Buddha Vs Spiritualism

Buddha Vs Spiritualism

Gopal Birahi

gopalbir@yahoo.com

.

'Spirit' has been such an important problem in Nepali society, on which almost everyone talks about. Spirit, being subjective, depends more on heart and brain of a human.

When a man saw that material property is very important and that everything vanishes in its absence, then, he supposed that property is 'spirit'. After property, men gave importance to their sons, then, 'Aatma Wai Jayate Putra' ('Son is spirit') was said. We can see that almost all love their own body than that of their sons, then, Shruti said, 'Aatmanastu Kaamaaya Sarva Priyam Bhawati', which means human started to believe body as lovely spirit. This theory was renowned as 'Dehatmavad' or body-spiritualism because people can be found saying 'I am thin', 'I am black' or 'I am white'. Some of them thought that body functions as a result of sense-organs, and people say 'I am blind', 'I am deaf' etc and so that they supposed sense-organs as spirit and 'Indriyatmavad' or sense-organs-spiritualism was introduced. Subsequently, they moved towards small things, because of which breath was hypothesized as spirit and 'Pranatmavad' came in existence. Further, some of them 'investigated' that senses itself are spirits. In this way, from various point of view, by moving towards small things from big one; property, son, body, sense-organs, breath and senses all were supposed to be spirit.

There were different views on how spirit produces. According to the followers of Charwaka and of Ajita Kesha Kambali, as red color produces while chewing betel nuts and as insects, spiders and frogs automatically bring into being in rainy seasons; with the special mixtures of mud, water, hit and air, spirit automatically occurs. Spiritualists and believers of god suppose them as 'spiritual element' so that they are the 'part of Brahma' the creator.

Some imaginations and descriptions with reference to spirit in some Upanisada show that those saints were not familiar with the reality. That's why; Buddha was enforced to say 'false idea' to them all. In one imagination, spirit is supposed to be smaller than barley. After this, spirit started to be supposed to be of thumb-size and they said that spirit wonders outside while one is sleeping. Chandogya Upanisada says, 'spirit is like a bird inside a trap'. In Buddha's time, such different imaginations were there with saints, which can be divided into two branches. One of them say that spirit and world is true. Spirit is stable as a door-pillar of a city is standing. Mahabir says, "Spirit is different from other things because of conscience. In every body, there is every spirit and conscience being is beyond limit. Spirit is shrinkable and expandable as light. If an elephant dies and if its spirit enters into an ant's body; the spirit manages its size with the size of that ant". Another, in which comes Puran Kassap, Makkhali Gossal etc say, 'spirit is made up of four elements and is produced from parents. Spirits shatter after body is dead, they do not exist after death'.

In Geeta, many things are given about spirit. Krishna, telling about spirit, says to Arjuna, 'This spirit, in anytime, neither births nor dies, because it is permanent. It does not die even after the death of a body.' Krishna says, ' No one can cut this spirit with weapons, neither fire can burn it and this spirit is stable forever.'

In this way, thousands of views and imaginations on spirit can be seen. Some of them are supporting each other with their own differences and some of them are contradictory. Nothing scientific is seen and said yet on spirit, and the related saints and philosophers are still in confusion.

Buddha was very well-known with the cons of spiritualism. He knew this fact that Charvaka and other viewers suppose the luxury of body-sensations as supreme goal of life. Purana Kassapa even says, 'If spirit does not kill anybody, then, what is wrong in killing others for self-pleasure?'  On the other hand, those who supposed spirit to be permanent and stable used to offer various animals and even human sacrifices for 'freedom of spirit'. Buddha, criticizing both of these theories, said that these are obstacles on the way of morality-based livelihood. That's why, Buddha realized that extreme luxury and extreme penance is avoidable because human-race's sorrow doesn't decrease by practicing them.

Buddha said to the first five monks that if body is a spirit, it should has not been such notorious and it could have been said that let my body be like this and let it not be like this. Senses are not spirits because we can't say let my senses be like this and that. Everything which is impermanent is not spirit and that which is not permanent is sorrowful. Sorrowful things are not good to be supposed as me and mine.

Once Milinda the king asked Nagsen the monk his name. Nagsen replied, 'I am known as Nagsen among my friends. Although parent give name like Nagsen, Sursen, Virsen or Singhsen; but in reality no such Purush or spirit exists'. Then Milinda inquired, 'If no one exists, then who gives you robes/foods/residence/medicine? Who consumes them? Who meditates? Who attain enlightenment? Who kills? Who use to be attached with luxuries? If your friends call you Nagsen, than what is Nagsen? Are your hairs Nagsen?' Nagsen replied, 'No'. Milinda asked either these nails, tooth, skin, flesh, nerves, skeleton, heart, liver, appendix, pancreas, intestine, stomach, cough, sweat, tear, brain, spit, urine, wound etc are Nagsen?' Nagsen responded, 'No.' Milinda asked, 'Then, is there any Nagsen separate from faces etc?' Nagsen replied, 'No'. At that juncture Nagsen asked Milinda whether he came up to walking or by some vehicles. When Milinda answered that he came by a chariot then Nagsen asked, 'Please tell me where is your chariot? Is stick a chariot?' Milinda replied, 'No.' Nagsen asked, 'Wheter the wheels, or whip, or ropes a chariot?' Milinda replied, 'No.' Nagsen said, 'Now you knew what chariot is. In the similar way, on the basis of hairs etc, only for practical purpose, a name such as Nagsen use to be given. But in reality, nothing like Nagsen and any 'spirit' exist.' 

 While talking with Milinda, Nagasena asks that if there is spirit and if spirit functions everything, why your nose can't see and why your eyes can't smell etc? So, why I wrote this article is to say its injustice to say Buddha a spiritualist.