THE FOURTH NOBLE TRUTH MAGGA: THE PATH

The Fourth Noble Truth is that of the Way leading to the Cessation of Dukkha (Dukkhanirodhagāminīpaṭipadā-ariyasacca). This is known as the ‘Middle Path’ (Majjhimā Paṭipadā), because it avoids two extremes: one extreme being the search for happiness through the pleasures of the senses, which is ‘low, common, unprofitable and the way of the ordinary people’; the other being the search for happiness through self-mortification in different forms of asceticism, which is ‘painful, unworthy and unprofitable’. Having himself first tried these two extremes, and having found them to be useless, the Buddha discovered through personal experience the Middle Path ‘which gives vision and knowledge, which leads to Calm, Insight, Enlightenment, Nirvāṇa’. This Middle Path is generally referred to as the Noble Eightfold Path (Ariya-Aṭṭhaṅgika-Magga), because it is composed of eight categories or divisions: namely,

1. Right Understanding (Sammā diṭṭhi)

2. Right Thought (Sammā saṅkappa)

3. Right Speech (Sammā vācā)

4. Right Action (Sammā kammanta)

5. Right Livelihood (Sammā ājīva)

6. Right Effort (Sammā vāyāma)

7. Right Mindfulness (Sammā sati)

8. Right Concentration (Sammā samādhi)

Practically the whole teaching of the Buddha, to which he devoted himself during 45 years, deals in some way or other with this Path. He explained it in different ways in different words to different people, according to the stage of their development and their capacity to understand and follow him. But the essence of those many thousand discourses scattered in the Buddhist Scriptures is found in the Noble Eightfold Path.

It should not be thought that the eight categories or divisions of the Path should be followed and practised one after the other in the numerical order as given in the usual list above. But they are to be developed more or less simultaneously, as far as possible according to the capacity of each individual. They are all linked together and each helps the cultivation of the others.

These eight factors aim at promoting and perfecting the three essentials of Buddhist training and discipline: namely: (a) Ethical Conduct (Sīla), (b) Mental Discipline (Samādhi) and (c) Wisdom (Paññā).[116] It will therefore be more helpful for a coherent and better understanding of the eight divisions of the Path, if we group them and explain them according to these three heads.

Ethical Conduct (Sīla) is built on the vast conception of universal love and compassion for all living beings, on which the Buddha’s teaching is based. It is regrettable that many scholars forget this great ideal of the Buddha’s teaching, and indulge in only dry philosophical and metaphysical divagations when they talk and write about Buddhism. The Buddha gave his teaching ‘for the good of the many, for the happiness of the many, out of compassion for the world’ (bahujanahitāya bahujanasukhāya lokānukampāya).

According to Buddhism for a man to be perfect there are two qualities that he should develop equally: compassion (karuṇā) on one side, and wisdom (paññā) on the other. Here compassion represents love, charity, kindness, tolerance and such noble qualities on the emotional side, or qualities of the heart, while wisdom would stand for the intellectual side or the qualities of the mind. If one develops only the emotional neglecting the intellectual, one may become a good-hearted fool; while to develop only the intellectual side neglecting the emotional may turn one into a hard-hearted intellect without feeling for others. Therefore, to be perfect one has to develop both equally. That is the aim of the Buddhist way of life: in it wisdom and compassion are inseparably linked together, as we shall see later.

Now, in Ethical Conduct (Sīla), based on love and compassion, are included three factors of the Noble Eightfold Path: namely, Right Speech, Right Action and Right Livelihood. (Nos. 3, 4 and 5 in the list).

Right speech means abstention (1) from telling lies, (2) from backbiting and slander and talk that may bring about hatred, enmity, disunity and disharmony among individuals or groups of people, (3) from harsh, rude, impolite, malicious and abusive language, and (4) from idle, useless and foolish babble and gossip. When one abstains from these forms of wrong and harmful speech one naturally has to speak the truth, has to use words that are friendly and benevolent, pleasant and gentle, meaningful and useful. One should not speak carelessly: speech should be at the right time and place. If one cannot say something useful, one should keep ‘noble silence’.

Right Action aims at promoting moral, honourable and peaceful conduct. It admonishes us that we should abstain from destroying life, from stealing, from dishonest dealings, from illegitimate sexual intercourse, and that we should also help others to lead a peaceful and honourable life in the right way.

Right Livelihood means that one should abstain from making one’s living through a profession that brings harm to others, such as trading in arms and lethal weapons, intoxicating drinks, poisons, killing animals, cheating, etc., and should live by a profession which is honourable, blameless and innocent of harm to others. One can clearly see here that Buddhism is strongly opposed to any kind of war, when it lays down that trade in arms and lethal weapons is an evil and unjust means of livelihood.

These three factors (Right Speech, Right Action and Right Livelihood) of the Eightfold Path constitute Ethical Conduct. It should be realized that the Buddhist ethical and moral conduct aims at promoting a happy and harmonious life both for the individual and for society. This moral conduct is considered as the indispensable foundation for all higher spiritual attainments. No spiritual development is possible without this moral basis.

Next comes Mental Discipline, in which are included three other factors of the Eightfold Path: namely, Right Effort, Right Mindfulness (or Attentiveness) and Right Concentration. (Nos. 6, 7 and 8 in the list.)

Right Effort is the energetic will (1) to prevent evil and unwholesome states of mind from arising, and (2) to get rid of such evil and unwholesome states that have already arisen within a man, and also (3) to produce, to cause to arise, good and wholesome states of mind not yet arisen, and (4) to develop and bring to perfection the good and wholesome states of mind already present in a man.

Right Mindfulness (or Attentiveness) is to be diligently aware, mindful and attentive with regard to (1) the activities of the body (kāya), (2) sensations or feelings (vedanā), (3) the activities of the mind (citta) and (4) ideas, thoughts, conceptions and things (dhamma).

The practice of concentration on breathing (ānāpānasati) is one of the well-known exercises, connected with the body, for mental development. There are several other ways of developing attentiveness in relation to the body – as modes of meditation.

With regard to sensations and feelings, one should be clearly aware of all forms of feelings and sensations, pleasant, unpleasant and neutral, of how they appear and disappear within oneself.

Concerning the activities of mind, one should be aware whether one’s mind is lustful or not, given to hatred or not, deluded or not, distracted or concentrated, etc. In this way one should be aware of all movements of mind, how they arise and disappear.

As regards ideas, thoughts, conceptions and things, one should know their nature, how they appear and disappear, how they are developed, how they are suppressed, and destroyed, and so on.

These four forms of mental culture or meditation are treated in detail in the Satipaṭṭhāna-sutta (Setting-up of Mindfulness).[117]

The third and last factor of Mental Discipline is Right Concentration leading to the four stages of Dhyāna, generally called trance or recueillement. In the first stage of Dhyāna, passionate desires and certain unwholesome thoughts like sensuous lust, ill-will, languor, worry, restlessness, and skeptical doubt are discarded, and feelings of joy and happiness are maintained, along with certain mental activities. In the second stage, all intellectual activities are suppressed, tranquillity and ‘one-pointedness’ of mind developed, and the feelings of joy and happiness are still retained. In the third stage, the feeling of joy, which is an active sensation, also disappears, while the disposition of happiness still remains in addition to mindful equanimity. In the fourth stage of Dhyāna, all sensations, even of happiness and unhappiness, of joy and sorrow, disappear, only pure equanimity and awareness remaining.

Thus the mind is trained and disciplined and developed through Right Effort, Right Mindfulness, and Right Concentration.

The remaining two factors, namely Right Thought and Right Understanding go to constitute Wisdom.

Right Thought denotes the thoughts of selfless renunciation or detachment, thoughts of love and thoughts of non-violence, which are extended to all beings. It is very interesting and important to note here that thoughts of selfless detachment, love and non-violence are grouped on the side of wisdom. This clearly shows that true wisdom is endowed with these noble qualities, and that all thoughts of selfish desire, ill-will, hatred and violence are the result of a lack of wisdom – in all spheres of life whether individual, social, or political.

Right Understanding is the understanding of things as they are, and it is the Four Noble Truths that explain things as they really are. Right Understanding therefore is ultimately reduced to the understanding of the Four Noble Truths. This understanding is the highest wisdom which sees the Ultimate Reality. According to Buddhism there are two sorts of understanding: What we generally call understanding is knowledge, an accumulated memory, an intellectual grasping of a subject according to certain given data. This is called ‘knowing accordingly’ (anubodha). It is not very deep. Real deep understanding is called ‘penetration’ (paṭivedha), seeing a thing in its true nature, without name and label. This penetration is possible only when the mind is free from all impurities and is fully developed through meditation.[118]

From this brief account of the Path, one may see that it is a way of life to be followed, practised and developed by each individual. It is self-discipline in body, word and mind, self-development and self-purification. It has nothing to do with belief, prayer, worship or ceremony. In that sense, it has nothing which may popularly be called ‘religious’. It is a Path leading to the realization of Ultimate Reality, to complete freedom, happiness and peace through moral, spiritual and intellectual perfection.

In Buddhist countries there are simple and beautiful customs and ceremonies on religious occasions. They have little to do with the real Path. But they have their value in satisfying certain religious emotions and the needs of those who are less advanced, and helping them gradually along the Path.

With regard to the Four Noble Truths we have four functions to perform:

The First Noble Truth is Dukkha, the nature of life, its suffering, its sorrows and joys, its imperfection and unsatisfactoriness, its impermanence and insubstantially. With regard to this, our function is to understand it as a fact, clearly and completely (pariññeyya).

The Second Noble Truth is the Origin of Dukka, which is desire, ‘thirst’, accompanied by all other passions, defilements and impurities. A mere understanding of this fact is not sufficient. Here our function is to discard it, to eliminate, to destroy and eradicate it (pahātabba).

The Third Noble Truth is the Cessation of Dukkha, Nirvāṇa, the Absolute Truth, the Ultimate Reality. Here our function is to realize it (sacchikātabba).

The Fourth Noble Truth is the Path leading to the realization of Nirvāṇa. A mere knowledge of the Path, however complete, will not do. In this case, our function is to follow it and keep to it (bhāvetabba).[119]

---

[116] M I (PTS), p. 301.

[117] See Chapter VII on Meditation.

[118] Vism. (PTS), p. 510.

[119] Mhvg. (Alutgama, 1922), p. 10.

THE THIRD NOBLE TRUTH: NIRODHA: THE CESSATION OF DUKKHA

The third Noble Truth is that there is emancipation, liberation, freedom from suffering, from the continuity of dukkha. This is called the Noble Truth of the Cessation of dukkha (Dukkhanirodha-ariyasacca), which is Nibbāna, more popularly known in its Sanskrit form of Nirvāṇa.

To eliminate dukkha completely one has to eliminate the main root of dukkha, which is ‘thirst’ (taṇhā), as we saw earlier. Therefore Nirvāṇa is known also by then term Taṇhakkhaya ‘Extinction of Thirst’.

Now you will ask: But what is Nirvāṇa? Volumes have been written in reply to this quite natural and simple question; they have, more and more, only confused the issue rather than clarified it. The only reasonable reply to give to the question is that it can never be answered completely and satisfactorily in words, because human language is too poor to express the real nature of the Absolute Truth or Ultimate Reality which is Nirvāṇa. Language is created and used by masses of human beings to express things and ideas experienced by their sense organs and their mind. A supramundane experience like that of the Absolute Truth is not of such a category. Therefore there cannot be words to express that experience, just as the fish had no words in his vocabulary to express the nature of the solid land. The tortoise told his friend the fish that he (the tortoise) just returned to the lake after a walk on the land. ‘Of course’ the fish said, ‘You mean swimming.’ The tortoise tried to explain that one couldn’t swim on the land, that it was solid, and that one walked on it. But the fish insisted that there could be nothing like it, that is must be liquid like his lake, with waves, and that one must be able to dive and swim there.

Words are symbols representing things and ideas known to us; and these symbols do not and cannot convey the true nature of even ordinary things. Language is considered deceptive and misleading in the matter of understanding of the Truth. So the Lankāvatāra-sūtra says that ignorant people get stuck in words like an elephant in the mud.[87]

Nevertheless we cannot do without language. But if Nirvāṇa is to be expressed and explained in positive terms, we are likely immediately to grasp an idea associated with those terms, which may be quite the contrary. Therefore it is generally expressed in negative terms[88] – a less dangerous mode perhaps. So it is often referred to by such negative terms as Taṇhakkhaya ‘Extinction of Thirst’, Asaṃkhata ‘Uncompound’, ‘Unconditioned’, Virāga ‘Absence of desire’, Nirodha ‘Cessation’, Nibbāna ‘Blowing out’ or ‘Extinction’.

Let us consider a few definitions and descriptions of Nirvāṇa as found in the original Pali texts:

‘It is the complete cessation of that very ‘thirst’ (taṇhā), giving it up, renouncing it, emancipation from it, detachment from it.’[89]

‘Calming of all conditioned things, giving up of all defilements, extinction of ‘thirst’, detachment, cessation, Nibbāna.’[90]

‘O bhikkhus, what is the Absolute (Asaṃkhata, Unconditioned)? It is, O bhikkhus, the extinction of desire (rāgakkhayo), the extinction of hatred (dosakkhayo), the extinction of illusion (mohakkhayo). This O bhikkhus, is called the Absolute.’[91]

‘O Rādha, the extinction of “thirst” (Taṇhakkhayo) is Nibbāna.’[92]

‘O bhikkhus, whatever there may be things conditioned or unconditioned, among them detachment (virāga) is the highest. That is to say, freedom from conceit, destruction of thirst,[93] the uprooting of attachment, the cutting off of continuity, the extinction of “thirst” (taṇhā), detachment, cessation, Nibbāna.’[94]

The reply of Sāriputta, the chief disciple of the Buddha, to a direct question ‘What is Nibbāna?’ posed by a Parivrājaka, is identical with the definition of Asaṃkhata given by the Buddha (above): ‘The extinction of desire, the extinction of hatred, the extinction of illusion.’[95]

‘The abandoning and destruction of desire and craving for these Five Aggregates of Attachment: that is the cessation of dukkha.’[96]

‘The cessation of Continuity and becoming (Bhavanirodha) is Nibbāna.’[97]

And further, referring to Nirvāṇa the Buddha says:

‘O bhikkhus, there is the unborn, ungrown, and unconditioned. Were there not the unborn, ungrown, and unconditioned, there would be no escape for the born, grown, and conditioned. Since there is the unborn, ungrown, and unconditioned, so there is escape for the born, grown, and conditioned.’[98]

‘Here the four elements of solidity, fluidity, heat and motion have no place; the notions of length and breadth, the subtle and the gross, good and evil, name and form are altogether destroyed; neither this world nor the other, nor coming, going or standing, neither death nor birth, nor sense-objects are to be found.’[99]

Because Nirvana is thus expressed in negative terms, there are many who have got a wrong notion that it is negative, and expresses self-annihilation. Nirvāṇa is definitely no annihilation of self, because there is no self no annihilate. If at all, it is the annihilation of the illusion, of the false idea of self.

It is incorrect to say that Nirvāṇa is negative or positive. The ideas of ‘negative’ and ‘positive’ are relative, and are within the realm of duality. These terms cannot be applied to Nirvāṇa, Absolute Truth, which is beyond duality and relativity.

A negative word need not necessarily indicate a negative state. The Pali of Sanskrit word for health is ārogya, a negative term, which literally means ‘absence or illness’. But ārogya (health) does not represent a negative state. The word ‘Immortal’ (or its Sanskrit equivalent Amṛta or Pali Amata), which also is a synonym for Nirvāṇa, is negative, but it does not denote a negative state. The negation of negative values is not negative. One of the well-known synonyms for Nirvāṇa is ‘Freedom’ (Pali Mutti, Skt. Mukti). Nobody would say that freedom is negative. But even freedom has a negative side: freedom is always a liberation from something which is obstructive, which is evil, which is negative. But freedom is not negative. So Nirvāṇa, Mutti or Vimutti, the Absolute Freedom, is freedom from all evil, freedom from craving, hatred and ignorance, freedom from all terms of duality, relativity, time and space.

We may get some idea of Nirvāṇa as Absolute Truth from the Dhātuvibhaṅga-sutta (No. 140) of the Majjhima-nikāya. This extremely important discourse was delivered by the Buddha to Pukkusāti (already mentioned), whom the Master found to be intelligent and earnest, in the quiet of the night in a potter’s shed. The essence of the relevant portions of the sutta is as follows:

A man is composed of six elements: solidity, fluidity, heat, motion, space and consciousness. He analyses them and finds that none of them is ‘mine’, or me, or ‘my self’. He understands how consciousness appears and disappears, how pleasant, unpleasant and neutral sensations appear and disappear. Through this knowledge his mind becomes detached. Then he finds within him a pure equanimity (upekhā), which he can direct towards the attainment of any high spiritual state, and he knows that thus this pure equanimity will last for a long period. But then he thinks:

‘If I focus this purified and cleansed equanimity on the Sphere of Infinite Space and develop a mind conforming thereto, that is a mental creation (saṃkhataṃ).[100] If I focus this purified and cleansed equanimity on the Sphere of Infinite Consciousness … on the Sphere of Nothingness … or on the Sphere of Neither-perception nor Non-perception and develop a mind conforming thereto, that is a mental creation.’ Then he neither mentally creates nor wills continuity and becoming (bhava) or annihilation (vibhava).[101] As he does not construct or does not will continuity and becoming or annihilation, he does not cling to anything in the world; as he does not cling, he is not anxious; as he is not anxious, he is completely calmed within (fully blown out within paccattaṃ yeva parinibbāyati). And he knows: ‘Finished is birth, lived is pure life, what should be done is done, nothing more is left to be done.’[102]

Now, when he experiences a pleasant, unpleasant or neutral sensation, he knows that it is impermanent, that it does not bind him, that it is not experienced with passion. Whatever may be the sensation, he experiences it without being bound to it (visaṃyutto). He knows that all those sensations will be pacified with the dissolution of the body, just as the flame of a lamp goes out when oil and wick give out.

‘Therefore, O bhikkhu, a person so endowed is endowed with the absolute wisdom, for the knowledge of the extinction of all dukkha is the absolute noble wisdom.

‘This his deliverance, founded on Truth, is unshakable. O bhikkhu, that which is unreality (mosadhamma) is false; that which is reality (amosadhamma), Nibbāna, is Truth (Sacca). Therefore, O bhikkhu, a person so endowed is endowed with this Absolute Truth. For, the Absolute Noble Truth (paramaṃ ariyasaccaṃ) is Nibbāna, which is Reality.’

Elsewhere the Buddha unequivocally uses the word Truth in place of Nibbāna: ‘I will teach you the Truth and the Path leading to the Truth.’[103] Here Truth definitely means Nirvāṇa.

Now, what is Absolute Truth? According to Buddhism, the Absolute Truth is that there is nothing absolute in the world, that everything is relative, conditioned and impermanent, and that there is no unchanging, everlasting, absolute substance like Self, Soul, or Ātman within or without. This is the Absolute Truth. Truth is never negative, though there is a popular expression as negative truth. The realization of this Truth, i.e., to see things as they are (yathābhūtaṃ) without illusion or ignorance (avijjā),[104] is the extinction of craving ‘thirst’ (Taṇhakkhaya), andthe cessation (Nirodha) of dukkha, which is Nirvāṇa. It is interesting and useful to remember here the Mahāyāna view of Nirvāṇa as not being different from Saṃsāra.[105] The same thing is Saṃsāra or Nirvāṇa according to the way you look at it – subjectively or objectively. This Mahāyāna view was probably developed out of the ideas found in the original Theravāda Pali texts, to which we have just referred in our brief discussion.

It is incorrect to think that Nirvāṇa is the natural result of the extinction of craving. Nirvāṇa is not the result of anything. If it would be a result, then it would be an effect produced by a cause. It would be saṃkhata ‘produced’ and ‘conditioned’. Nirvāṇa is neither cause nor effect. It is beyond cause and effect. Truth is not a result nor an effect. It is not produced like a mystic, spiritual, mental state, such as dhyāna or samādhi. TRUTH IS. NIRVĀṆA IS. The only thing you can do is to see it, to realize it. There is a path leading to the realization of Nirvāṇa. But Nirvāṇa is not the result of this path.[106] You may get to the mountain along a path, but the mountain is not the result, not an effect of the path. You may see a light, but the light not the result of your eyesight.

People often ask: What is there after Nirvāṇa? This question cannot arise, because Nirvāṇa is the Ultimate Truth. If it is Ultimate, there can be nothing after it. If there is anything after Nirvāṇa, then that will be the Ultimate Truth and not Nirvāṇa. A monk named Rādha put this question to the Buddha in a different form: ‘For what purpose (or end) is Nirvāṇa?’ This question presupposes something after Nirvāṇa, when it postulates some purpose or end for it. So the Buddha answered: ‘O Rādha, this question could not catch its limit (i.e., it is beside the point). One lives the holy life with Nirvāṇa as its final plunge (into the Absolute Truth), as its goal, as its ultimate end.’[107]

Some popular inaccurately phrased expressions like ‘The Buddha entered into Nirvāṇa or Parinirvāṇa after his death’ have given rise to many imaginary speculations about Nirvāṇa.[108] The moment you hear the phrase that ‘the Buddha entered into Nirvāṇa or Parinirvāṇa’, you take Nirvāṇa to be a state, or a realm, or a position in which there is some sort of existence, and try to imagine it in terms of the senses of the word ‘existence’ as it is known to you. This popular expression ‘entered into Nirvāṇa’ has no equivalent in the original texts. There is no such thing as ‘entering into Nirvāṇa after death’. There is a word parinibbuto used to denote the death of the Buddha or an Arahant who has realized Nirvāṇa, but it does not mean ‘entering into Nirvāṇa’. Parinibbuto simply means ‘fully passed away’, ‘fully blown out’ or ‘fully extinct’, because the Buddha or an Arahant has no re-existence after his death.

Now another question arises: What happens to the Buddha or an Arahant after his death, parinirvāṇa? This comes under the category of unanswered questions (avyākata).[109] Even when the Buddha spoke about this, he indicated that no words in our vocabulary could express what happens to an Arahant after his death. In reply to a Parivrājaka named Vaccha, the Buddha said that terms like ‘born’ or ‘not born’ do not apply in the case of an Arahant, because those things – matter, sensation, perception, mental activities, consciousness – with which the terms like ‘born’ and ‘not born’ are associated, are completely destroyed and uprooted, never to rise again after his death.[110]

An Arahant after his death is often compared to a fire gone out when the supply of wood is over, or to the flame of a lamp gone out when the wick and oil are finished.[111] Here it should be clearly and distinctly understood, without any confusion, that what is compared to a flame or a fire gone out is not Nirvāṇa, but the ‘being’ composed of the Five Aggregates who realized Nirvāṇa. This point has to be emphasized because many people, even some great scholars, have misunderstood and misinterpreted this smile as referring to Nirvāṇa. Nirvāṇa is never compared to a fire or a lamp gone out.

There is another popular question: If there is no Self, no Ātman, who realizes Nirvāṇa? Before we go on to Nirvāṇa, let us ask the question: Who thinks now, if there is no Self? We have seen earlier that it is the thought that thinks, that there is no thinker behind the thought. In the same way, it is wisdom (paññā), realization, that realizes. There is no other self behind the realization. In the discussion of the orgin of dukkha we saw that whatever it may be – whether being, or thing, or system – if it is of the nature of arising, it has within itself the nature, the germ, of its cessation, its destruction. Now dukkha, saṃsāra, the cycle of continuity, is of the nature of arising; it must also be of the nature of cessation. Dukkha arises because of ‘thirst’ (taṇhā), and it ceases because of wisdom (paññā). ‘Thirst’ and wisdom are both within the Five Aggregates, as we saw earlier.[112]

Thus, the germ of their arising as well as that of their cessation are both within the Five Aggregates. This is the real meaning of the Buddha’s well-known statement: ‘Within this fathom-long sentient body itself, I postulate the world, the arising of the world, the cessation of the world, and the path leading to the cessation of the world.’[113] This means that all the Four Noble Truths are found within the Five Aggregates, i.e., within ourselves. (Here the word ‘world’ (loka) is used in place of dukkha). This also means that there is no external power that produces the arising and the cessation of dukkha.

When wisdom is developed and cultivated according to the Fourth Noble Truth (the next to be taken up), it sees the secret of life, the reality of things as they are. When the secret is discovered, when the Truth is seen, all the forces which feverishly produce the continuity of saṃsāra in illusion become calm and incapable of producing any more karma-formations, because there is no more illusion, no more ‘thirst’ for continuity. It is like a mental disease which is cured when the cause or the secret of the malady is discovered and seen by the patient.

In almost all religions the summum bonum can be attained only after death. But Nirvāṇa can be realized in this very life; it is not necessary to wait till you die to ‘attain’ it.

He who has realized the Truth, Nirvāṇa, is the happiest being in the world. He is free from all ‘complexes’ and obsessions, the worries and troubles that torment others. His mental health is perfect. He does not repent the past, nor does he brood over the future. He lives fully in the present.[114] Therefore he appreciates and enjoys things in the purest sense without self-projections. He is joyful, exultant, enjoying the pure life, his faculties pleased, free from anxiety, serene and peaceful.[115] As he is free from selfish desire, hatred, ignorance, conceit, pride, and all such ‘defilements’, he is pure and gentle, full of universal love, compassion, kindness, sympathy, understanding and tolerance. His service to others is of the purest, for he has no thought of self. He gains nothing, accumulates nothing, not even anything spiritual, because he is free from the illusion of Self, and the ‘thirst’ for becoming.

Nirvāṇa is beyond all terms of duality and relativity. It is therefore beyond our conceptions of good and evil, right and wrong, existence and non-existence. Even the word ‘happiness’ (sukha) which is used to describe Nirvāṇa has an entirely different sense here. Sāriputta once said: ‘O friend, Nirvāṇa is happiness! Nirvāṇa is happiness!’ Then Udāyi asked: ‘But, friend Sāriputta, what happiness can it be if there is no sensation?’ Sāriputta’s reply was highly philosophical and beyond ordinary comprehension: ‘That there is no sensation itself is happiness.’

Nirvāṇa is beyond logic and reasoning (atakkāvacara). However much we may engage, often as a vain intellectual pastime, in highly speculative discussions regarding Nirvāṇa or Ultimate Truth or Reality, we shall never understand it that way. A child in the kindergarten should not quarrel about the theory of relativity. Instead, if he follows his studies patiently and diligently, one day he may understand it. Nirvāṇa is ‘to be realized by the wise within themselves’ (paccattaṃ veditabbo viññūhi). If we follow the Path patiently and with diligence, train and purify ourselves earnestly, and attain the necessary spiritual development, we may one day realize it within ourselves – without taxing ourselves with puzzling and high- sounding words.

Let us therefore now turn to the Path which leads to the realization of Nirvāṇa.

---

[87] Lanka. p. 113

[88] Sometimes positive terms like Siva ‘Auspicious’, ‘Good’, Khema ‘Safety’, Suddhi ‘Purity’, Dīpa ‘Island’, Saraṇa ‘Refuge’, Tāṃa ‘Protection’, Pāra ‘Opposite shore’. ‘Other side’, Santi ‘Peace’, ‘Tranquillity’ are used to denote Nirvāṇa. There are 32 synonyms for Nibbāna in the Asaṃkhata-saṃyutta of the Saṃyutta-nikāya. They are mostly metaphorical.

[89] Mhvg. (Alutgama,1922), p. 10; S V p. 421. It is interesting to note that this definition of Nirodha ‘Cessation of Dukkha’, which is found in the first sermon of the Buddha at Sarnath, does not contain the word Nibbāna, though the definition means it.

[90] S I, p. 136

[91] Ibid. IV, p. 359.

[92] Ibid. III, p. 190.

[93] Here the word pipāsa which lit. means thirst

[94] A (PTS) II, p. 34.

[95] S (PTS) IV, p. 251.

[96] Sāriputta’s words. M I, (PTS), p. 191.

[97] Words of Musīla, another disciple of the Buddha. S II (PTS), p. 117.

[98] Ud. (Colombo, 1929), p. 129.

[99] Ibid. p. 128; D I (Colombo, 1929), p. 172.

[100] Notice that all the spiritual and mystic states, however pure and high they may be, are mental creations, mind-made, conditioned and compound (saṃkhata). They are not Reality, not Truth (sacca).

[101] This means that he does not produce new karma, because now he is free from ‘thirst’ will, volition.

[102] This expression means that now he is an Arahant.

[103] S V (PTS), p. 369.

[104] Cf. Lanka. p. 200; ‘O Mahāmati, Nirvāṇa means to see the state of things as they are.’

[105] Nāgārjuna clearly says that ‘Saṃsāra has no difference whatever from Nirvāṇa and Nirvāṇa has no difference whatever from Saṃsāra.’ (Madhya. Kari XXV, 19).

[106] It is useful to remember here that among nine supra-mundane dharmas (navalo-kuttara-dhamma) Nirvāṇa is beyond magga (path) and phala (fruition).

[107] S III (PTS), p. 189.

[108] There are some who write ‘after the Nirvāṇa of the Buddha’ instead of ‘after the Parinirvāṇa of the Buddha’. ‘After the Nirvāṇa of the Buddha’ has no meaning, and the expression is unknown in Buddhist literature. It is always ‘after the Parinirvāṇa of the Buddha’.

[109] S IV (PTS), p. 375 f.

[110] M I (PTS), p. 486.

[111] Ibid. I, p. 487; III, p. 245; Sn (PTS), v. 232 (p. 41).

[112] See Aggregates of Formations above pp. 16, 21.

[113] A (Colombo, 1929), p. 218.

[114] S I (PTS), p. 5.

[115] M II (PTS), p. 121.

THE SECOND NOBLE TRUTH: SAMUDAYA: THE ARISING OF DUKKHA

The Second Noble Truth is that of the arising or origin of dukkha (Dukkhasamudaya-ariyasacca). 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, taṇhā) which produces re-existence and re-becoming (ponobhavikā), and which is bound up with passionate greed (nandīrāgasahagatā), and which finds fresh delight now here and now there (tatratatrābhinandinī), namely, (1) thirst for sense-pleasures (kāma-taṇhā), (2) thirst for existence and becoming (bhava-taṇhā) and (3) thirst for non-existence (self-annihilation, vibhava-taṇhā).[71]

It is this ‘thirst’, desire, greed, craving, manifesting 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, according to Buddhism, everything is relative and inter-dependent. Even this ‘thirst’, taṇhā, which is considered as the cause or origin of dukkha, depends for its arising (samudaya) on something else, which is sensation (vedanā),[72] and sensation arises depending on contact (phassa), and so on and so forth goes on the circle which is known as Conditioned Genesis (Paṭicca-samuppāda), which we will discuss later.[73]

So taṇhā, ‘thirst’, is not the first or the only cause of the arising of dukkha. But it is the most palpable and immediate cause, the ‘principal thing’ and the ‘all-pervading thing’.[74] Hence in certain places of the original Pali texts themselves the definition of samudaya or the origin of dukkha includes other defilements and impurities (kilesā, sāsavā dhammā), in addition to taṇhā ‘thirst’ which is always given the first place.[75] Within the necessarily limited space of our discussion, it will be sufficient if we remember that this ‘thirst’ has as its centre 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, idea and ideals, views, opinions, theories, conceptions and beliefs (dhamma-taṇhā).[76] According to the Buddha’s analysis, all the troubles and strife in the world, from little personal quarrels in families to great wars between nations and countries, arise out of this selfish ‘thirst’. [77] From this point of view, all economic, political and social problems are rooted in this selfish ‘thirst’. Great statesmen who try to settle international disputes and talk of war and peace only in economic and political terms touch the superficialities, and never go deep into the real root of the problem. As the Buddha told Raṭṭapāla: ‘The world lacks and hankers, and is enslaved to “thirst” (taṇhādāso).’

Every one 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 (ponobhavikā) is a problem not so easy to grasp. It is here that we have to discuss the deeper philosophical side of the Second Noble Truth corresponding to the philosophical side of the First Noble Truth. Here we must have some idea about the theory of karma and rebirth.

There are four Nutriments (āhāra) in the sense of ‘cause’ or ‘condition’ necessary for the existence and continuity of beings: (1) ordinary material food (kabaliṅkārāhāra), (2) contact of our sense-organs (including mind) with the external world (phassāhāra), (3) consciousness (viññāṇāhāra) and (4) mental volition or will (manosañcetanāhāra).[78]

Of these four, the last mentioned ‘mental volition’ is the will to live, to re-exist, to continue, to become more and more.[79] It creates the root of existence and continuity, striving forward by the way of good and bad actions (kusalākusalakamma).[80] It is the same as ‘Volition’ (cetanā).[81] We have seen earlier[82] 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’ (taṇhā).’[83] 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.[84]

Here is one of the most important and essential points in the Buddha’s teaching. We must therefore clearly and carefully mark and remember that the cause, the germ, of the arising of dukkha is within dukkha itself, and not outside; and we must 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: Yaṃ kiñci samudayadhammaṃ sabbaṃ taṃ nirodhadhammaṃ ‘Whatever is of the nature of arising, all that is of the nature of cessation.’[85] A being, a thing, or a system, if it has within itself the nature of arising, the nature of coming into being, has also within itself the nature, the germ, of its own cessation and destruction. Thus dukkha (Five Aggregates) has within itself the 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 Sankrit word karma (from the root kṛ 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’ or karma (kamma-phala or kamma-vipāka).

Volition may relatively be good or bad, just as a desire may relatively be good or bad. So karma may be good or bad relatively. Good karma (kusala) produces good effects, and bad karma (akusala) 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 (saṃsāra). 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 (kilesā, sāsavā dhammā). For him there is no rebirth.

The theory of 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 judgment, who is a law-giver and who decides what is right and wrong. The term ‘justice’ is ambiguous and dangerous, and in its name more harm than good is done to 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 idea 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 may continue to manifest themselves even in a life after death. Here we have to explain what death is according to Buddhism.

We have seen earlier that a being is nothing but a combination of physical 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, producing re-existence which is called rebirth.

Now, another question arises: If there is no permanent, unchanging entity or substance like Self or Soul (ātman), what is it that can re-exist or be reborn after death? Before we can go on to life after death, let us consider what this 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 constantly 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.’[86] 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 Soul behind them after then 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 faculties are tender and weak, but they have within them the potentiality of producing 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.

As there is no permanent, unchanging substance, nothing passes from one moment to the next. So quite obviously, nothing permanent or unchanging can pass or transmigrate from one life to the next. It is a series that continues unbroken, but changes every moment. The series is, really speaking, nothing but movement. It is like a flame that burns through the night: it is not the same flame nor it is another. A child grows up to be a man of sixty. Certainly the man of sixty is not the same as the child of sixty years ago, nor is he another person. Similarly, a person who dies here and is reborn elsewhere is neither the same person, nor another (na ca so na ca añño). It is the continuity of the same series. The difference between death and birth is only a thought-moment: the last thought-moment in this life conditions the first thought-moment in the so-called next life, which, in fact, is the continuity of the same series. During this life itself, too, one thought-moment conditions the next thought-moment. So from the Buddhist point of view, the question of life after death is not a great mystery, and a Buddhist is never worried about this problem.

As long as there is this ‘thirst’ to be and to become, the cycle of continuity (saṃsāra) goes on. It can stop only when its driving force, this ‘thirst’, is cut off through wisdom which sees Reality, Truth, Nirvāṇa.

---

[71] Mhvg. (Alutgama, 1922), p. 9; S V (PTS), p. 421 and passim.

[72] Vedanāsamudayā taṇhāsamudayo. M I (PTS), p. 51

[73] See p. 32.

[74] Abhisamuc, p. 43, prādhānyārtha, sarvatragārtha.

[75] See Vibh. (PTS), p. 106 ff.

[76] M I (PTS), p. 51; S II p. 72; Vibh. p. 380.

[77] M I, p. 86.

[78] ibid., p. 48.

[79] It is interesting to compare this ‘mental volition’ with ‘libido’ in modern psychology.

[80] MA I (PTS), p. 210.

[81] Manosañcetanā’ ti cetanā eva vuccati. MA I (PTS), p. 209.

[82] See above p. 16.

[83] S II (PTS), p. 100. The three forms of ‘thirst’ are: (1) Thirst for sense-pleasures, (2) Thirst for existence and becoming, and (3) Thirst for non-existence, as given in the definition of samudaya ‘arising of dukkha’ above.

[84] See above p. 16.

[85] M III (PTS), p. 280; S IV, pp. 47, 107; V, p. 423 and passim.

[86] Prmj. I (PTS), p. 78. ‘Khandhesu jāyamānesu jīyamānesu mīyamānesu ca khaṇe khaṇe tvaṃ bhikkhu jāyase ca jīyase ca mīyase ca.’ This is quoted in the Paramatthajotikā Commentary as the Buddha’s own words. So far I have not been able to trace this passage back to its original text.

THE FIRST NOBLE TRUTH: DUKKHA

The First Noble Truth (Dukkha-ariyasacca) is generally translated by almost all scholars as ‘The Noble Truth of Suffering’, and it is interpreted to mean that life according to Buddhism is nothing but suffering and pain. Both translation and interpretation are highly unsatisfactory and misleading. It is because of this limited, free and easy translation, and its superficial interpretation, that many people have been misled into regarding Buddhism as pessimistic.

First of all, Buddhism is neither pessimistic nor optimistic. If anything at all, it is realistic, for it takes a realistic view of life and of the world. It looks at things objectively (yathābhūtaṃ). It does not falsely lull you into living in a fool’s paradise, nor does it frighten and agonize you with all kinds of imaginary fears and sins. It tells you exactly and objectively what you are and what the world around you is, and shows you the way to perfect freedom, peace, tranquillity and happiness.

One physician may gravely exaggerate an illness and give up hope altogether. Another may ignorantly declare that there is no illness and that no treatment is necessary, thus deceiving the patient with a false consolation. You may call the first one pessimistic and the second optimistic. Both are equally dangerous. But a third physician diagnoses the symptoms correctly, understands the cause and the nature of the illness, sees clearly that it can be cured, and courageously administers a course of treatment, thus saving his patient. The Buddha is like the last physician. He is the wise and scientific doctor for the ills of the world (Bhisakka or Bhaiṣajya-guru).

It is true that the Pali word dukkha (or Sanskrit duḥkha) in ordinary usage means ‘suffering’, ‘pain’, ‘sorrow’ or ‘misery’, as opposed to the word sukha meaning ‘happiness’, ‘comfort’ or ‘ease’. But the term dukkha as the First Noble Truth, which represents the Buddha’s view of life and the world, has a deeper philosophical meaning and connotes enormously wider senses. It is admitted that the term dukkha in the First Noble Truth contains, quite obviously, the ordinary meaning of ‘suffering’, but in addition it also includes deeper ideas such as ‘imperfection’, ‘impermanence’, ‘emptiness’, ‘insubstantiality’. It is difficult therefore to find one word to embrace the whole conception of the term dukkha as the First Noble Truth, and so it is better to leave it untranslated, than to give an inadequate and wrong idea of it by conveniently translating it as ‘suffering’ or ‘pain’.

The Buddha does not deny happiness in life when he says there is suffering. On the contrary he admits different forms of happiness, both material and spiritual, for laymen as well as for monks. In the Aṅguttara-nikāya, one of the five original Collections in Pāli containing the Buddha’s discourses, there is a list of happinesses (sukhāni), such as the happiness of family life and the happiness of the life of a recluse, the happiness of sense pleasures and the happiness of renunciation, the happiness of attachment and the happiness of detachment, physical happiness and mental happiness etc.[40] But all these are included in dukkha. Even the very pure spiritual states of dhyāna (recueillement or trance) attained by the practice of higher meditation, free from even a shadow of suffering in the accepted sense of the word, states which may be described as unmixed happiness, as well as the state of dhyāna which is free from sensations both pleasant (sukha) and unpleasant (dukkha) and is only pure equanimity and awareness – even these very high spiritual states are included in dukkha. In one of the suttas of the Majjhima-nikāya, (again one of the five original Collections), after praising the spiritual happiness of these dhyānas, the Buddha says that they are ‘impermanent, dukkha, and subject to change’ (aniccā dukkhā vipariṇāmadhammā).[41] Notice that the word dukkha is explicitly used. It is dukkha, not because there is ‘suffering’ in the ordinary sense of the word, but because ‘whatever is impermanent is dukkha’ (yad aniccaṃ taṃ dukkhaṃ).

The Buddha was realistic and objective. He says, with regard to life and the enjoyment of sense-pleasures, that one should clearly understand three things: (1) attraction or enjoyment (assāda), (2) evil consequence or danger or unsatisfactoriness (ādīnava), and (3) freedom or liberation (nissaraṇa).[42] When you see a pleasant, charming and beautiful person, you like him (or her), you are attracted, you enjoy seeing that person again and again, you derive pleasure and satisfaction from that person. This is enjoyment (assāda). It is a fact of experience. But this enjoyment is not permanent, just as that person and all his (or her) attractions are not permanent either. When the situation changes, when you cannot see that person, when you are deprived of this enjoyment, you become sad, you may become unreasonable and unbalanced, you may even behave foolishly. This is the evil, unsatisfactory and dangerous side of the picture (ādīnava). This, too, is a fact of experience. Now if you have no attachment to the person, if you are completely detached, that is freedom, liberation (nissaraṇa). These three things are true with regard to all enjoyment in life.

From it is evident that it is no question of pessimism or optimism, but that we must take account of the pleasures of life as well as of its pains and sorrows, and also freedom from them, in order to understand life completely and objectively. Only then is true liberation possible. Regarding this question the Buddha says:

‘O bhikkhus, if any recluses or brāhmaṇas do not understand objectively in this way that the enjoyment of sense-pleasures is enjoyment, that their unsatisfactoriness is unsatisfactoriness, that liberation from them is liberation, then it is not possible that they themselves will certainly understand the desire for sense-pleasures completely, or that they will be able to instruct another person to that end, or that the person following their instruction will completely understand the desire for sense-pleasures. But, O bhikkhus, if any recluses or brāhmaṇas understand objectively in this way that the enjoyment of sense-pleasures is enjoyment, that their unsatisfactoriness is unsatisfactoriness, that liberation from them is liberation, then it is possible that they themselves will certainly understand the desire for sense-pleasures completely, and that they will be able to instruct another person to that end, and that that person following their instruction will completely understand the desire for sense-pleasure.’[43]

The conception of dukkha may be viewed from three aspects: (1) dukkha as ordinary suffering (dukkha-dukkha), (2) dukkha as produced by change (vipariṇāma-dukkha) and (3) dukkha as conditioned states (saṃkhāra-dukkha).[44]

All kinds of suffering in life like birth, old age, sickness, death, association with unpleasant persons and conditions, separation from loved ones and pleasant conditions, not getting what one desires, grief, lamentation, distress – all such forms of physical and mental suffering, which are universally accepted as suffering or pain, are included in dukkha as ordinary suffering (dukkha-dukkha).

A happy feeling, a happy condition in life, is not permanent, not everlasting. It changes sooner or later. When it changes, it produces pain, suffering, unhappiness. This vicissitude is included in dukkha as suffering produced by change (vipariṇāma-dukkha).

It is easy to understand the two forms of suffering (dukkha) mentioned above. No one will dispute them. This aspect of the First Noble Truth is more popularly known because it is easy to understand. It is common experience in our daily life.

But the third form of dukkha as conditioned states (saṃkhāra-dukkha) is the most important philosophical aspect of the First Noble Truth, and it requires some analytical explanation of what we consider as a ‘being’, as an ‘individual’, or as ‘I’.

What we call a ‘being’, or an ‘individual’, or ‘I’, according to Buddhist philosophy, is only a combination of ever-changing physical and mental forces or energies, which may be divided into five groups or aggregates (pañcakkhandha). The Buddha says: ‘In short these five aggregates of attachment are dukkha’.[45] Elsewhere he distinctly defines dukkha as the five aggregates: ‘O bhikkhus, what is dukkha? It should be said that it is the five aggregates of attachment’.[46] Here it should be clearly understood that dukkha and the five aggregates are not two different things; the five aggregates themselves are dukkha. We will understand this point better when we have some notion of the five aggregates which constitute the so-called ‘being’. Now, what are these five?

The Five Aggregates

The first is the Aggregate of Matter (Rūpakkhandha). In this term ‘Aggregate of Matter’ are included the traditional Four Great Elements (cattāri mahābbūtāni), namely, solidity, fluidity, heat and motion, and also the Derivatives (upādāya-rūpa) of the Four Great Elements.[47] In the term ‘Derivatives of Four Great Elements’ are included our five material sense-organs, i.e., the faculties of eye, ear, nose, tongue, and body, and their corresponding objects in the external world, i.e., visible form, sound, odour, taste, and tangible things, and also some thoughts or ideas or conceptions which are in the sphere of mind-objects (dharmāyatana).[48] Thus the whole realm of matter, both internal and external, is included in the Aggregate of Matter.

The second is the Aggregate of Sensations (Vedanākkhandha). In this group are included all our sensations, pleasant or unpleasant or neutral, experienced through the contact of physical and mental organs with the external world. They are of six kinds: the sensations experienced through the contact of the eye with visible forms, ear with sounds, nose with odour, tongue with taste, body with tangible objects, and mind (which is the sixth faculty in Buddhist Philosophy) with mind-objects or thoughts or ideas.[49] All our physical and mental sensations are included in this group.

A word about what is meant by the term “Mind’ (manas) in Buddhist philosophy may be useful here. It should clearly be understood that mind is not spirit as opposed to matter. It should always be remembered that Buddhism does not recognize a spirit opposed to matter, as is accepted by most other systems of philosophies and religions. Mind is only a faculty or organ (indriya) like the eye or the ear. It can be controlled and developed like any other faculty, and the Buddha speaks quite often of the value of controlling and disciplining these six faculties. The difference between the eye and the mind as faculties is that the former senses the world of colours and visible forms, while the latter senses the world of ideas and thoughts and mental objects. We experience different fields of the world with different senses. We cannot hear colours, but we can see them. Nor can we see sounds, but we can hear them. Thus with our five physical sense-organs – eye, ear, nose, tongue, body – we experience only the world of visible forms, sound, odours, tastes and tangible objects. But these represent only a part of the world, not the whole. What of ideas and thoughts? They are also a part of the world. But they cannot be sensed, they cannot be conceived by the faculty of the eye, ear, nose, tongue or body. Yet they can be conceived by another faculty, which is mind. Now ideas and thoughts are not independent of the world experienced by these five physical sense faculties. In fact they depend on, and are conditioned by, physical experiences. Hence a person born blind cannot have ideas of colour, except through the analogy of sounds or some other things experienced through his other faculties. Ideas and thoughts which form a part of the world are thus produced and conditioned by physical experiences and are conceived by the mind. Hence mind (manas) is considered a sense faculty or organ (indriya), like the eye or the ear.

The third is the Aggregate of Perceptions (Saññākkhandha). Like sensations, perceptions also are of six kinds, in relation to six internal faculties and the corresponding six external objects. Like sensations, they are produced through the contact of our six faculties with the external world. It is the perceptions that recognize objects whether physical or mental.[50]

The fourth is the Aggregate of Mental Formations[51] (Saṃkhārakkhandha). In this group are included all volitional activities both good and bad. What is generally known as karma (or kamma) comes under this group. The Buddha’s own definition of karma should be remembered here: ‘O bhikkhus, it is volition (cetanā) that I call karma. Having willed, one acts through body, speech and mind.[52] Volition is ‘mental construction, mental activity. Its function is to direct the mind in the sphere of good, bad or neutral activities.’[53] Just like sensations and perceptions, volition is of six kinds, connected with the six internal faculties and the corresponding six objects (both physical and mental) in the external world.[54] Sensations and perceptions are not volitional actions. They do not produce karmic effects. It is only volitional actions – such as attention (manasikāra), will (chanda), determination (adhimokkha), confidence (saddhā), concentration (samādhi), wisdom (paññā), energy (viriya), desire (rāga), repugnance or hate (paṭigha), ignorance (avijjā), conceit (māna), idea of self (sakkāya-ditthi) etc. – that can produce karmic effects. There are 52 such mental activities which constitute the Aggregate of Mental Formations.

The fifth is the Aggregate of Consciousness (Viññāṇa­kkhandha).[55] Consciousness is a reaction or response which has one of the six faculties (eye, ear, nose, tongue, body and mind) as its basis, and one of the six corresponding external phenomena (visible form, sound, odour, taste, tangible things and mind-objects, i.e., an idea or thought) as its objects. For instance, visual consciousness (cakkhu-viññāṇa) has the eye as its basis and a visible form as its object. Mental consciousness (mano-viññāṇa) has the mind (manas) as its basis and a mental object, i.e., an idea or thought (dhamma) as its object. So consciousness is connected with other faculties. Thus, like sensation, perception and volition, consciousness also is of six kinds, in relation to six internal faculties and corresponding six external objects.[56]

It should be clearly understood that consciousness does not recognize an object. It is only a sort of awareness – awareness of the presence of an object. When the eye comes in contact with a colour, for instance blue, visual consciousness arises which simply is awareness of the presence of a colour; but it does not recognize that it is blue. There is no recognition at this stage. It is perception (the third Aggregate discussed above) that recognizes that it is blue. The term “visual consciousness’ is a philosophical expression denoting the same idea as is conveyed by the ordinary word ‘seeing’. Seeing does not mean recognizing. So are the other forms of consciousness.

It must be repeated here that according to Buddhist philosophy there is no permanent, unchanging spirit which can be considered ‘Self’, or ‘Soul’, or ‘Ego’, as opposed to matter, and that consciousness (viññāṇa) should not be taken as ‘spirit’ in opposition to matter. This point has to be particularly emphasized, because a wrong notion that consciousness is a sort of Self or Soul that continues as a permanent substance through life, has persisted from the earliest time to the present day.

One of the Buddha’s own disciples, Sāti by name, held that the Master taught: ‘It is the same consciousness that transmigrates and wanders about.’ The Buddha asked him what he meant by ‘consciousness’. Sāti reply is classical: ‘It is that which expresses, which feels, which experiences the results of good and bad deeds here and there’.

‘To whomever, you stupid one’, remonstrated the Master, ‘have you heard me expounding the doctrines in this manner? Haven’t I in many ways explained consciousness as arising out of conditions: that there is no arising of consciousness without conditions’. Then the Buddha went on to explain consciousness in detail: ‘Consciousness is named according to whatever condition through which it arises: on account of the eye and visible forms arises a consciousness, and it is called visual consciousness; on account of the ear and sounds arises a consciousness, and it is called auditory consciousness; on account of the nose and odours arises consciousness, and it is called olfactory consciousness; on account of the tongue and tastes arises a consciousness, and it is called gustatory consciousness; on account of the body and tangible objects arises a consciousness, and it is called tactile consciousness; on account of the mind and mind-objects (ideas and thoughts) arises a consciousness, and it is called mental consciousness.’

Then the Buddha explained it further by an illustration: A fire is named according to the material on account of which it burns. A fire may burn on account of wood, add it is called wood-fire. It may burn on account of straw, and then it is called straw-fire. So consciousness is named account to the condition through which it arises.[57]

Dwelling on this point, Buddhaghosa, the great commentator, explains: ‘… a fire that burns on account of wood burns only when there is a supply, but dies down in that very place when it (the supply) is no longer there, because then the condition has changed, but (the fire) does not cross over to splinters, etc., and become a splinter-fire and so on; even so the consciousness that arises on account of the eye and visible forms arises in that gate of sense organ (i.e., in the eye), only when there is the condition of the eye, visible forms, light and attention, but ceases then and there when it (the condition) is no more there, because then the condition has changed, but (the consciousness) does not cross over to the ear, etc., and become auditory consciousness and so on…’[58]

The Buddha declared in unequivocal terms that consciousness depends on matter, sensation, perception and mental formations and that it cannot exist independently of them. He says:

‘Consciousness may exist having matter as its means (rūpupāyaṃ), matter as its object (rūpārammaṇaṃ), matter as its support (rūpa-patiṭṭham), and seeking delight it may grow, increase and develop; or consciousness may exist having sensation as its means… or perception as its means… or mental formations as its means, mental formations as its objects, mental formations as its support, and seeking delight it may grow, increase and develop.

‘Were a man to say: I shall show the coming, the going, the passing away, the arising, the growth, the increase or the development of consciousness apart from matter, sensation, perception and mental formations, he would be speaking of something that does not exist.’[59]

Very briefly these are the five Aggregates. What we call a ‘being’, or an ‘individual’, or, ‘I’, is only a convenient name or a label given to the combination of these five groups. They are all impermanent, all constantly changing. ‘Whatever is impermanent is dukkha’ (Yad aniccaṃ tam dukkhaṃ). This is the true meaning of the Buddha’s words: ‘In brief the five Aggregates of Attachment are dukkha’. They are not the same for two consecutive moments. Here A is not equal to A. They are in a flux of momentary arising and disappearing.

‘O Brāhmaṇa, it is just like a mountain river, flowing far and swift, taking everything along with it; there is no moment, no instant, no second when it stops flowing, but it goes on flowing and continuing. So Brāhmaṇa, is human life, like a mountain river.’[60] As the Buddha told Raṭṭhapāla: ‘The world is in continuous flux and is impermanent.’

One thing disappears, conditioning the appearance of the next in a series of cause and effect. There is no unchanging substance in them. There is nothing behind them that can be called a permanent Self (Ātman), individuality, or anything that can in reality be called ‘I’. Every one will agree that neither matter, nor sensation, nor perception, nor any one of those mental activities, nor consciousness can really be called ‘I’.[61] But when these five physical and mental aggregates which are interdependent are working together in combination as a physio-psychological machine,[62] we get the idea of ‘I’. But this is only a false idea, a mental formation, which is nothing but one of those 52 mental formations of the fourth Aggregate which we have just discussed, namely, it is the idea of self (sakkāya-diṭṭhi).

These five Aggregate together, which we popularly call a ‘being’ are dukkha itself (saṃkhāra-dukkha). There is no other ‘being’ or ‘I’, standing behind these five aggregates, who experiences dukkha. As Buddhaghosa says:

‘Mere suffering exists, but no sufferer is found;
The deeds are, but no doer is found.’[63]

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 different 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 unthinkable. 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 (saṃsāra) is without a visible end, and the first beginning of beings wandering and running round, enveloped in ignorance (avijjā) and bound down by the fetters of thirst (desire, taṇhā) is not to be perceived.’[64] And further, referring to ignorance which is the main cause of the continuity of life the Buddha states: ‘The first beginning of ignorance (avijjā) is not to be perceived in such a way as to postulate that there was no ignorance beyond a certain point.’[65] Thus it is not possible to say that there was no life beyond a 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.’[66]

This does not at all make the life of a Buddhist melancholy or sorrowful, 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 upset or dismayed by changes 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’ (mihita-pubbaṃgama). 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.[67] 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, according to Buddhism, is ‘repugnance’ or hatred. Repugnance (pratigha) 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.’[68] 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 trouble, and aggravates and exacerbates a situation already disagreeable. What is necessary 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 Theragāthā and the Therīgāthā 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 (haṭṭha-pahaṭṭha), jubilant and exultant (udaggudagga), enjoying the spiritual life (abhiratarūpa), with faculties pleased (pīṇitindriya), free from anxiety (appossukka) serene (pannaloma), peaceful (paradavutta) and living with a gazelle’s mind (migabhūtena cetasā), 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.’[69]

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 (pīti) is one of the seven Bojjhaṃgas or’Factors of Illumination’, the essential qualities to be cultivated for the realization of Nirvāṇa.[70]

---

[40] A (Colombo, 1929), p. 49.

[41] Mahādukkhakkhandha-sutta, M I (PTS), p. 90.

[42] M I (PTS), p. 85 ff; S III (PTS), p. 27 ff.

[43] M I (PTS), p. 87.

[44] Vism (PTS), p. 499; Abhisamuc, p. 38.

[45] Saṃkhittena pancupādānakkhandhā dukkhā. S V (PTS), p. 421

[46] S III (PTS), p. 158.

[47] S III (PTS), p. 59.

[48] Abhisamuc, p. 4. Vibh. p.72. Hhs. p. 133 §594.

[49] S III (PTS), p. 59.

[50] S III (PTS), p.60

[51] ‘Mental Formations’ is the term now generally used to represent the wide meaning of the word saṃkhāra in the list of Five Aggregates. Saṃkhāra in other contexts may mean anything conditioned, anything in the word, in which sense all the Five Aggregates are saṃkhāra.

[52] A (Colombo, 1929), p. 590 – Cetanā’haṃ bhikkhave kammaṃ vadāmi. Cetayitvā kammaṃ karoti kāyena vācā manasā.

[53] Abhisamuc, p.6.

[54] S III (PTS), p. 60.

[55] According to Mahāyāna Buddhist philosophy the Aggregate of Consciousness has three aspects: citta, manas and vijñāna, and the Ālaya-vijñāna (popularly translated as ‘Store-Consciousness’) finds its place in this Aggregate. A detailed and comparative study of this subject will be found in a forthcoming work on Buddhist philosophy by the present writer.

[56] S III (PTS), p.61

[57] Mahātaṇhāsaṃkhaya-sutta, M I (PTS), p. 256 ff.

[58] MA II (PTS), pp. 306-307

[59] S III (PTS), p. 58.

[60] A (Colombo, 1929), p. 700. These words are attributed by the Buddha to a Teacher (Satthā) named Araka who was free from desires and who lived in the dim past. It is interesting to remember here the doctrine of Heraclitus (about 500 B.C.) that everything is in a state of flux, and his famous statement: ‘You cannot step twice into the same river, for fresh waters are ever flowing in upon you.’

[61] The doctrine of Anatta ‘No-Self’ will be discussed in Chapter VI.

[62] In fact Buddhaghosa compares a ‘being’ to a wooden mechanism (dāruyanta). Vism. (PTS), pp. 594-595.

[63] Vism. (PTS), p. 513.

[64] S III (PTS), pp. 178-179; III pp.149, 151.

[65] A V (PTS), p. 113.

[66] S V (PTS), p. 437. In fact the Buddha says that he who sees any one of the Four Noble Truths sees the other three as well. These Four Noble Truths are interconnected.

[67] There is a statue from Gandhara, and also one from Fou-Kien, China, depicting Gotama as an ascetic, emaciated, with all his ribs showing. But this was before his Enlightenment, when he was submitting himself to the rigorous ascetic practices which he condemned after he became Buddha.

[68] Abhisamuc, p. 7.

[69] M II (PTS), p. 121.

[70] For these Seven Factors of Enlightenment see Chapter on Meditation, p. 43.