism, and the religion of the Ajivikas. We also find the idea in Brahmanism in the new literature called the Upanisads. Here I would like to examine the idea as it appears among the Ajivika sect.
According to the founder, Makkhali Gosala,
There are 1,406,600 kinds of living being. There are 500 karmas, 5 karmas, 3 karmas, 1 karma, and a half karma. There are 62 practices, 62 intermediate kalpas, 6 classes, 8 stages, 4,900 modes of living, 4,900 wandering mendicants, 4,900 Naga realms, 2,000 organs, 3,000 hells, 36 polluted realms, 7 thinking beings, 7 non-thinking beings, 7 insects, 7 heavenly beings, 7 human beings, 7 demons, 7 lakes, 7 mountains, 707 impregnable passes, 707 dreams. There are 8,400,000 great kalpas [extremely long periods of time]. During that time both the ignorant and the wise undergo rebirth, and being reborn, bring about the end of suffering. During that time no one can say, “Through practice of the precepts, or through practice of the purities, or through asceticism, or through chastity, I will bring to maturity that karma still immature. And I will gradually gain liberation from the karma already matured.” The pleasure and suffering have already been meted out and will continue without increase or decrease during the course of the round of birth and death. It is like a ball of thread that must be unraveled to the end. Both the ignorant and the wise must undergo the round of birth and death until the end of suffering is reached.4
Living beings transmigrate among all types of existence. So far, Gosala agrees with Buddhism. He differs, however, in saying that meritorious activities such as religious practice and asceticism are of no use in gaining liberation from the round of birth and death. According to Gosala, human destiny is fixed. As a ball of thread unravels, birth and death will continue until the stipulated end, whatever religious exercises a person might undertake. It was natural that Buddhism, with its emphasis on the importance of religious training, would reject this idea as fatalism (nyativada).
Greek Ideas about Transmigration
Among Greek ideas about transmigration, that of Orphism is particularly well known. In this theory, transmigration was said to occur as a result of sins committed. Followers of Orphism therefore had to maintain the precepts stricdy and purify their lives, so that they could release their spirits from their bodies, at which point the spirits were believed to return to Dionysus. Pythagoras (ca. 580-ca. 500 B.C.E.) was a follower of the Orphic cult, and he founded a sect. A famous episode tells how, when he was out walking, he came across a man whipping a dog. He cried out, “Stop that! That dog you are beating is an old friend of mine! He has now been reborn as a dog, but I know his voice.”5
Empedocles (ca. 490-430 B.C.E.), a theoretician of elements, wrote, “The father fishes up his beloved dead child, now reborn as a fish, and kills him. And the fool even gives thanks to the gods! But they [his servants] hesitate to sacrifice one who seeks compassion. The father does not hear the cries [of the sacrificial victim] and after having killed him, prepares an evil meal within his house. In the same way sons capture fathers, children capture mothers, and take their lives and eat that dear meat.”6
According to the Greek historian Herodotus (ca. 484—ca. 425 B.C.E.), the idea of transmigration came to Greece from Egypt. “The Egyptians say that Demeter [[[Isis]]] and Dionysus [[[Wikipedia:Osiris|Osiris]]] are the chief powers in the underworld; and they were also the first people to put forward the doctrine of the immortality of the soul, and to maintain that after death it enters another creature at the moment of that creature’s birth. It then makes the round of all living things—animals, birds, and fish—until it finally passes once again, at birth, into the body of a man. The whole period of transmigration occupies three thousand years. This theory has been adopted by certain Greek writers, some earlier, some later, who have put it forward as their own. Their names are known to me, but I refrain from mentioning them.”7
What we should note is that the Greeks believed that the soul transmigrated, while Buddhism denied the existence of the soul. In the Buddhist work Milinda’s Questions (Milindapanha, compiled 1st century B.C.E.-1st century C.E.), the Greek King Menandros (Menander) questions the Buddhist Nagasena about the seeming contradiction between the Buddhist ideas of rebirth and a non-self. The king asks how rebirth takes place without anything transmigrating, and Nagasena replies as follows:
“It is as if, sire, some person might light a lamp. Would it burn all night long?”
“Yes, revered sir, it might burn all night long.”
“Is the flame of the first watch the same as the flame of the middle watch?”
“No, revered sir.”
“Is the flame of the middle watch the same as the flame of the third watch?”
“No, revered sir.”
“Is it then, sire, that the lamp in the first watch was one thing, the lamp in the middle watch another, and the lamp in the last watch still another?”
“O no, revered sir, it was burning all through the night in dependence on itself.”
“Even so, sire, a continuity of dhammas [“beings, existences, persons”] runs on; one uprises, another ceases; it runs on as hough there were no before, no after; consequently neither the one [[[dhamma]]] nor another is reckoned as the last consciousness.”8
This passage states the belief of Buddhists that there is no continuous and eternal “I.” While the lamp burns, the flame changes from moment to moment, yet it is as if it were the same flame. The flame of the first watch is the “I” of the present, and the flame of the middle watch is the “I” of the future.
The fact that the idea of transmigration was current in both India and Greece at around the same time is surprising and puzzling. Is it possible that there was some borrowing between the two cultures? The Roman officer Arrian mentions the legend that Dionysus invaded India.9 If we give some credence to this as evidence of contact between the two cultures, we can allow that there was some connection between Greek and Indian transmigration theories. The question of which culture affected the other remains. There is also the possibility that there may have been an indirect relationship through a third culture.
Enlightenment and the Realm of Formlessness
In previous chapters we have discussed the dwelling places among which living beings transmigrate according to karma. But where does the Buddha dwell? Mahayana Buddhism posits its own theories about this, which are discussed in part 2. In terms of the Abhidharmakosa, however, the Buddha probably occupies a position above the realm of formlessness, where old maps of Mount Sumeru show him. To be accurate, however, the realm of the Buddha is beyond space.
Where, then, is the realm of formlessness (arupya-dhatiip? In that realm, beings no longer have physical, material bodies. There is only spirit, and no form irupa) remains. We should not assume that the realm of formlessness is “above” the realm of form, for it transcends all geographical notions. Though we in elude it in cosmology, it is completely detached from spatial concepts. It is not, however, beyond the reach of time, and the inhabitants of its various levels follow allotted life spans of twenty thousand great kalpas, eighty thousand great kalpas, etc. (A kalpa is a period of time so long that it cannot be calculated in years.) Before he became a buddha, Siddhartha, on taking up the religious life, studied under the ascetic Arada Kalama and attained the Four Dhyanas and the samadhis of the Four Formless Abodes, which were subsequendy incorporated into Buddhism. These Four Abodes are termed Akasa-anantya-ayatana (“abode of the infinity of space”), Vijnana-anantya-ayatana (“abode of the infinity of consciousness”), Akimcanya-ayatana (“abode of nothingness”), and Naiva-samjna-nasamjna-ayatana (“abode of neither thought nor non-thought”).
Samadhi. We have seen that practitioners of dhyana may attain any of the various Dhyana heavens in the realm of form. The realm of formlessness, however, belongs to practitioners of samadhi. There is a subtle difference between the two. Dhyana incorporates the practices of tranquillity (“quieting the mind”) and discernment (“observing the nature of things”). Samadhi involves an intensification of the elements of tranquillity. In the broadest sense of the word, it means concentration of the mind on one point, and so includes dhyana. Samadhi is an element of religious training that has been consistendy emphasized in both pre-Mahayana and Mahayana Buddhism (especially in the Wisdom sutras).
Each of the Four Formless Abodes is attained by means of a corresponding kind of samadhi. For example, when one has attained the Akasa-anantya-ayatana samadhi, one dwells in the abode of the infinity of space. To enter this abode means that all thoughts of the realm of form are eliminated, and only infinite space remains. The Commentary on the Great Perfection orf Wisdom Sutra sets out in specific terms how this may be achieved: “Contemplate space within the body, and always contemplate the body as being void, like a cage, or like a receptacle for steam cooking. . . . Thus [you] are enabled to transcend form and eliminate the body. As the body becomes infinite space, so does other outer form. At that time [you] have succeeded in contemplating the emptiness of the infinity of space.”10
The concept of the four samadhis is subde, and I fear that I, not having ascended to such heights (170 billion yojanas above Jambudvipa!), scarcely have the qualifications to discuss their differences. Nevertheless I will attempt a simple explanation. The goal of samadhi practitioners is the realm of the absolute, a realm where the self is at one with the universe, in which all relativity has vanished. From the practitioner’s standpoint, it means liberation from the “small self’" to seek the state of freedom. I deal with the idea of the absolute later, but here I discuss the samadhi of the four stages from the viewpoint of freedom.
Even in the realm of form practitioners attain considerable freedom, though strictly in terms of the material world. In the realm of formlessness, the practitioner has freedom from the material, and strives to attain perfect spiritual freedom, realized only when the practitioner removes all thought objects. When thought objects exist, one remains in the grip of the idea of the final stage. In the first stage of the realm of formlessness, the mind has to enter the realm of infinite space (infinite voidness) in order to eliminate thought objects concerning the material. This is the samadhi of the abode of the infinity of space.
Upon reflection, though, the practitioner realizes that infinite space is itself an object (what the fifth-century B.C.E. Greek philosophers Leucippus and Democritus called “not-being being not inferior to being”). Therefore the mind must next do away with infinite space as a thought object and gain liberation from that condition. At that point, the practitioner enters a realm from which all thought objects have been eliminated, a realm in which only mind itself exists. This is Vijnana-anantya-ayatana (the abode of the infinity of consciousness).
Upon still further reflection, the practitioner comes to realize that the thought of “the elimination of all thought objects” does remain, and liberation must be gained from that. One must proceed to eliminate all thoughts of having done something, of having gained liberation from a lower stage and ascended to a higher one, or of having attained the fruit of practice, so that one may enter the realm of having nothing at all. This is Akimcanya-ayatana (the abode of nothingness).
Again on further reflection, one realizes that even nothingness is an idea that one holds, and it is necessary to eliminate this, too. Then one enters Naiva-samjna-nasamjna-ayatana (the abode of neither thought nor non-thought). “Non-thought” is “not thinking,” which itself becomes the “thought of not-think-ing.” It must therefore be negated as well, which gives us “nor non-thought.” This is considered the highest of the stages.12 (By this logic, however, we must admit that it cannot be called the last stage at all, and we could continue the process infinitely.) A buddha (literally, “one who has attained enlightenment”) ascends to the abode of neither thought nor non-thought, and then transcends the three realms and gains liberation from the cycle of transmigration.
A buddha’s mission is to rescue living beings trapped in the worlds of transmigration. A buddha appears in the world as a result of his aspiration toward enlightenment in former existences and his accumulation of various kinds of practice in order to fulfill a vow. It is said that only one buddha appears in a single world system (or, some say, in a trichiliocosm, described in chapter 4). Sakyamuni, the buddha who appeared in India, was one such buddha.
To attain enlightenment is not an easy thing. The Japanese call a person who has died ho take, which means “buddha.” Under the influence of Christianity, there has also been a recent tendency in Japan for mothers to explain a father’s death to children by saying that he has gone to heaven. I hesitate to shatter children’s dreams, but according to Buddhism those fathers are almost certainly not in heaven. In Buddhism, death alone cannot make a person a buddha; in all likelihood the dead person would merely be reborn in a hell or as a hungry spirit. To attain enlightenment, and to enter heaven, demands effort and faith.
Non-duality. Non-duality is a concept central to the notion of enlightenment. Non-duality denies all relative and opposite concepts. Only in this denial can the truth appear; it is like a dialectic that resolves opposites. “Neither thought nor non-thought” is an example of non-duality, in that there is a negation of both opposing concepts. In the Heart Sutra (Prajnaparamita-hrdaya-sutra, ca. 5th-6th century C.E.) the expressions “not born, not destroyed,” “not defiled, not pure,” and “no ignorance and no end to ignorance” are examples of non-dual thought.
The Vimalakirti Sutra (Vimalakirti-nirdesa-sutra, trans, into Chinese 5th century) expounds the idea of the non-duality of all existences. The hero of this very popular sutra is the lay practitioner Vimalakirti, a man whose deep understanding of the emptiness of transcendental wisdom {prajna} surpasses even that of the ordained disciples of the Buddha. At one point, Vimalakirti and the disciples discuss the teaching of non-duality. A certain bodhisattva says, “Many wise people think that there is birth and there is death. However, things originally were not born, and therefore they do not die. To enter the gate of non-duality means to gain the tranquillity of mind that comes of the understanding that ‘things are not born.’” Other bodhisattvas proceed to deny other opposing concepts, such as pure and defiled, good and evil, and samsara (“life and death,” “transmigration”) and nirvana (“eternal peace”). Finally they appeal to the bodhisattva Manjusri, who says, “In my way of thinking, nothing can be said, explained, shown, or discerned about anything at all. Being detached from all questions and answers is to enter the gate of nonduality.” Rightly is Manjusri called the embodiment of wisdom! His reply overwhelms the answers of the other bodhisattvas. Then he says to Vimalakirti, “Everyone has finished. It is now your turn. What is the meaning of entering the gate of non-duality?” But Vimalakirti says nothing. Manjusri praises him, saying: “Wonderful, wonderful! You use neither letters nor speech. That indeed is what it truly means to enter the gate of non-duality!”13
Non-duality is a philosophy of the absolute. In Buddhism, that which is absolute is true, whereas that which is relative is only temporary, a falsehood. This idea arose from the concept that the world is characterized by suffering, and that we must seek in whatever way we can to remove that suffering. The origin of suffering is believed to be the relativistic nature of the world. Because we discriminate between ourselves and others, pain and anguish arise. This abhorrent world of the relative is not the true world. In the world from which all relativity has been eliminated, that is, the world of the absolute, there is no suffering. That is the realm of truth.
Buddhism gave its whole attention to the question of the nature of the absolute. From the Buddhist point of view, the concept of the absolute in popular usage carried only a faint echo of its true meaning, for it tended to be employed only in the sense of contrasting relative and absolute, not in terms of absolute truth. This distinction is rarely recognized. What do we mean by an absolute god? If we say “an existence standing above all other things,” we have not yet understood its meaning sufficiently. We are only comparing “absolute god” with “all things.” The true meaning of absolute god is god beyond all concepts of “us” and “god,” a god where we and god are one. In this sense, Buddhism is pantheistic.
The idea of a non-dual absolute is not confined to Buddhism. Brahmanism terms the absolute the “identicality of Brahman and Atman,” Brahman being the entire universe, and Atman the self, real and immortal. The two are, in truth, one. Thinking that the self somehow exists separately from the universe derives from attachment to deluded views created by that very self. The idea of non-duality appears throughout the Brahmanic sacred texts called the Upanisads, and it is here we should look to discover its origin. It is in the Brhadaranyaka-upanisad (Upanisad of the Great Forest, 700-500 B.C.E.) that the famous expression neti, neti (literally, “not this, not this”) appears.
