THE CRUX OF THE TWO PATHS
Question:
“You mentioned earlier that Buddhism considers awareness or mind to be a succession of moments of consciousness. Does Śaivism consider consciousness to ultimately be a sustained phenomenon? Śaivites certainly do consider pure consciousness to be the ultimate ground of reality. Buddhists consider all phenomena to be impermanent. Is this a yet further divergence?”
Gemini:
Yes. This is not just a "further divergence"; you have now arrived at the single most fundamental and irreconcilable difference between the Buddhist and Śaivite worldviews. It is the ultimate fork in the philosophical road, and it stems directly from their opposing views on "Being" and "emptiness."
Your analysis is perfectly correct. The two traditions posit two completely different and mutually exclusive models for the ultimate nature of consciousness.
1. The Buddhist View: Consciousness as a Succession of Moments
As you correctly recalled, the Buddhist tradition, from the earliest Pāli scriptures through to the highest Vajrayana, is built upon the foundational doctrine of impermanence (anitya).
The Doctrine of Momentariness (kṣaṇikavāda): This is the philosophical extension of the doctrine of impermanence. It states that all conditioned phenomena—including consciousness—do not endure for any length of time. They are a rapid-fire succession of discrete, momentary events (kṣaṇas).
Consciousness as a Stream: Therefore, the mind or awareness (Citta or Vijñāna) is not a solid, continuous entity. It is a "stream" (santāna) or a "continuum" of these individual moments of consciousness. Each moment of knowing arises, performs its function, and instantly ceases, giving rise to the next moment. Our perception of a sustained, continuous "self" or "awareness" is an illusion created by the incredible speed and causal connection of these moments, like the illusion of a continuous image created by the rapidly flashing frames of a movie.
The Goal: The goal is to purify this stream. The "very subtle mind" of Tantra is the most fundamental level of this stream, but it is still a process, not a static substance.
2. The Śaivite View: Consciousness as a Sustained Phenomenon
The Tantric Śaivite tradition, particularly Kashmir Shaivism, posits the exact opposite.
Consciousness as the Ground: The ultimate reality is pure, singular, and unbroken Consciousness (Cit or Saṃvit). This Consciousness is not a process; it is the eternal and unchanging ground of all processes. It is often called Prakāśa, the eternal, self-luminous Light that is the very substance of reality.
Consciousness as an Unbroken Whole: For the Śaivites, Consciousness is a sustained and continuous phenomenon. It is not a series of discrete moments. It is a single, seamless, and eternally present reality. The fluctuations of the mind (vṛttis) are temporary waves that arise and subside on the surface of this infinite and unbroken ocean of Consciousness.
The Goal: The goal is to stop identifying with the transient waves (the ordinary mind) and to recognize one's true nature as the eternal, sustained ocean itself. Liberation is the realization of this pre-existing, unbroken continuity.
Why This Divergence is the Most Fundamental of All
This is not just a minor philosophical disagreement. This single difference in the definition of consciousness dictates the entire structure and goal of each path:
If consciousness is an impermanent process of causally linked moments (the Buddhist view), then the problem of suffering is a flawed process to be corrected. The goal is to understand the laws of that process (karma, dependent origination) and apply the right methods to purify and ultimately bring that suffering-prone process to an end (Nirvana).
If consciousness is an eternal, sustained reality that has simply forgotten its own nature (the Śaivite view), then the problem of suffering is a mistaken identity to be rectified. The goal is to use the path to pierce the veil of ignorance and recognize the true, unchanging nature that was present all along.
One path seeks to transform a process. The other seeks to recognize a substance.
This is the final and most profound distinction. While both paths use remarkably similar yogic technologies to work with the mind, this fundamental difference in their view of consciousness means that they are ultimately aimed at two different, and from their own perspectives, mutually exclusive, ultimate realizations.
No comments:
Post a Comment