Hammering My Thoughts Into A Unity

It seems that the tendency to hold views (drstis) is deeply embedded in the human mind; indeed, attachment to views is a defining characteristic of the unawakened state. Drstis are more than merely theories; they are emotional attachments to distorted interpretations of the world. Out of these our articulated views arise. Once formulated into concepts and arguments, they are subject to critique from reason in accordance with the laws of logic. It is the tools whereby this is done that we have been studying with Jnanaketu on his 'Critical Thinking' course. By examining the laws, and art, of argument, and common tricks whereby fallacious arguments are passed off as genuine, we are arming ourselves against the plethora of views, many of them deluded and harmful, which fill the world.

Buddhism contains its fair share of argument. I have undertaken a study of Nargarjuna, under the direction of Subhuti and Saramati. Nagarjuna, the founder of the Madhyamaka school of Mahayana Buddhism, uses reasoning to show that any positive assertion leads to absurdity and contradiction. For instance: there cannot be any existing things which undergo movement, since one would either have to say that the thing that moves has the property of movement, in which case, if the movement were to cease, it would be a non-moving mover; or it would have to have the property of non-movement, in which case one is left with a moving non-mover. Both of these options are clearly ridiculous.

So once all reifications have been cleared away, what are we left with? Is it nothing? Not exactly. We must be careful of missing the middle way by falling into annihilationism. Once all mental constructs have been exposed, there remains the spiritually positive residue of a direct, non-conceptual experience of reality. The problem Buddhism has had through the ages is how to express that which is beyond concepts by means of concepts. Some formulations, like arguably Nargarjuna’s, have erred on the side of negation; others, like the doctrine of Tathagatagarbha (about which Sagaramati is notoriously suspicious!), may have erred on the essentialist side. But could it be possible to find the conceptual formulation which avoids these two extremes?

It seems not. Insights from Western philosophy can help to illuminate this. The German philosopher Immanuel Kant has given us new insights into the nature of the apparatus which a percipient being must necessarily have in order to have intelligible experience. This apparatus includes the percept conditions of time and space, out of which arises the differentiation necessary for concepts to be created. But time and space, and therefore differentiation, obtain only in our mental interpretation of the world, and thus the limit of what may be asserted about how things actually are is circumscribed. What this means for us is that reality is ineffable. Concepts may assert, or they may deny, but reality, being infinitely subtle, remains aloofly beyond their reach.

Saramati teaches that Sangharakshita has given us a perspective on this which is unique to the history of Buddhism. Through understanding that language inevitably lays itself open to misinterpretation, by falling one side or other of the middle way, we can take an appreciative attitude to the whole Buddhist tradition, recognising that all authentic conceptualizations of the Dharma are attempts to express that which is beyond expression. They may contradict one another on the level of logic, but that only matters to the extent that we are attached to an interpretation of reality in which logic obtains.

Back to drstis. 'God is dead', Nietzsche declared, and thereby laid down a challenge to man, to look no more beyond the world for his spiritual values. Perhaps the Indian politician and social reformer Dr Ambedkar meant something similar by his assertion that 'sila is Dhamma and Dhamma is sila '. Subhuti, developing the thought of Dr Ambedkar, teaches that sila (ethics) cannot be based on drstis but must rather come from the reality of the interconnectedness of beings. The dangers of basing values on drstis are plainly seen in the terrifying ideological conflicts threatening our world. Buddhism is perhaps unique as a spiritual tradition in its refusal to assert that contact with a higher being, or entrance into a higher realm, is the goal of spiritual practice. Awakening consists in understanding this world fully, understanding it free from all tendencies to cling to the belief that anything at all is ultimately real.

Though many years, perhaps lifetimes, of dedicated practice still lie between me and this lofty experience, I hope, and believe, that my studies at Dharmapala College have pointed me more clearly in the right direction.

Matt Burgess