Asian Philosophy, Research Paper Example

There are salient points of comparison and striking similarities between the teachings of the Buddha and the Upanishads, notably the Isha Upanishad: both teach that there is an endless cycle of rebirth, samsara, and that ‘attachment’ to the ego and its desires is the cause of suffering. Both also teach that the way to enlightenment, the way to escape samsara, is for the soul to reject the false consciousness of the self through detachment. However, they profoundly contradict each other on the nature of enlightenment: where the Isha Upanishad proclaims that only Brahman, the true Self, is the ultimate reality with which the individual must merge, Buddhism rejects any absolute reality beyond Nirvana, and teaches that all is impermanent. Both the Buddha and the Isha Upanishad proclaim enlightenment as the way to escape attachment, suffering, and rebirth; however, they differ markedly in their conception of what that enlightenment entails.

The Buddhist concept of Nirvana can only be understood with reference to the core teachings of the Buddha, particularly the Four Noble Truths. Only by understanding the Four Noble Truths can one arrive at a correct understanding of Nirvana. The First Noble Truth, Dukkha-ariyasacca, is concerned with dukkha or “suffering” (Rahula,1974, p. 16). But as Rahula explains, dukkha is far more than suffering: it also connotes “’imperfection’, impermanence’, ‘emptiness’, ‘insubstantiality’” (p. 17). This truth does not deny the existence of happiness—indeed, the Buddha recognized a plethora of different types of happiness, ranging from the enjoyment of family life and sense pleasures to the enjoyment of a reclusive, ascetic life (pp. 17-18). The Buddha also recognized the supreme happiness which could be realized in dhyana, a kind of spiritual trance state induced by meditation, and the state of dhjana, wherein the practitioner is “free from sensations both pleasant (sukha) and unpleasant (dukkha)” (p. 18). However, the important point is that for the Buddha, all of these sources of happiness still result in an imperfect, impermanent state, and are therefore dukkha (p. 18). Dukkha also obtains due to life-changes: getting older, failing to achieve one’s desires, bereavement from the death of a loved one, etc. (p. 19). Finally, dukkha may be conceptualized in terms of “conditioned states”: from the perspective of Buddhism, the self, the ‘I’, is the combined result of “physical and mental forces or energies” of different types, and attachment to these forces is itself a form of dukkha (p. 20).

The Second Noble Truth is concerned with the cause of dukkha: this Truth states that dukkha is caused by “the thirsts of the physical body and… the illusions of worldly passion” (Kyonkai, 2005, p. 27). More specifically, “thirst” or craving (tanha) leads to ponobhavika, or “re-existence and re-becoming” (Rahula, 1974, p. 29). Tanha is the delight in sense-pleasures (kama-tanha), in existence itself (lbhava-tanha), and in non-existence (vibhava-tanha) (p. 29). This, then, is the source of dukkha, but it is not the first cause—because in Buddhism, there is no first cause (p. 29). The important thing to understand is that fundamentally, tanha is characterized by attachment, not only to sense-pleasures and existence but also to cherished ideals and beliefs (dhamma-tanha) (p. 30). Once one understands this, one can comprehend the Third Noble Truth: that dukkha, suffering, will cease when one releases oneself from tanha, thirst (p. 30). By eliminating tanha, one can become free of dukkha and attain Nibbdna (Pali) or Nirvana (Sanskrit) (p. 35).

The Fourth Noble Truth builds upon the Third by delineating how one enters (though even this word is inadequate) a state of Nirvana. As Kyonkai (2005) explained, the Fourth Truth is the “Truth of the Noble Path to the Cessation of the Cause of Suffering”: the Noble Eightfold Path (p. 27). Crucially, this Path is the Majjhima Patipada, the “’Middle Path’”: a via media between the two polar extremes of asceticism and hedonism (Rahula, 1974, p. 45). The eight pillars of the Path are as follows: “Right Understanding”; “Right Thought”; “Right Speech”; “Right Action”; “Right Livelihood”; “Right Effort”; “Right Mindfulness”, and “Right Concentration” (p. 45). Collectively, these eight pillars or factors are concerned with three important elements of Buddhist teaching: Silo or ethical conduct; Samadhi or mental discipline, and Panna or “wisdom” (p. 46). By following the Eight-Fold Path, one can eliminate tanha in order to free oneself from dukkha, thereby achieving Nirvana (p. 46).

Nirvana is Absolute Truth, the Ultimate Reality: a state of Tanhakkhayo, “extinction of thirst”, reached by virdga, “detachment” (Rahula, 1974, p. 36). Nirvana is not, however, the annihilation of the self: rather, it is characterized by the extinguishing of an illusory, false conception of the self (p. 37). More specifically, Nirvana is the realization that everything is impermanent: once one understands this, then the illusion of the self can be discarded (p. 39). The Buddha taught that the Self is impermanent, no less than everything else: there is no eternal soul or Atman, only impermanence (p. 39). Indeed, Rahula explicitly draws the contrast between Buddhism and Hinduism in this regard: in the teachings of Hinduism, there is a conception of the self, which possesses a unique soul (p. 51). This soul is responsible for the mind that thinks, experiences sensations, and is culpable for its decisions both good and bad (p. 51). Through a process of rebirth, the soul is ultimately purified and can unite with Atman, the Universal Soul of Brahman of which it is a manifestation (p. 51). By contrast, Buddhism teaches that there is no Atman, and that this view of the self is both illusory and harmful: it is the source of all selfishness, tanha, and dukkha in the world (p. 51).

A consideration of the Upanishads confirms the essential differences between these two mutually exclusive cosmologies; however, it also reveals core similarities. The Isha Upanishad declares: “The Lord is the supreme Reality. Rejoice in him through renunciation” (1). As Giri (n.d.) explained, the essential vision here is that suffering is produced by false consciousness: we suffer, we sorrow and we are troubled because we take the things and people that we see and encounter at face-value, rather than understanding them as manifestations of the Atman of Brahman, the Universal Soul (p. 6). This is very like the Buddhist conception of false consciousness: the teachings of both the Buddha and the Isha Upanishad hold that we suffer because we are attached to a false conception of reality. Of course, the key difference is that Buddhism teaches that all is impermanent, whereas the Isha Upanishad teaches that only Brahman is permanent—the true, Ultimate Reality. In Giri’s words, “the sooner we understand this and resolve to be cured and released, the better things will be for us” (p. 6). The reason for this is that one can then see not “’things’”, but rather with what Giri calls “God-perception”: the ability to see through things to the divine truth that permeates all (p. 6).

From this, the Isha Upanishad can declare: “Covet nothing. All belongs to the Lord” (1). As Giri (n.d.) explained, if one accepts that things as we perceive them are the result of a false consciousness, then the things that one might covet simply do not exist (p. 7). In his words, “there are no ‘things’ to covet or possess. They are the fever dreams of illusion from which we must awaken” (p. 7). As Badlani (2008) explained, the Upanishads teach that it is only by realizing the truth of Brahman, the Divine, that the individual can escape the otherwise-endless cycle of samsara, rebirth: only when the soul realizes that the ego is an illusion and rejects it can the individual achieve a state of moksha, uniting with the Atman that is Brahman (p. 63). As the Isha Upanishad declares, “Those who deny the Self are born again/Blind to the Self, enveloped in darkness, Utterly devoid of love for the Lord” (3). Again, the similarities and differences with Buddhism are obvious: like the Buddha, the Isha Upanishad is saying that those who cling to a false conception of self are doomed to rebirth. However, there is a decidedly confessional dimension to the vision of the Isha Upanishad: it says that those who deny the Self, i.e. Brahman, are devoid of love for Brahman. This is, again, the essential distinction between the two philosophies: the Isha Upanishad enjoins a rejection of the illusion of self in order to reunite with the Ultimate Source, Brahman, the only thing or entity that is really real; by contrast, the teachings of the Buddha enjoin a conception that nothing is permanent, and one must understand this in order to attain the release of Nirvana.

And how does one attain moksha? The second verse of the Isha Upanishad gives a crucial clue: “Thus working may you live a hundred years./Thus alone will you work in real freedom” (2). As Giri (n.d.) explains, the significance of a hundred years is probably that the life well-lived, i.e. the life lived with an awareness of Brahman, is an unburdened life: a life “lived in fulfillment with peace and happiness all the way through” (p. 8). The key, of course, is to recognize that everyone and everything in this world is a part of Brahman: to realize that the apparent distinctions are all illusions; indeed, this reality itself is an illusion (p. 8). When one realizes this, one can cultivate detachment in order to extinguish desire (p. 8). This, of course, is very familiar from Buddhism: both the Buddha and the Upanishads articulate the idea that misery and suffering are the fruits of the ego and its desires. Giri explicitly contrasts “those who live in attachment” and “those who live without egoic desire”: the former are doomed to “suffer and live in frustration” while the latter are “perpetually at peace” (p. 8).

The Isha Upanishad describes Brahman in transcendental terms: Brahman is an omnipresent force, an entity that pervades all. “Ever still, the Self is/Swifter than thought, swifter than the senses./Though motionless, he outruns all pursuit./Without the Self, never could life exist” (4). As Badlami (2008) explained, Brahman is the cosmic soul: it is “the essence of all cosmos, and the soul or atman projects the individual being” (p. 57). There is a saying in Hinduism, tat tvam asi: “You are That” (p. 57). As Badlami explained, the meaning of the saying is that one is Brahman: the individual is simply, profoundly, inextricably a part of the divine (p. 57). Therefore, the goal of life is not serving the self, but rather serving the Self: the devotee should seek to serve the Divine, rather than their own ego (p. 58). Again, it is the ego, the self, that is an illusion: only God, the Divine, Brahman, the Self, is the truth (p. 58). The ramifications are profound: if the Divine Self is in one, then one should treat others accordingly, respecting them and seeking to serve them (p. 58). One should be charitable to the degree one is able, and be kind and compassionate (p. 58). The way to do this, of course, is to keep one’s mind on the truth of the Self, of Brahman: by focusing on this truth, the devotee can free themselves from attachment to the self and its ego, and all its attendant activities and pursuits (Giri, n.d., p. 9). In the words of the Isha Upanishad: “May my life merge in the Immortal/When my body is reduced to ashes./O mind, meditate on the eternal Brahman” (17). Through meditation on the eternal Self, Brahman, the individual remembers that they are not an individual, only a manifestation of the Ultimate Source.

The similarities between the teachings of the Buddha and the Isha Upanishad are indeed profound: both depict a series of endless lives, deaths, and rebirths, in a cycle of samsara. Both proclaim that suffering is the result of the ego and its attachments: the ego has many desires, which are often frustrated. The way to enlightenment is realizing this, and cultivating detachment, practicing right, ethical conduct, and meditating to seek an awareness of the Absolute or Ultimate Truth. However, the differences are just as salient: the Isha Upanishad hymns the praises of Brahman as the Self, the cosmic soul, the ultimate reality to which the individual must return. By contrast, Buddhism teaches that there is only Nirvana: the realization that all is impermanent, and that there is no atman or soul whatsoever.

References

Badlani, Hiro G. (2008). Hinduism: Path of the ancient wisdom. Bloomington, IN: iUniverse.

Giri, Swami N. (n.d.). A commentary on the Upanishads. Retrieved from http://books.google.com/books?id=FNzTC6Nmy6gC&dq=Upanishads,+commentary&source=gbs_navlinks_s

Kyonkai, B. D. (2005). The teachings of Buddha. New Delhi, India: Sterling Publishers.

Rahula, W. (1974). What the Buddha taught (2^nd ed.). New York: Grove Press.