NO.5 : CHAPTER III : THE NATURE AND PROCESS OF EXISTENCE

CHAPTER III : THE NATURE AND PROCESS OF EXISTENCE 

                 3.1. THE NATURE OF EXISTENCE 

                         3.1.1 The Fundamental Law of existence 

                According to Buddhism, a thing, whether living or non-living, is regarded as sańkhata (put together) depending on causes and conditions. It may be defined as a series of existence connected with each other by continuity and a certain causal law. This law is called the nature of things (dhammatā) or suchness (tathatā),318 which denotes the causal relation (paccaya) or the Dependent Origination (paticcasamuppāda). This law is in the nature of things. The Buddha has rightly said thus : 

               “Monks, for one who is virtuous, in full possession of virtue, there is no need for the purposeful thought ‘May freedom from remorse arise in me,’ this, monk, is in accordance with nature (dhammatā) that for one who is virtuous, in full possession of virtue, freedom from remorse arises, … that for one who is free from remorse joy arises… that for one who is joyous rapture arises… that for one who is and whose heart is enraptured the body is calmed”.319 

              The above passage clearly shows how does the nature of existence arises by being dependent on one another. Regarding man, the khandhas, especially consciousness, do not continue the same even for two moments, but are constantly changing in the light of three phases, viz., genesis, development, and dissolution.320 These three characteristics are that of the conditioned things. This is regarded as the natural law, in other words, called Dharma as it appeared to the Venerable Kondañña, and as he knew, “whatever has the nature to arise, all that has the nature to cease.”321 It is also said in the Samyutta-Nikāya : “Thus is material shape, thus is its uprising and its passing away ; thus is feeling… perception… mental activities… consciousness.”322 This means that arising goes along with ceasing and creation with destruction. There can never be one without the other in the world of the conditioned. Thus, in Buddhism, unlike other religions, the existence is conditional, is dependent on a cause, and nothing happens by a Creator God or by any blind chance, as the Buddha uses the words : “Sabbe sańkhārā aniccāti - All that is conditioned is impermanent.”323 This is the fundamental law of nature or of things. In brief, the continuity of life-series is based on a causal connection running to the different states, as in the case of a lamp burning throughout the night. The flame of each moment is dependent on its own conditions and is different, yet there is unbroken succession of the different flames. Again, from one flame another may be lighted, and so they are causally connected ; similarly, the end-state of this life may cause the beginning of the next in accordance with the law of karma and rebirth.324 

              As stated above, the continuous existence of the conditioned things are caused by the causal law of nature whose Pāli equivalent term is dhātu-dhammatthitatā, or in short dhammatā (the law of nature). However, for both the terms, there are so many synonymous words being used and generally understood in the Buddhist texts, such as dhammadhātu (the cosmic law), dhammathiti (the fundamental law) and dhammaniyāma (the lawful necessity). The last one is the closest term as being used by the Buddha thus : “Thita va sa dhātu dhammatthitatā dhammaniyāmatā.”325 The Buddha classified the law of Dhammaniyāma into three kinds regarded as the law of Tilakkhana. According to Buddhism, these three groups of Dharma, viz., the Three Common Characteristics (Tilakkhana), the Dependent Origination (Paticcasamuppāda), and the Four Noble Truths (Ariyasacca), are by analysis regarded as one and the same, and they differ from each other only in their name and usages. 

                It would not be out of place to mention here that the word ‘Dhammaniyāma’ is one of the five niyāmas (the fixedness of the law of all things or the fivefold lawfulness or the natural order), which is mentioned in the Sumańgala-Vilāsinī and Atthasālinī.326 The so-called niyāmas accepted by Buddhism are of five kinds : 

1. Utuniyāma : physical inorganic order or physical law 
2. Bījaniyāma : physical organic order or biological law 
3. Kammaniyāma : the moral law 
4. Cittaniyāma : psychological law 
5. Dhammaniyāma : the general law of cause and effect. 

            Thus these five elements (niyāmas) can be reduced to two main elements, namely, mind and matter (nāma-rūpa). The first four elements can be combined into the fifth one, i.e. Dhammaniyāma, which means the law of Tilakkhana or of Paticcasamuppāda. 

 

3.1.2 THE THREE CHARACTERISTICS OF EXISTENCE (TILAKKHANA) 

           Buddhism is an organized practical system designed to reveal “what is what” or the facts of existence. In the Ańguttara-Nikāya, the Buddha says : 

            "Monks, whether the Tathāgatas have arisen or not, this fundamental law (dhammathīti), this lawful necessity (dhammaniyāma), prevails, all conditioned factors of beings (sańkhāras) are impermanent (aniccatā), all (sańkhāras) are subject to suffering (dukkhatā), and all things (dhammas) are non-substantiality(anattatā).”327 

               It is to be noted that in the first and second sentences the word ‘sańkhāra’ is used, but in the third the word ‘dhamma’ is used. 

               Here the term dhamma is used in the widest sense. It includes all states (sabhāva), both rūpa-dhamma and nāma-dhamma ; lokiya-dhamma and lokuttara-dhamma ; and kusala-dhamma, akusala-dhamma. Here the set of sańkhata-dhamma and asańkhata-dhamma will be considered. As we have mentioned earlier, the sańkhata means compounded things called sańkhara which means both mind (nāma) and matter (rūpa), or mundane (lokiya) and supramundane (lokuttara) things, with the exception of Nirvāna. The asańkhata refers to unconditioned things called visańkhāra which means Nirvāna. Here all sańkhāras are impermanent and suffering with the exception of Nirvāna, and all sańkhāras and Nirvāna are not-self. This clearly shows that Early Buddhism denied the theory of self absolutely. 

 

3.1.2.1 Impermanence or Changeability (aniccatā) 

            The Buddha declared thus : “All the conditioned things (sańkhāras) are impermanent, they occur and then they cease in accordance with the law of cause and effect.”328 The term “conditioned” mentioned above implies man and animals, both having mind or consciousness, and other things without mind ; the latter is again divided into two kinds, viz., trees and plants, which have life, and other things, which are lifeless, such as rocks, houses, etc. But there is in Thailand another idea that all animate things with no exception have mind (viññāna).329 In short, the conditioned things are name and form, in other words, the five khandhas are impermanent. According to Buddhaghosa, the impermanence (aniccatā) is so-called due to the following four reasons : 

1. Uppādavayappavattito ; the occurrence of rise and fall 
2. Viparināmato ; change 
3. Tāvakālikato ; temporariness 
4. Niccapatikkhepato ; preclusion of permanence.330

             Just to make it clear, let us take the five khandhas for example, Body (Rūpa) : It is unable to remain static. The most obvious change may be seen in the in the case of a human body331 starting from the movement of its conception within the mother’s womb, ceaselessly changing from being a fetus to an embryo until its delivery. The infant becomes a baby, a child, a youth finally suffers old age and death. Sensation or Feeling (Vedanā):332 These are the feelings of happiness, suffering and neutrality ; subject to change, soon or later it becomes something else : for example, within an hour, we are repeatedly raided by happiness and suffering alternating each other. The Arahants alone can produce no impact whatever on their minds. Perception (Saññā) : The term used in Theravāda Buddhism points directly to the memory as opposed to the wisdom (sańkhāra), in the sense that saññā is the knowledge borrowed from outside, whereas Paññā comes from inside. The saññā obviously requires effort to commence its function again. Mental Formations (Sańkhāra) : In a worldly mind it is impossible for thought to take birth without emotion such as laziness, selfishness, and so on. And these qualities are still subject to becoming something else sooner or later because of the causes by which they are produced. Consciousness (Viññāna) : Both bhavańga-citta and vithīcitta are in constant flux like a monkey in a forest which seizes one branch only to let it go to another.333 

                Thus, the five khandhas have one thing in common, they are mutable and dynamic ; there is no khandhas that, having been born, in the past, present, and future, will not change. Impermanence, therefore, characterizes all the planes of life, including all the things. Because of their instant change, all things can continue dependently. 

 

3.1.2.2 Unsatisfactoriness or Suffering (Dukkhatā) 

                 The term “Dukkha” has a wide range of meaning depending on the context in which it is used. Dukkha, appearing in the five khandhas, is mentioned as a kind of Vedanā, such as pain, hunger, etc. The word “dukkha” as used in the Four Noble Truths has a wider meaning, including a matter of suffering and extending to happiness that is born of desire (tanhā). But the “dukkha” in present discussion of Tilakkhana includes both of the characters mentioned above, and has a special sense of its own. In its special sense, dukkhatā points to deterioration of all conditioned things; and “whatever is changing is unsatisfactory (dukkha).”334 In the Visuddhimagga, Buddhaghosa has given four reasons of the dukkhatā, namely ; 

               i) It is so-called because of continual oppression (abhinha-sampatipīlanato), 

               ii) It is so-called because of being hard to bear (dukkhamato), 

               iii) It is so-called because of being the basis of suffering (dukkha-vatthuto), 

               iv) It is so-called because of precluding pleasure (sukhapatik-khepato).335 

                This is confirmed by discerning the following three characteristics of dukkhatā mentioned in the Dīgha-Nikāya thus : firstly, suffering as pain (dukkha-dukkhā) ; secondly, suffering inherent in the karma-formation (sańkhāradukkha), and thirdly, suffering in charge (viparināmadukkha). Strictly speaking, the five khandhas are as frightful as a dead body hung round a man’s neck ; causing suffering ; the Arahants alone can appreciate the five khandhas as the greatest of all suffering, and that, in consequence, Nirvāna is the highest bliss. Having considered the Buddha’s universal fact of suffering, Lama Govinda described him as having gone a step further over Rene Descartes, the famous dualist, who started his philosophy with the personal conclusion that, “I think, therefore, I am.” To quote Lama Govinda’s formula : 

               Not all sentient beings are thinking beings, and not all thinking beings reach the stage in which this faculty conceives its own nature and importance; but all sentient beings endure suffering; because all are subject to old age, decay and death.336 

               In the first sermon addressed to the first five monks, the Buddha describes the domain of dukkha by saying that, “birth, decay, illness, death, separation from objects we love, not to obtain what we desire, all these are dukkha, in sort the Fivefold Attached Khandha is dukkha.”337 To the question why birth is dukkha, Buddhaghosa replied that since it is the basis of all dukkhas, such as the descent into the womb, and so on.338 Similarly, in a book entitled Dhammavicārana complied by H.R.H. the Late Supreme Patriarch Prince Vajirañānavarorasa, dukkha is divided into ten categories of which the important one is the sufferings which result from Karmic Effects.339 This is due to the fact that not only Buddhism, including the Theravāda and the Mahāyāna, but also Hinduism and Jainism regard our present dukkha as the result of out past misdeeds.340 

                The Buddha once summed up the kernel of his teachings by sayings : “Both in the past and in the present, I have consistently preached suffering and the ending of suffering.”341 In this context, a question is often raised, “Is Buddhism pessimistic?” It would in fact be more appropriate to describe Buddhism not as ‘pessimistic’ but as ‘realistic’, since it begins, quite simply, with the common facts of experience.342 On the other hand, “suffering in Buddhism is not the expression of pessimism or of the world-tiredness of an aged civilization : “It is the fundamental thesis of a world-embracing thought, because there exists no experience which is equally universal,” says Lama Govinda.343 In fact, the Buddha is called saccavādī (the speaker of truth), and atthavādī (the speaker of the useful).344 He will say only the word which is true, useful and both pleasant and unpleasant.345 The teaching of the Buddha is known as akāliko (no time-limit) and ehipassiko (inviting one to come and see).346 The Buddha once said: “Some monks and brāmanas speaking that night are living in bewilderment, but I say that night is similar to night and day is similar to day.”347 Buddhism cannot, therefore, be said to be both pessimism and optimism, but realism in the sense that it sees things in their reality. The Buddhist view is not that life is full of dukkha, but that the unenlightened life that one lives is without real meaning and truth.348 The Buddhist concept of dukkha is, therefore, so radical and fundamental that it is the cosmic dukkha par excellence. 

              According to scholars of Indian Philosophy, it is to be mentioned here that Buddhism started initially with pessimism, passes through optimism and culminated in eternal optimism.349 

 

3.1.2.3 Ownerlessness, No-selfness, Non-substantiality (Anattatā) 

                Of the three characteristics, the most profound one directly resulting from the first and second ones is : “The five khandhas are impermanent ; whatever is impermanent that is subject to suffering ; whatever is subject to suffering, that is not-self.”350 Let us consider an example. If this animal is not a horse, then what is it? Supposing that it is a cow, what part of it is called cow? Is it the leg, the horn or any one part in particular? With these analytical questions, we shall not be able to find what, or where the real cow is. This is one interpretation of the Third Common Characteristics. In the Anattalakkhana-Sutta, the Buddha exhorts the five monks thus : 

               Body is not self (anattā), if it were, this body could not turn oppressive, and with regard to body it would be possible to achieve the intention, ‘let my body be thus, let my body not be thus.’ But because body is not the self, therefore, it turns oppressive, and one cannot achieve the intention, ‘let my body be thus, let my body not be thus.’ And so with feelings, perceptions, mental formations, and consciousness.351 

             The Buddha continuously asks them and they reply him thus : 

              “What do you think, is body permanent or impermanent? It is impermanent, sir. But is the impermanent suffering or happiness? It is suffering, sir. But is it fitting to consider that which is impermanent, linked to suffering, doomed to reversal as ‘this is mine, I am this, this is myself’? No, indeed, sir”.352 

           Regarding feeling, perception, and so on, the Buddha used the same argument. From the above two quotations, we can conclude that the five khandhas are anattā because (i) we cannot choose the kind we want to have, (ii) we cannot control them in accordance with the way we want them to be, and (iii) they are destined to illness. In this connection, the description of the anattā-doctrine in the Visuddhimagga deserves mention here. According to it, the anattā is so-called because it is void (suññato), ownerless (assāmikato), unsusceptible to the wielding of power (avasavattanato) and because of precluding a self (attapatikkhepato).353 According to the Buddha, it is impossible that anyone with right view should see anything as self. The Buddha says : 

            If anyone regards the eye as the self, that does not hold, for the arising and the passing away of the eye is clear. With regard to that which arises and passes away, if anyone were to think, ‘myself is arising and passing away’, would be disputed by the person himself. Therefore, it does not hold the eye as the self.354 

           And what thus applies to the eye applies equally to the other five senses too. Once Vajira Bhikkhunī being asked by the evil one (māra) about the question of the creator of a person, told him that there is no such thing as a person, but merely a collection of ever-charging khandhas.355 

           The preceding statements of the Anattalakkhana-Sutta show the Buddhist contribution in eliminating the idea of self. The real Buddhists have no conception of permanent self. Some say that the Buddha never denied the permanent self as admitted by the Upanisadic thinkers. Taking the case of non-Buddhist scholar for example, Radhakrishnan says : 

             “Buddha clearly tells us what the self is not, though he does not give any clear account of what it is. It is, however, wrong to think that there is no self at all according to Buddha. Buddha is silent about the Ātman in the Upanisads. He neither affirms nor denies its existence”.356 

            In connection with the above-mentioned passage, a similar view of Mrs. Rhys Davids, a well-known Buddhist scholar, who spent nearly fifty-years of her life-time in studying Buddhism, deserves mention. In her The Birth of Indian Psychology and its Development in Buddhism, she strongly argues that the doctrine of Anattā is not the original teaching of the Buddha. According to her, the Anattā-doctrine is the matter of later development. She contends that the Buddha never denied the permanent self; he only warned his disciples not to regard the body and mind (nāma-rūpa) or the five khandhas as the absolute self.357 She condemns the Anattā-doctrine as speaking of man less rather than more. In her view, the Anattā-doctrine is no worthy world religion,358 and the theory of the five khandhas is in a downward path of decadence in the study of man’s inner world, a path making for materialism.359 Her criticism is mainly based on the Buddha’s silence about the metaphysical problems. According to her, the Buddha’s silence is really meant to say that there is something more in man, which cannot be determined (abyākatapañhā).360 Like Radhakrishnan, she assimilates the Anattā-doctrine to the Brahman of the Upanisads. 

               Rejecting the above-mentioned two views, V.P. Varma in his Early Buddhism and Its Originals, argues that the ‘Vedantification’ of early Buddhism attempted by the two well-known scholars appears untrue. He further maintains that “If in his heart of hearts the Buddha did adhere to the concept of a spiritual real, why was he shy of saying so? It must have been a stupendous task of self-deception for the Buddha to adhere to a monastic spiritualism and keep mum over it for forty-five years.”361 According to him, if the Tipitakas are to be considered the basis for the views of the Buddha, then the concept of ‘soullessness’ too seems to him to be the view of the Buddha. The Buddha’s analysis of man into the five khandhas being known as Anattāvāda is accepted as psychologically superior, philosophically a sounder view, and a marvel for the contemporary philosophers. Stcherbatsky thus remarks: “The Buddhist Anattāvāda has also been regarded as a remarkable precursor of the conception of psychology without a soul.”362 The Buddha’s purpose of preaching Anattāvāda is to transport mankind from the ocean of suffering to the shore of happiness. According to the Buddha, if a man understands all things as their reality, he will be able to uproot his desire and attachment and at last will attain Nirvāna, because man always suffers due to egoism and makes others suffer as well. 

               Apart from the passage denying the permanent self in the Anattalakkhana-Sutta in the Samyutta-Nikāya there also appear similar repudiations of the self that we cannot say that a man belongs to the form, the feeling and the perception, etc., just as we cannot say that the fragrance of the lotus belongs to the petals, the colour and so on.363 There is no place to search for self, for even the Brahmaloka is not permanent,364 not to mention the human world, especially the world of the six-feet-long-living body. According to the Buddha, the world originates from the twelve āyatanas, which are empty,365 and none of them can be called the self (attā).

             The Buddhist doctrine of anatta stands in opposition to a self theory.366 It is in the Upanisads that we find formulated a doctrine of self which has remained fundamental in Indian thought. In the Chāndogya Upanisad, Ātman is said to be free from death, suffering and has real thought.367 Elsewhere, the Ātman can be identified in the dream-state or in the state of deep sleep.368 Yajñāvalkya speaks of Ātman as unknowable to any process of reasoning.369 Once upon a time, the Buddha took up a little pellet of cow dung in his hand, and said to a monk : “If the getting of a selfhood so small as this, monk, were permanent, stable, eternal, by nature unchanging, then the living of the holy life for the best destruction of suffering would not be set forth.”370 There is, therefore, nothing that can be called the self, if by that is meant an unchanging, abiding substance. On one occasion a monk came to ask the Buddha : “Is there any anxiety about something subjective that does not exist?” The Buddha’s reply is : 

         “Yes, there is, monk. In this case, the view occurs to someone : ‘This the world, this the self ; after dying, I will become permanent lasting, and eternal.’ He hears Dhamma as taught by the Buddha and his disciples for rooting out all, bias, tendency and addiction to view and causal relation… for the destruction of attachment and craving and for Nirvāna. He then will think : ‘I will surely be annihilated, be destroyed and I will surely not be.’ He grieves, mourns and falls into disillusionment”.371 

 

           According to the Buddha, by grasping of the self there would arise grief, suffering, lamentation and despair.372 The belief in the existence of a permanent self, argues T.R.V. Murty, does not always hold good especially in respect of karma and rebirth as the permanent is of one uniform immutable nature, it cannot have different volitions when different circumstances call for different actions. According to him, a changing Ātman is also a contradiction in terms, for this would mean to admit two different Ātmans, for this would mean to admit two different Ātmans, this does violence to the conception of an entity.373 

              Buddhism denies the theory of Attā, but preaches that of Anattā in the sense of the continuity of mind and matter in relation to the Dependent Origination which is regarded as the middle path between eternalism and annihilationism or between a duality of “it is “ and “it is not,” and only the wise man with right insight can see the uprising and passing away of the existence as they really are.374 As we can see, the process of life-continuum is based on the law of causal relation or the law of karma that governs the whole of human existence. 

                In this regard, the following points should be understood. According to Buddhism, the Three Characteristics and the Dependent Origination are the selfsame law, i.e. natural law, but they are explained in different aspects, namely, the former expounds all things as their appearance, while the latter explains the nature of all things that are dependently originated. The word ‘sańkhāra’ here differs from that of the five khandhas in which sańkhāra covers only mental states (nāmadhamma), while here it covers both mental and material states. Another point is that almost all people misunderstand that there is a thinker apart from thinking, intender apart from intention, for example, Descartes thought and concluded : “I think, therefore, I am.” In the Buddha’s time, some asked the Buddha : “who desires for? Who clings to? The right question must be : “What is a condition that gives rise to desire and attachment? To sum up, such misunderstandings occur due to lack of non-attention (ayonisomanasikāra). The phrase “the attachment of self or detachment of which” is wrong, and the correct one is to say “the attachment of an image or convention of attā.” Since the term ‘attā’ is merely conventional, there is no attā to attach: it cannot be detached. The last one is that besides the denial of eternalism, annihilationism and Creator God, Anattāvāda advocates a kind of theory of karma and rebirth in Buddhism, but at the same time it denies akiriyavāda of the Ājīvakas, pubbekatavāda of Jainism and karmavāda of Hinduism. 

 

3.1.3 THE DEPENDENT ORIGINATION (PATICCASAMUPPĀDA) 

                3.1.3.1 The Significance of the Dependent Origination in Relation to Existence 

                The Buddha, while sitting under the Bodhi-tree at Gaya, and during the night of attaining Sambodhiñāna, realized the Three Aspects of Wisdom (ñāna), viz., 

           1.Pubbenivāsānussatiñāna ; the remembrance of former existences, 

which means the wisdom leading to realization of the body and mind as mere assemblage of things coming together called khandha ; this knowledge contributes to the belief in the operation of karma 

           2.Cutūpapātañāna ; the knowledge of the death and rebirth of beings, 

which means the realization of the truth that those khandhas are subject to the law of Tilakkhana ; this supports the belief in karma and rebirth ; 

             3.Āsāvakkhayañāna ; the knowledge of the exhaustion of all mental intoxicants, which means the realization how the khandhas are within the swan of the law of Dependent Arising (Paticcasamuppāda) ; this is conducive to his Enlightenment, i.e., Nirvāna.375 The law of Paticcasamuppāda is, thus, extremely significance in clearly describing the reality of things in the universe. 

              After his Enlightenment, the Buddha did not want to preach his Dharma due to its difficulty. When the Venerable Ānanda told the Buddha that he thought that the Paticcasamuppāda was an easy and a simple matter, Buddha then asked him not to think like that because the Paticcasamuppāda was a profound teaching, for the various groups of human beings did not understand it so they were ensnared and unable to free themselves from the condition of suffering.376 The law of Paticcasamuppāda is that of Dharma, as the Buddha himself said : “Whoever sees conditioned genesis sees Dharma, whoever sees Dharma sees conditioned genesis.”377 The Paticcasamuppāda, like the anattalakkhana, is not made known unless there is the rising of the Buddha.378 When analysed, it has four characteristics of objectivity (tathatā), necessity (avitathatā), immutability (anaññathatā), and conditionality (idappaccayatā).379 In this way, the law of Paticcasamuppāda is also known as the law of idappaccayatā. Combining these into names, it is sometimes called idappaccayatā-paticcasamuppāda’. 

                There are two principles of Paticcasamuppāda. Firstly, “the general principle with no mention of its condition-number” which is divided into two kinds : (i) Dependent Arising : “When this is, that comes to be (imasmim sati idam hoti) ; from the arising of this, that arises (imassupāda idam uppajjati) ;” (ii) Dependent Cessation : “When this is not, that does not come to be (imasmim asati idam na hoti) ; from the ceasing of this, that also ceases (imassa niroda idam nirujjati).”380 

                Secondly, “the particular principle with mention of condition number,” which is of two kinds : (i) Dependent Arising, divided into four kinds : (a) starting ignorance down to karma-formation, consciousness, mind-and-matter, six sense-bases, contact, feeling, desire, attachment, becoming, birth, decay-death,381 etc., (b) starting from anyone in the middle such as vedanā down to the last formula;382 these two are regarded as ‘normal order’ (anuloma), (c) starting from the last link, i.e., decay-death, etc., up to ignorance,383 (d) starting from anyone in the middle and go up to the first,384 these two are known as ‘reverse order’ (patiloma) ; (ii) Dependent Cessation, divided into four kinds : (a) starting from the cessation of ignorance down to decay-death, etc., (hence the same for b.c. and d. by adding the word ‘cessation.’).385 

                 Regarding the above-mentioned two principles of Paticcasamuppāda, two important points have to be mentioned here: Firstly, in accordance with the general principle, it can be put into modern form as: When A is, B is, when A arises, B arises ; when A is not, B is not; When A ceases to be, B ceases to be. This means that the Buddha preached his Paticcasamuppāda as the doctrine of the Middle Path (Majjhimapatipāda). As the Buddha said ;

              “All exists,’ Kaccāna, that is one extreme. ‘All does not exist,’ that is the other extreme. Not approaching either extreme, the Tathagata teaches you a doctrine by the middle way, ‘conditioned by ignorance come the karma-formations, etc., thus is the arising of this whole mass of suffering. By ceasing of ignorance comes the ceasing of karma-formations, etc., thus is the ceasing of this entire mass of suffering”.386 

               From the viewpoint of the middle path, the Paticcasamuppāda stands between extreme realism (atthikavāda) and nihilism (natthikavāda), eternalism (sassatavāda) and annihilationism (ucchedavāda), and karmic autogenesism (sayańkāravāda) and karmic heterogenesism (parakāravāda).387 Unlike the Upanisads, the Buddha teaches that there is no doer, only doing, no seer, only seeing, no hearer, only hearing, and so on.388 According to the Upanisads, Brāhman is an eternal entity behind the changing universe and Ātman behind the transient personality. But Buddhism finds nothing eternal behind the world and individual, all things are in the state of causal relation. This is the uniqueness of the doctrine of Dependent Arising. If one thoroughly understands the Paticcasamupāda, one will understand the anattā-doctrine properly and will have no doubt about the metaphysical questions. Secondly, despite ignorance being mentioned first, it should, by no means, be considered the “first cause.” The various ways of this doctrine as thus described are enough to indicate the fact that ignorance is essentially the root-cause of human existence. Although ignorance is supposed to be the root-cause, yet it is not the original root-cause. Because ignorance itself is still rooted in cankers (āsavas), namely, lobha, dosa and moha.389 

 

3.1.3.2 The Explanation of the Meaning of Paticcasamupāda 

                According to Buddhism, Paticcasamuppāda is a discourse on the ‘causal arising and ceasing processes’ of life and suffering. The “causal arising process” of Paticcasamuppāda or suffering will be explained now, but the “causal ceasing process” of Paticcasamuppāda or Nirvana will be dealt with later. The former is divided into two types, of which one is ‘the Paticcasamupāda in Daily Life,’ 

               1. Ignorance or lack of knowledge (avijjā) = not knowing, not seeing according to the truth, not understanding nor keeping pace with conditions, getting tied up with conventional assumptions, not understanding life and the world according to truth, not knowing various hidden thoughts and beliefs, a state lacking wisdom, ignorant of causal factors, not applying wisdom or having wisdom fail you at the moment. 

                2. Mental formations, predispositions, or volitional activities (sańkhāra) = embellished thought, intentions, aims, decisions, and showing intentions through action; a thought process that proceeds according to inclination, habit, and various properties of the mind that have been stored up. 

                3. Consciousness (viññāna) = Perceiving various mind-objects, that is, seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, and contacting according to the objects in the mind, and this includes knowing the origin of various state of mind. 

                4. Mind-and-body or the animated organism (nāma-rūpa) = the perception of physical (rūpa-) and psychological factors (nāma-dhamma), the condition of all the physical and mental factors existing in an interconnected state and performing all their functions in respond to the flow of consciousness (viññāna), and various parts of body and mind (Thai, chit-chai) that process or change depending on a person’s state of mind. 

                 5. The six sense-bases (salāyatana) = the state of that are related to the performance of duties and are related to the circumstances at hand. 

                 6. Contact (phassa) = linking knowledge with the external world, perceiving mind-objects or various experiences. 

                 7. Sensation (vedana) = feeling pleasure and comfort, having wishes fulfilled, or experiencing dukkha and discomfort or equanimity (that is, neither-sukha-nor-dukkha). 

              8. Craving (tanhā) = an ambitious, over-eager desire to find things to fulfill a need for pleasurable sensations (sukha-vedanā), avoiding things that cause unpleasant sensations (dukkha-vedanā); it is being divided by a desire to get, to have, to exist in a continuous state and wanting to avoid, to annihilate, and destroy. 

               9. Attachment, clinging (upādāna) = clinging to feeling of like and dislike, manipulating various things and conditions in order to sustain certain feelings, inflating the value and importance of various conditions and things in a way that responds to or increases craving. 

              10. Process of becoming (bhava) = the whole behavioral process that reveals itself in response to craving and clinging (kamma-bhava, the active process) and the conditions of life that exist for a “self” or for a “self” to occupy (upapatti-bhava, the passive process) depending on attachments and the behaviour associated with them. 

                11. Birth (jāti) = coming to the realization that you exist or do not exist in a certain state, have or do not have certain things, are or are not a certain way. 

                12. Decay-and-death (jarā-marana) = being conscious of a lack of or a separation from the above life-state; feeling that you are threatened by final disintegration or separation from that life-state, which includes having certain things and being a certain way. This brings about sorrow, lamentation, suffering, grief, and distress linked with feelings of despair, loss, irritation, frustration, depression, sadness, disappointment, restlessness, and various other miserable feelings. 

 

3.1.3.2.1 Paticcasamuppāda in Daily Experiences 

               As mentioned earlier, anyone of the twelve links can be picked up and mentioned first. The Paticcasamuppāda in Daily Experience is supported to start with phassa (contact) down to the last factor. For example, by means of the eyes and the sight coming together, the eye-consciousness occurs. Consequently, it produces feeling (vedanā). There being feeling, there arises desire (tanhā), and so on and so forth.390 In the words of Venerable Buddhadāsa : “All sentient being have to suffer when doing wrong against the law of conditionality (idappaccayatā) in the moment of phassa ‘contact’.”391 It should be understood that although we mentioned phassa as the starting point, yet phassa is as a rule conditioned by ignorance, because ignorance always remains hidden in those constituents. This short explanation or ‘Paticcasamuppāda in daily life’ is technically called “a short cycle.” In its “long cycle,” the ‘Paticcasamuppāda in daily life’ has to start, as usual, with ignorance as follows: 

               1. Dependent on ignorance arise karma-formations (sańkhāra) : Because of not-knowing things as their reality and not-using wisdom, we are experiencing the various kinds of events. We mostly think and act in accordance with our fundamental belief in the same way as a man in a dark room, perceiving the animal eyes as a ghost. This act is based on ignorance. 

               2. When there is act or volition (sańkhāra), there arises consciousness (viññāna), namely, seeing, hearing, etc., if no volition or attention is present, the consciousness will not arise, e.g. when we are attentively reading a book, we are sometimes not aware of ourselves even when mosquitoes bite us. 

                 3. There being the consciousness of seeing and hearing etc., there arise the seen, the heard, etc., of name and form (nāmarūpa). The consciousness and name-and-form depend on one another like the two bunches of reeds; if anyone of them is removed, the other will automatically fall down. 

                4. There being mind and matter, there arise the six sense bases (slāyatana). When the mind and matter are functioning, they have to rely on anyone of six sense-bases as a medium for their behaviour. For this reason, the particular sense-base will be aroused by its actions, e.g. a football player’s both the ears will function more specially than other sense-organs. 

                5. There being the slāyatanas, there arises contact (phassa). When the sense-organs function, there will be perceptions of objects through them. 

                6. Dependent on contact, arises feeling (vedanā). When there is the perception, there must be feeling. 

                 7. There being feeling, arises craving or desire (tanhā). Of the three cravings, the craving for non-existence (vibhavatanhā) can express itself in a rough manner such as boredom, loneliness and so on. 

                8. Dependent on craving arises clinging (upadāna). When the craving becomes more intense, it is turned into an attachment, whose nature is that whatever comes into contact with it, is in contact with us as well. 

               9. There being clinging, there arises becoming (bhava). We usually tend to invent the condition or becoming from the grasping both in behavior and personality dealing with name and form. 

               10. Dependent on becoming, arises birth (jāti). When there is the becoming for occupying, there appears ego or self to occupy the becoming or life by declaring itself as the owner, the doer, and so on. 

                 11. There being birth, there arise decay, death, etc., When the ego arises in such a life state, then follows the matter of both retrogression and development. This is the Paticcasamuppāda in Daily Experience. It is profound and is believed to be the Buddha’s purpose. In fact, it is latent in the Paticcasamuppāda between Life to Life, which will be stated now. 

 

3.1.3.2.2 Paticcasamuppāda between Life to Life 

              It is said that at the concluding portion of the Paticcasamuppāda, there are five constituents that are regarded as the expression of canker (āsava), viz., from sorrow (soka) to despair (upāyasa), which are reckoned as the origin of ignorance. For, when these conditions arise, there will be no sign of wisdom. The ‘Paticcasamuppāda between Life to Life’ is, therefore, called the ‘Wheel of Existence’ (bhavacakka) or the ‘round of perpetual wandering’ (samsāracakka), which covers three durations of life, as follows. 

1. The Past : Which consists of ignorance and karma formations 
2. The Present : which is composed of consciousness, mind-and matter, six sense-based, contact, feeling, desire, attachment and becoming 
3. The Future : which comprises of the remaining constituents starting from birth, decay and death, and so on. 

                 Of the three durations, the present one is the most important, for it consists of both sides of causes and effects, which can be put into four parts called “synthesis” (sańgaha), thus : 

1. the Past Cause which comprises of ignorance and karma-formations ; 
2. the Present Effect which is composed of consciousness, mind-and-matter, six sense-bases, contact, and feeling ; 
3. the Present Cause which consists of desire, attachment, and becoming ; 
4. the Future Effect which comprises of birth, decay-and-death, sorrow, etc., despair.

             It follows that each of the four parts can be further divided into five kinds 

by combining the two groups of causes and the two groups of effects and still the four parts remain as before : 

1. The Past Causes, which are of five kinds, viz., ignorance, karma-formations, desire, attachment and becoming 
2. The Present Effects, which are five in number, namely, consciousness, mind-and-matter, six sense-bases, contact, and feeling (including birth, decay-and-death, etc., despair) 
3. The Present Causes, which are of five numbers, viz., ignorance, karma-formations, desire, attachment, and becoming ; 
4. The Future Effects, which consist of five constituents, namely, consciousness, mind-and-matter, six sense-bases, contact, and feeling (including birth, decay-and-death, etc., despair). 

             Twelve constituents can be classified in accordance with their functions into three cycles of rebirth (tivatta) : Firstly, ignorance, desire and attachment’ are technically grouped under the cycle of defilements (kilesavatta) ; secondly, ‘karma-formations and becoming’ under the cycle of action  (kammavatta) ; and thirdly, ‘consciousness’ mind-and-matter, six sense-bases, contact, and feeling’ are under the cycle of result (vipākavatta). The last cycle is the state of life resulting from the cycle of karma, and it will give rise to the next cycle of defilements. 

 

3.1.3.2.3 The Traditional Explanation of Paticcasamuppāda between Life to Life 

              Before explaining the basic formula of Paticcasamuppāda, it is essential, for a complete understanding of its twelve links, to state the twenty-four modes of Causal Relations (paccaya), which are enumerated in the Patthāna of the Abhidhamma. It is said that the theory of paccayas was formulated by the Abhidhammikas in an attempt to place the theory of Paticcasamuppāda on a more philosophical foundation. The latter is anterior to the former which is regarded as the final development of the same doctrine, the former describes the things that are related and the latter, the way in which things are related. Therefore, the two render their support to one another. The Buddhists explain them by mixing both theories. 

 

3.1.3.3 The Law of Causal Relations 

                 There are twenty-four paccayas (conditions) and some are even fully identical with each other. Buddhaghosa defines paccaya as “that from which the derived comes (paticca etasmā etī’ti paccayo).” It is said that Buddhaghosa, after analysing the theory of Paticcasamuppāda, raises the question : “The objector might say, ‘we accept that the avijjā (ignorance) is the cause of sańkhāra, but in what way is it the cause?”392 He is said to depict the stage in which the Abhidhammikas were led on to formulate the theory of twenty-four paccayas. The Abhidhammikas were agreed that every Dharma is the product of at least two causes.393 The twenty-four paccayas are :394 

1. Hetupaccaya (root-condition) 
2. Ārammana-paccaya (object-condition) 
3. Adhipati-paccaya (predominance-condition) 
4. Anantara-paccaya (contiguity-condition) 
5. Samanantara-paccaya (immediacy-condition) 
6. Sahajāta-paccaya (co-nascence-condition) 
7. Aññamañña-paccaya (mutuality-condition) 
8. Nissaya-paccaya (support-condition) 
9. Upanissaya-paccaya (decisive-support-condition) 
10. Purejāta-paccaya (pre-nascence-condition) 
11. Pacchājāta-paccaya (post-nascence-condition) 
12. Āsevana-paccaya (repetition-condition) 
13. Karma-paccaya (action-condition) 
14. Vipāka-paccaya (the condition of the fruit of action) 
15. Āhāra-paccaya (nutriment-condition) 
16. Indriya-paccaya (faculty-condition) 
17. Jhāna-paccaya (absorption-condition) 
18. Magga-paccaya (path-condition) 
19. Sampayutta-paccaya (association-condition) 
20. Vippayutta-paccaya (disassociation-condition) 
21. Atthi-paccaya (presence-condition) 
22. Natthi-paccaya (absence-condition) 
23. Vigata-paccaya (disappearance-condition) 
24. Avigata-paccaya (non-disappearance-condition).

             All these twenty-four conditions, according to Abhidhammasańgaha, may be reduced to only four, namely : 

1. Object-condition
2. Decisive support-condition 
3. Karma-condition 
4. Presence-condition

              It is evident that the theory of paccaya can be traced to the Nikāyas. But there are only eight paccayas found in different Nikāyas, namely, hetu-paccaya, ārammana-paccaya, adhipati-paccaya, aññamañña-paccaya, nissaya-paccaya, vipāka-paccaya, and āhāra-paccaya.395 

               It is also said that the formulation of the twenty-four paccayas is aimed at solving the problem of how the unconscious body understands the desire or wish of conscious mind. But it had been pointed out that all the twenty-four paccayas are not related to mind and matter. Mind is related to mind in six conditions (paccaya), namely, contiguity-condition, immediacy-condition, repetition-condition, association-condition, absence-condition and disappearance-condition. Mind is related to mind and matter in five ways, namely, root-condition, action-condition, resultant-condition, absorption-condition and path-condition. Again, mind is related to matter in one way, that is, by pacchājāta-paccaya (post-nascence-condition); and matter in one way to mind, i.e., by purejāta-paccaya (pre-nascence-condition). In two ways, concepts, mind and matter are related to mind by ārammana-paccaya (object-condition) and upanissaya-paccaya (support-condition). In nine ways are mind and matter related to mind and matter, namely, predominance-condition, co-nascence-condition, mutuality-condition, support-condition, nutriment-condition, faculty-condition, disassociation-condition, presence-condition and non-disappearance-condition. Thus the relation of mind and matter are six-fold.396 

 

 

3.1.3.4 The Relation Between Paticcasamuppāda and Paccaya Applied to the Individual

                   According to Buddhism, the doctrine of Dependent Arising provides the explanation of the exact way in which the personality or individual is evolved and disintegrated. The reverse order of the Paticcasamuppāda will make the matter clear. The Buddha concentrates on the five khandhas and comes to the conclusion that they undergo changes such as old age, death, etc., despair, because they have birth for their origin. Where there is no birth, there is no decay, death and suffering. Birth leads to the consequent suffering by way of purejāta-paccaya (pre-nascence-condition), natthi-paccaya (absence-condition), and vigata-paccaya (disappearance-condition).397 Birth depends on becoming by way of vigata-paccaya, for nothing comes out of nothing. Birth is not possible if there was no previous existence of human personality. Becoming depends on attachment (upādāna) by way of ahāra-paccaya (nutriment-condition). Our life is a chain of constant clinging for the attainment of our want. Therefore, attachment depends on desire (tanhā) by way of hetu-paccaya (root-condition). To use the Tibetan simile, it is like a woman offering drink to a seated man.398 Desire depends on feeling (vedanā) by way of āhāra-paccaya (nutriment-condition), indriya-paccaya (faculty-condition) and avigata-paccaya (non-disappearance-condition), for desire to arise it must be fed by pleasurable feeling. Feeling depends on contact (phassa) by means of anantara-paccaya (contiguity-condition), since immediately after contact, there arises sensation, and by way of nissaya-paccaya (support-condition), just like a man and woman embracing. Contact depends on the six sense organs and their objects by ārammana-paccaya (object-condition), for it is with the focusing of the mind of the individual on the external world that he become aware of it. Mind-and-matter depends on rebirth-consciousness (patisandhiviññāna) by way of aññamañña-paccaya (mutuality-condition), for the one cannot exist without the other. Then consciousness serves as karma-paccaya (action-condition) and adhipati-paccaya (predominance-condition) for nāma-rūpa (mind-and-matter), but nāma-rūpa serves the consciousness by nissaya-paccaya (support-condition). Both serve each other by way of sampayutta-paccaya (association-condition) and avigata-paccaya (non-disappearance-condition). It should be borne in mind that ‘nāma’ here means the three khandhas, viz., feeling, perception and mental-formation, that arise simultaneously with the rebirth consciousness depends on karma formations (sańkhāra) by way of karma-paccaya (action-condition). The rebirth-consciousness here means the nineteen types of patisandhi-viññāna, namely, two types of upekkhā-santīrana-citta (consciousness accompanied by equanimity) eight types of sahetuka-kāmāvacara-vipākacittas (conditional-sense sphere-resultant consciousness), and nine kinds of five rūpāvacara-vipākacittas (form sphere-resultant consciousness) and of four arūpāvacara-vipākacittas (formless sphere-resultant consciousness). In fact, the rebirth-consciousness(patisandhi-viññāna) includes all thirty-two types of vipāka-citta (resultant consciousness). All the past karmas inherit from all these cittas.

                    The karma-formations (sańkhāra) are caused by ignorance (avijjā) by way of adhipati-paccaya, because the accumulation of karmas is always dominated by avijjā. The term ‘sańkhāra’ here means karma or volition that denotes the twenty-nine types of consciousness, namely, twelve akusalacittas (unwholesome consciousness), eight mahākusalacitta (great wholesome consciousness), five rūpāvacāracittas (form-sphere consciousness), four arūpāvacāracittas (formless sphere consciousness). Hence ignorance is the root-cause of all moral, immoral and neutral karmas that produce rebirth of an individual. The Buddha explains thus : “Ignorance is the deep delusion wherein we here so long and circling round.” Further, the Buddha exclaims : 

                “Through many a birth, I wandered in samsāra, seeking but not finding, the builder of the house. Sorrow is it to be born again and again. O house-builder you are seen ; you shall build no house again, all your rafters are destroyed… my mind has gained the unconditioned…. Achieved is the end of craving.”399

                In this way, the Doctrine of Paticcasamuppāda is the description of how the processes of life are formed and dissolved, how do they manifest in various manners. As such they are changeable, subject to destruction and finally are ownerless depending on the causal law whose beginning and end are fully enlightened by the Buddha as the Venerable Assaji utters this stanza : “Of Dharmas arising from a cause the Tathāgata knows that cause and its cessation (he knows) thus instructs, the Great Samana.”400 

                 Thus, we have seen that the human individual is a constantly changing compound formed and fashioned under the influence of karma. Truly, it is the same thing whether we say a man is born as a result of his karma (sańkhāra) or of ignorance (avijjā), because they are aspects of the same thing, as discussed earlier. In other words, according to the Three Vicious Cycles, “it means that it is the activities of the past life promoted by ignorance that directly give rise to the present.”401 The present personality of man results from karma, one of the causal laws of existence, which we will now study at length. 

 

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

318 SN, XII. 20.

319 AN, V. 1; The Gradual Sayings, V. 3.

320 DhsA. 420.

321Vin., I. 8; Dhammacakkappavattana-Sutta.

322 SN, II. 29.

323 AN, I. 285-286; SN, IV. 1; Dh., 277; AP, I. 300.

324 Chatterjee & D. Datta, An Introduction to Indian Philosophy, p. 136-137; The simile seen from Milinda., 40.

325 AN, I. 286.

326 DA, II. 432 ; DhsA., 272 ; Nyanatiloka’s Buddhist Dictionary, p. 135.

327 AN, I. 236 : Uppādā bhikkhave Tathā gatānam … sabbe dhamma anattāti.

328 DN, II. 157 : Aniccā vata sańkhārā upādavayadhammino, … upajjitvā nirujjanti tesam vupasamosukho. See also Dialogues of the Buddha, II. 84.

329 Porn Rattanasuwan, Buddha-Vidaya, Vol.I (Bangkok : The Home of Psychical Research, 2514/1971), pp.82, 104, 105, where he said; “In man and animals the consciousness is obvious, in plants and trees is only semi-active degree, whereas in rocks and others are lifeless things”. But Bancob Bannaruci says that even in rocks and house, etc. exists sub-consciousness (bavańga-viññāna), in this regard, he defends himself not to be called “a follower of Jainism” by saying that though viññāna is said to exist in all things, nonetheless it is impermanent, which is different from that of Jainism. See, Bancob Bannaruci, Citta, Mano, Viññān&a, pp. 154,156. 

330 Vism., 618 ; Visuddhi., III. 246.

331 MN, I. 266.

332 DN, III. 216; Dialogue of the Buddha, III. 210.

333 SN, II. 94.

334 SN, III, 20 ; - Yad aniccam tam dukkham.

335 Visuddhi., III. 246 ; The Path of Purification, p. 720. 

336 Lama Anagarika Govinda, The Psychological Attitude of Early Buddhist Philosophy (London : Ridder & Company, 1961). pp. 47-49.

337 SN, V. 421.

338 Vism., 500-505.

339 Quoted in Vasin Indasara’s Theravada Buddhist Principles (Bangkok : Mahamakut Buddhist University, 1978), pp. 144-160.

340 Harsh Narain “Suffering in Mahayana Buddhism”, Suffering : Indian Perspectives, edited by K.N. Tiwari, p. 167.

341MN, I. 140 : Pubbe cāham bhikkhave … dukkhassa ca nirodham.

342 John, Bowker, Problems of Suffering in Religion of the World (Cambridge : University Press, 1970), p.237. 

343 Lama Anagarika Govinda, op.cit., p. 47f.

344 DN, III. 134-135.

345 Ibid.

346 MN, I. 37 ; An, III. 285.

347 MN, I. 21.

348 James W. Bond, “Suffering in Theravāda Buddhism”, Suffering, edited by K. N. Tiwari, p.162.

349 M. Hiriyanna, The Essentials of Indian Philosophy, (Delhi ; Motilal Banarsidass, 1995), p. 75.

350 SN, XXII. 45.

351Vin, I. 14 ; SN, XXII. 59.

352 SN, XXII. 59; The Kindred Sayings, III. 59.

353 Vism., 618.

354 MN, III. 282-284.

355 SN, I. 134.

356 S. Radhakrishnan, Indian Philosophy, I. p. 386-389.

357 Mrs. Rhys Davids, The Birth of Indian Psychology and Its Development in Buddhism (London : Luzac & Co., 1936), pp. 203, 218, 222.

358 Ibid., pp. 203, 218.

359 Ibid., p. 321.

360 Ibid., p. 219.

361 V. P. Varma, Early Buddhism and Its Origins, p. 145.

362 Th. Stcherbatsky, The Central Conception of Buddhism (Culcutta : Susil Gupta, 1961), p.23.

363 SN, III. 13.

364 SN, III. 85.

365 SN, IV. 54.

366 L.A. De Silva, The Problem of the Self in Buddhism and Christianity (Columbo : The Study Centre for Religion and Society, 1975), p. 25.

367 Chānd. Up., VIII. 7.1.

368 Brhd. Up., IV. 3.9.

369 Brhd. Up., II. 4.14.

370 SN, III. 143 (XXII.96) ; The Kindred Sayings, III. 123.

371 MN, I. 136-137 ; The Middle Length Sayings, I. 175-176.

372 Ibid.

373 T.R.V. Murti, The Central Philosophy of Buddhism, p. 32.

374 SN, II. 15.

375 MN, I. 167.

376 SN, II. 80 ; The Kindred Sayings, II. 55.

377 MN, I. 191.

378 SN, II. 24 ; Cf. AN, I. 286.

379 Mererk, Selflessness, p. 113.

380 MN, III. 63 ; SN, XII, 21 ; SN, II. 77.

381 SN, II. 1.

382 MN, I. 261 ; SN, II. 77.

383 MN, I. 261-262.

384 SN, II. 11.

385 SN, II. 1 ; SN, III. 132.

386 SN, III. 132.

387 Phrarajavaramuni, Buddha-Dhamma, pp. 129-134.

388 Vism., 513.

389 MN, I. 54.

390 MN, I. 261 ; SN, II. 77.

391 Buddhadasa Bhikkhu, The Meditative Development of Mindfulness of Breathing, p. 14.

392 Vism., 532.

393 MN, II. 126-128, 271.

394 See Sańgaha Tīkā, 240-244 ; Vism., 532-541 ; A Manual of Abhidhamma, pp. 364-378.

395 See in MN, I. 62-63 ; SN, II. 56 ; MN, II. 61 ; DN, II. 44 ; DN, II. 45 ; SN, II. 81 ; DN, II. 50 ; SN, II. 56 ; MN, I. 64.

396 Sańgaha Tīkā., 245 ; Sańgaha., 47, 48 ; A Manual of Abhidhamma, p. 368.

397 Vide, Nyanatiloka, The Significance of Dependent Origination in Theravada Buddhism, pp. 22-41; U.C. Mutsuddhi, Outlines of Buddhism and How It differs from Hinduism, pp. 6-8.

398 For the details of all similes see E. Conze, Buddhist Meditation, p. 157 ; Ven. Ayya Khema, “Dependent Arising : Cause and Effect” The Middle Way, Vol. 64, (1990), pp. 217-227.

399 Dh., V. 153-154.

400 Vin., I. 39.

401 M. Hiriyana, M. Outlines of Indian Philosophy, p. 149.