Outlines of Mahayana BuddhismSuzuki, Daisetz Teitaro
Religion
Outlines of Mahayana Buddhism
Suzuki, Daisetz Teitaro
Mahayana Buddhism -- Doctrines
/Karma/, or Sanskâra which is sometimes used as its synonym,--though
the latter gives a slightly different shade of meaning,--comes from
the Sanskrit root _kṛ_, “to do,” “to make,” “to perform,” “to effect,”
“to produce,” etc. Both terms mean activity in its concrete as well as
in its abstract sense, and form an antithesis to intelligence,
contemplation, or ideation in general. When karma is used in its most
abstract sense, it becomes an equivalent to “beginningless ignorance,”
which is universally inherent in nature, and corresponds to the Will
or blind activity of Schopenhauer; for ignorance as we have seen above
is a negative manifestation of Suchness (_Bhûtatathâtâ_) and marks the
beginning or unfolding of a phenomenal world, whose existence is
characterised by incessant activities actuated by the principle of
karma. When Goethe says in Faust, “In Anfang war die That,” he uses
the term “That” in the sense of karma as it is here understood.
When karma is used in its concrete sense, it is the {182} principle of
activity in the world of particulars or nâmarûpas: it becomes in the
physical world the principle of conservation of energy, in the
biological realm that of evolution and heredity etc., and in the moral
world that of immortality of deeds. Sanskara, when used as an
equivalent of karma, corresponds to this concrete signification of it,
as it is the case in the Twelve Chains of Dependence (_Nidânas_, or
_Pratyâyasamutpâda_).[84] Here it follows ignorance (_avidyâ_) and
precedes consciousness (_vijñâna_). Ignorance in this case means
simply privation of enlightenment, and does not imply any sense of
activity which is expressed in Sanskâra. It is only when it is coupled
with the latter that it becomes the principle of activity, and creates
as its first offspring consciousness or mentality. In fact, ignorance
and blind activity are one, their logical difference being this: the
former emphasises the epistemological phase and the latter the
ethical; or, we might say, one is statical and the other dynamical. If
we are to draw a comparison between the first four of the Twelve
Nidânas and the several processes of evolution that takes place in the
Tathâgata-garbha as described above, we can take Ignorance and the
principle of blind activity, sanskâra, {183} in the Twelve Chains as
corresponding to the All-conserving Soul (_âlayavijñâna_), and the
Vijñâna, consciousness of the Twelve Chains, to the Manovijñâna, and
the Nâmârûpa to this visible world, _viṣaya_, in which the principle
of karma works in its concrete form.
As we have a special chapter devoted to “Ignorance” as an equivalent
of karma in its abstract sense, let us here treat of the Buddhist
conception of karma in the realm of names and forms, i.e. of karma in
its concrete sense. But we shall restrict ourselves to the activity of
karmaic causation in the moral world, as we are not concerned with
physics or biology.
_The Working of Karma._
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account