Causality: The Central Philosophy of Buddhism David J. Kalupahana FOREWORD BY ELIOT DEUTSCH THE UNIVERSITY PRESS OF HAWAll Honolulu Contents Foreword IX Preface xi Acknowledgments xvii I. Pre-Buddhist Theories of Causation: The Vedic Tradition II. Pre-Buddhist Theories of Causation: The Non-Vedic Tradition 23 III. Clarification of Terminology 54 IV. The Conception of Dharma 67 V. The Causal Principle and Its Validity 89 VI. The Causal Explanation of Existence 110 VII. Later Developments 147 VIII. Causal Correlations: Another Facet of Development 163 IX. Conclusion 177 Abbreviations 186 Notes 189 Bibliography 228 Index of Chinese Terms 240 General Index 253 Foreword D. J. KALUPAHANA, chairman ofthe Department of Philosophy at the University of Hawaii, has carried out, in the tradition of his teacher K. N. Jayatilleke, a masterful articulation, analysis, and interpretation ofthe doctrines of causation in Buddhist philosophy. Special attention is given to early Buddhist teachings as found in the Pal\ Nikayas and Chinese Agamas; and by working with both Pali an~ Chinese sources Kalupahana has broadened considerably the fo~dations of scholarship in early Buddhist philosophy. In early Buddhism, Kalupahana maintains, a cause is defined as "the sum total of several factors that gives rise to a consequent"­ the "consequent" being the entire universe as well as a specific thing or event. As with the Greeks (Aristotle in particular), for whom the question of causality was not so much how one thing (efficiently) causes another, but how one thing can become some­ thing different from itself, we have in Buddhist thought a concern to account for 'development,' 'process,' 'change' in the whole of our experience. For Buddhism, causality is at once a problem in metaphysics and epistemology, and its resolution in these areas leads to a variety of ethical considerations. In recent years Western interest in Buddhism has been directed mainly to Mahayana traditions, principally to the Madhyamika school of Nagarjuna and to Zen. Professor Kalupahana is to be warmly commended for turning our attention back to the philo­ sophical riches of the early schools, where, together with profound x spiritual concerns, a good deal of sharp philosophical analysis is to be found. The author offers us as well a comprehensive historical background to Buddhist 'phenomenalism' and unravels many of the complexities in the schools associated with the so-called Thera­ vada tradition and in the later Mahayana developments. One of the most interesting analyses Kalupahana offers has to do with whether the doctrine of 'dependent origination,' or paticcasamuppada (Skt. pratTtyasamutpada), implies determinism. His manner of treating this question shows how nicely he refuses to accept any interpretation of Buddhism that does violence to the original texts for the sake of satisfying one's philosophical precon­ ceptions or predilections. Professor Kalupahana faces directly the many difficulties in the Buddhist doctrines and presents a hard-headed, no-nonsense, sympathetic but not apologetic, analysis. His work should deepen considerably philosophical interest in Buddhism and appreciation for the distinctive genius of the many extraordinary thinkers asso­ ciated with it. ELIOT DEUTSCH Preface STUDIES ON THE PHILOSOPHY of early Buddhism have so far been confined mostly to the material available in the Pali Nikayas, which represent only one of the early Buddhist traditions. Some Japanese scholars, such as Ui Hakuji and Akanuma Chizen, have examined the teachings embodied in the Chinese Agamas. Unfortunately, these treatises are not accessible to the present au­ thor because he does not know the Japanese language. Akanuma Chizen as well as Masaharu Anesaki have rendered a great service. to those interested in comparative studies of the Nikayas and the Agamas by compiling catalogues of the sutras in these two bodies of literature. The present·· work was undertaken to compare the teachings on the problem of causation in the Pali Nikayas and the Chinese Agamas. The importance of the Chinese Agamas for the study of early Buddhist thought is twofold. First, they supply cor­ roborative evidence for some of the major concepts in the Pali Nikayas, whose authenticity has been questioned by many scholars in recent times. Secondly, they throw much light on some of the obscure concepts in the Nikayas. Indian thinkers before and during the time of the Buddha put forward a wide variety of views regarding the problem of change and causality. Buddhist theory is a product of criticism, assimila­ tion, and synthesis of these ideas. Most of the earlier theories are examined in the early Buddhist texts, namely, the Pali Nikayas xii and the Chinese Agamas. In chapter 1 an attempt is made to trace the gradual development of causal theories in the Vedic tradition to establish the historical basis of some of the theories mentioned in the Pali Nikayas and the Chinese Agamas. Here the evidence from the Agamas is mainly corroborative. An examination of philo­ sophical sections of the Vedas, Brahma:Q.as, Ara:Q.yakas, and the Upani~ads has led to the conclusion that the theories of self-causa­ tion (sat-karya) and creation by God (f§vara-nirmar;.a) were two of the major causal theories in the Vedic tradition. These were referred to in the early Buddhist texts as sayarrz katarrz (tsu tsao) and issara­ nimmar;.a (tsun yu tsao) , respectively. Buddhist criticism of these theories appearing in the Pali Nikayas and the Chinese Agamas is also examined. Chapter 2 is devoted to an analysis of pre-Buddhist ideas mainly in the non-Vedic tradition. The causal theories of the Materialists, the Ajrvikas, and the J ainas are discussed in detail, especially because oftheir possible influence on the Buddhist theory of causation. Here the evidence gleaned from the Chinese Agamas is of immense value in understanding some obscure concepts, such as niyatisangatibhliva of the Ajrvikas. The close similarity between the theories of moral causation put forward in Jainism and Bud­ dhism has confused some scholars who have written on this subject, so the Jaina standpoint is discussed at length. With the help of the commentaries of SiIaIika it is possible to determine the relationship between the two schools of thought with some precision. It is pointed out how the philosophical theory of causation formulated in J ainism led to the acceptance of a deterministic theory of moral causation. The influence of some Ajrvika theories on Jainism is not overlooked. Apart from the doctrines of these major schools of thought, we examine several other theories that are mentioned in the early Buddhist texts. Chapter 3 is an attempt to elucidate the meaning of some of the terms expressing causation in the early Buddhist texts. The" different views, classical as well as modem, regarding the use of the "terms hetu (yin) and pratyaya (yuan) are discussed. All the evidence from the Pali Nikayas and the Chinese Agamas indicates that during the earliest phase of Buddhism the two terms were used synonymously and that they did not express any distinction xiii Preface comparable to the distinction between 'cause' and 'subsidiary con­ dition.' Doctrinal as well as textual evidence suggests that that distinction originated with the Sarvastivadins. A discussion of the causal principle involves an examination of the nature of things that are connected by the causal principle. Chapter 4 is therefore devoted to an analysis of the nature of causally conditioned dharma or dhamma. There are many impor­ tant disquisitions on this subject by modem scholars. Outstanding among them are (i) The Central Conception of Buddhism and the Meaning ofthe Term' Dharma' by T. I. Stcherbatsky, which is based primarily on the source material in the Abhidharmakosa, and (ii) Pali Dhamma by Wilhelm and Magdalene'Geiger, who examined almost every reference to the term dhamma in Pali literature, ca­ nonical. as well as commentarial, to bring forth the wide variety of meanings. the term connotes. A fresh look at this material was found to be necessary especially in the light of the information supplied by the Chinese Agamas. The conception of dhamma (fa) appearing in the Pali Nikayas and the Chinese Agamas was found to differ from the conceptions of dharma in some of the major schools of thought, such as the Sarvastiyada, the Sautrantika, and the later Theravada. Some scholars have minimized the difference between the teachings of early Buddhism as embodied in the Pali Nikayas and the Chinese Agamas on the one hand and those of the later schools on the other;1 we endeavor to show that the difference is far too great to be ignored. For example, the acceptance of a logi­ cal theory of momentariness (k$a1'Jikavada) instead of an empirical view of change and impermanence (anitya) gave rise to a host of problems, and their solution created significant differences not only among the later schools but also between these and early Buddhism. The Sarvastivadins, it is pointed out, accepted an eternal underlying substratum (dravya, svabhava) in things (dharma). It was this fun­ damental conception of Sarvastivada, a school that gained promi­ nence in India after the third century B.C., that was the target of Nagarjuna's dialectic. Thus, with much justification, the Mahaya­ nists attributed a theory of pudgala-nairatmya (nonsubstantiality of the individual) but not dharma-nairatmya (non substantiality of the elements) to the Sarvastivlidins and claimed superiority over them for formulating the latter conception. Since the Sarvastivada xiv was then the most prominent of the Hlnayana schools, the Mahaya­ nists, without any justification, extended their criticism to all the Hlnayana schools. Moreover, with the emergence of different Buddhist schools and the compilation of the Abhidharma literature and ancillary works, the study of the early sutra literature was relegated to the background. As a result, the Abhidharma came to be looked upon as the primary source for the study of early Buddhism.