What the Buddha Taught 5
Mere suffering exists, but no sufferer is found:
The deeds are, but no doer is found.’
There is no unmoving mover behind the movement. It is only movement. It is not correct to say that life is moving, but life is movement itself. Life and movement are not two differenet things. In other words, there is no thinker behind the thought. Thought itself is the thinker. If you remove the thought, there is no thinker to be found. Here we cannot fail to notice how this Buddhist view is diametrically opposed to the Cartesian cogito ergo sum: ‘I think, therefore I am.’
Now a question may be raised whether life has a beginning. According to the Buddha’s teaching the beginning of the life stream of living beings is unthinable. The believer in the creation of life by God may be astonished at this reply. But if you were to ask him ‘What is the beginning of God?’ he would answer without hesitation ‘God has no beginning’, and he is not astonished at his own reply. The Buddha says: ‘O bhikkhus, this cycle of continuity is without a visible end, and the first beginning of beings wandering and running round, enveloped in ignorance and bound down by the fetters of thirst (desire, tanha) is not to be perceived.’ And further, referring to ignorance which is the main cause of the continuity of life the Buddha states: ‘The first beginning of ignorance is not to be perceived in such a way as to postulate that there was no ignoracne beyond a certain point. Thus it is not possible to say that there was no life beyonda certain definite point.
This in short is the meaning of the Noble Truth of Dukkha. It is extremely important to understand this First Noble Truth clearly because, as the Buddha says, ‘he who sees dukkha sees also the arising of dukkha, sees also the cessation of dukkha, and sees also the path leading to the cessation of dukkha.
This does not at all make the life of a Buddhist melancholy r sorrowl, as some people wrongly imagine. On the contrary, a true Buddhist is the happiest of beings. He has no fears or anxieties. He is always calm and serene, and cannot be upsetor dismayed by anges or calamities, because he sees things as they are. The Buddha was never melancholy or gloomy. He was described by his contemporaries as ‘ever-smiling’. In Buddhist painting and sculpture the Buddha is always represented with a countenance happy, serene, contented and compassionate. Never a trace of suffering or agony or pain is to be seen. Buddhist art and architecture, Buddhist temples
never give the impression of gloom or sorrow, but produce an atmosphere of calm and serene joy.
Although there is suffering in life, a Buddhist should not be gloomy over it, should not be angry or impatient at it. One of the principal evils in life, accoriding to Buddhism, is ‘repugnance’ or hatred. Repugnance is explained as ‘ill will with regard to living beings, with regard to suffering and with regard to things pertaining to suffering. Its function is to produce a basis for unhappy states and bad conduct.’ Thus it is wrong to be impatient at suffering. Being impatient or angry at suffering does not remove it. On the contrary, it adds a little more to one’s troubles, and aggravates and exacerbates a situation already disagreeable. What is neceessary is not anger or impatience, but the understanding of the question of suffering, how it comes about, and how to get rid of it, and then to work accordingly with patience, intelligence, determination and energy.
There are two ancient Buddhist texts called the Theragatha and Therigatha which are full of the joyful utterances of the Buddha’s disciples, both male and female, who found peace and happiness in life through his teaching. The king of Kosala once told the Buddha that unlike many a disciple of other religious systems who looked haggard, coarse, pale, emaciated and unprepossessing, his disciples were ‘joyful and elated, jubilant and exultant, enjoying the spiritual life, with faculties pleased, free from anxiety, serene, peaceful and living with a gazelle’s mind, i.e., light-hearted.’ The king added that he believed that this healthy disposition was due to the fact that ‘these venerable ones had certainly realized the great and full significance of the Blessed One’s teaching.’
Buddhism is quite opposed to the melancholic, sorrowful, penitent and gloomy attitude of mind which is considered a hindrance to the realization of Truth. On the other hand, it is interesting to remember here that joy is one of the seven Bojjhamgas or ‘Factors of Enlightenment’, the essential qualities ot be cultivated for the realization of Nirvana.
CHAPTER 3
THE SECOND NOBLE TRUTH:
SAMUDAYA: “The Arising of Dukkha”
The Second Noble Truth is that of the arising or origin of dukkha. The most popular and well-known definition of the Second Truth as found in innumerable places in the original texts runs as follows:
‘It is this “thirst” (craving, tanba) which produces re-existence and re-becoming, and which is bound up with passionate greed, and which finds fresh delight now here and now there, namely, thirst for sense-pleasures, thirst for existence and becoming and thirst for non-existence (self annihilation).
It is this ‘thirst’, desire, greed, craving, manifexsting itself in various ways, that gives rise to all forms of suffering and the continuity of beings. But it should not be taken as the first cause, for there is no first cause possible as, acoording to Buddhism, everything is relative and inter-dependent. Even this ‘thirst’, tanba, which is considered as the cause or origin of dukkha, depends for its arising (samudaya) on something else, which is sensation, and sensation arises depending on contact, and so on and so forth goes on the circle which is known as Conditioned Genesis, which we will discuss later.
So tanha, ‘thirst’, is not the first or the only cause of the arising of dukkha. But it is the most palpable and immediate casue, the ‘principal thing’ and the ‘all-pervading thing’. Hence in certain places of the original Pali texts themselves the definition of samudaya or the origin of dukkha includes other defilements and impurities, in addition to tanha ‘thirst’ which is always given the first place. Within the necessarily limited space of our discussion, it will be sufficient if we remember that this ‘thirst’ has as its center the false idea of self arising out of ignorance.
Here the term’thirst’ includes not only desire for, and attachment to, sense-pleasures, wealth and power, but also desire for, and attachment to, ideas and ideals, views, opinions, theories, conceptions and beliefs. According to the Buddha’s analysis, all the troubles and strife in the world, fromlittle personal quarrels in families to great wars between nations and countries, arise out of this selfish ‘thirst’. From this point of view, all economic, political and socail problems are rooted in this selfish ‘thirst’. Great stattesmen who try to settle international disputes and talk of war and peace only in economic and political terms touch the supeficaialites, and never go deep into the real root of the problem. As the Buddha told Rattapala: ‘The world lacks and hankers, and is enslaved to “thirst”.’
Every on will admit that all the evils in the world are produced by selfish desire. This is not difficult to understand. But how this desire, ‘thirst’, can produce re-existence and re-becoming aproblem not so easy to grasp. It is here that we have to discuss the deeper philosophical side of the Second Noble Truth. Here we must have some idea about the theory of karma and rebirth.
There are four Nutriments in the sense of ‘cause’ or ‘condition’ necessary for the existence and continuity of beings: 1. Ordinary material food, 2 contact of our sense-organs (including mind) with the external world 3. Consciousness and mental volition or will.
Of these four, the last mentioned ‘mental volition’ is the will to live, to exist, to re-exist, to continue, to become more and more. It creates the root of existence and continuity, striving forward by way of good and bad actions. It is the same as ‘Volition. We have seen earlier that volition is karma, as the Buddha himself has defined it. Referring to ‘Mental volition’ just mentioned above the Buddha says: ‘When one understands the nutriment of mental volition one understands the three forms of ‘thirst’. Thus the terms ‘thirst’, ‘volition’, ‘mental volition’ and ‘karma’ all denote the same thing: they denote the desire, the will to be, to exist, to re-exist, to become more and more, to grow more and more, to accumulate more and more. This is the cause of the arising of dukkha, and this is found within the Aggregate of Mental formations, one of the Five Aggregates which constitute a being.
Here is one of the most important and essential points in the Buddha’s teaching. We must therefore clearly and carefully mark and remeber that the cause, the germ, of the arising of dukkha is within dukkha itself, and not outside; and we ust equally well remember that the cause, the germ, of the cessation of dukkha, of the destruction of dukkha, is also within dukkha itself, and not outside. This is what is meant by the well-known formula often found in original Pali texts: Yam kinci samudayadhammam sabbam tam nirodhadhammam ‘Whatever is of the nature of arising, all that is of the naure of cessation. A being, a thing, or a system, if it has within itself the naure of arising, the nature of coming into being, has also within itself the nature, the germ, of its own cessation and estruction. Thus dukka (Five Aggregates) has within itselfthe nature of its own arising, and has also within itself the nature of its own cessation. This point will be taken up again in the discussion of the Third Noble Truth, Nirodha.
Now, the Pali word kamma or the Sanskrit word karma (from the root kr to do) literally means ‘action’, ‘doing’. But in the Buddhist theory of karma it has a specific meaning: it means only ‘volitional action’, not all action. Nor does it mean the result of karma as many people wrongly and loosely use it. In Buddhist terminology karma never means its effect; its effect is known as the ‘fruit’ or the ‘result’ of karma.
Volition may relatively be good or bad, jst as a desire may relatively be good or bad. So karma may be good or bad realativley. Good karma produces good effects, and bad karma produces bad effects. ‘Thirst’, volition, karma, whether good or bad, has one force as its effect: force to continue-to continue in a good or bad direction. Whether good or bad it is relative, and is within the cycle of continuity. An Arahant, though he acts, does not accumulate karma, because he is free from the false idea of self, free from the ‘thirst’ for continuity and becoming, free from all other defilements and impurities. For him there is no rebirth.
The theory oof karma should not be confused with so-called ‘moral justice’ or ‘reward and punishment’. The idea of moral justice, or reward and punishment, arises out of the conception of a supreme being, a God, who sits in judent, who is a law0giver and who decides whaqt is right and wrong. The term ‘justice’ is ambiguous humanity. The theory of karma is the theory of cause and effect, of action and reaction; it is a natural law, which has nothing to do with the diea of justice or reward and punishment. Every volitional action produces its effects or results. If a good action produces good effects and a bad action bad effects, it is not justice, or reward, or punishment meted out by anybody or any power sitting in judgment on your action, but this is in virtue of its own nature, its own law. This is not difficult to understand. But what is difficult is that, according to the karma theory, the effects of a volitional action my continue to manifest themselves even in a life after death. Here we have to explain what death is according to Buddhism.
We have seen eariler taht a being is nothing but a combination of pphysical and mental forces or energies. What we call death is the total non-functioning of the physical body. Do all these forces and energies stop altogether with the non-functioning of the body? Buddhism says ‘No’. Will, volition, desire, thirst to exist, to continue, to become more and more, is a tremendous force that moves whole lives, whole existences, that even moves the whole world. This is the greatest force, the greatest energy in the world. According to Buddhism, this force does not stop with the non-functioning of the body, which is death; but it continues manifesting itself in another form, producting re-existence which is called rebirth.
Now, another question arises: If there is no permanent, unchanging entity or substance like Self or Soul, what is it that can re-exist or be reborn after death? Before we go on to life after death, let us consider what is life is, and how it continues now. What we call life, as we have so often repeated, is the combination of the Five Aggregates, a combination of physical and mental energies. These are constatly changing; they do not remain the same for two consecutive moments. Every moment they are born and they die. ‘When the Aggregates arise, decay and die, O bhikkhu, every moment you are born, decay and die. Thus even now during this life time, every moment we are born and die, but we continue. If we can understand that in this life we can continue without a permanent, unchanging substance like Self or Soul, why can’t we understand that those forces themselves can continue without a Self or a Sould behind them after the non-functioning of the body?
When this physical body is no more capable of functioning, energies do not die with it, but continue to take some other shape or form, which we call another life. In a child all the physical, mental and intellectual faculites are tender and weak, but they have within them the potentiality of producting a full grown man. Physical and mental energies which constitute the so-called being have within themselves the power to take a new form, and grow gradually and gather force to the full.
출처: https://storytellingis.tistory.com/3 [붓다:티스토리]