Reasons for the Buddha’s noble silence
Ven. Dapane Chandaratana,
Department of Buddhist Studies,
Buddhist and Pali University
of Sri Lanka. After a short time of the enlightenment the Buddha had the
unique ability of preaching his doctrine in such a way
that everybody understood. He used different methods to
preach His Dhamma. The four methods are explained in the
commentary to the Anguttara Nikaya, and the Abhidhamma.
The four methods are as follows:
1. Ekansa Vyakarana - question which ought to be
explained categorically.
2. Vbhajja Vyakarana - question which ought to be
explained analytically.
3. Patipacca Vyakarana - question which ought to be
replied with a counter question.
4. Tapaniya - question that should be set aside.
Last method
Here the last method (Tapaniya) explains questions that
The Buddha did not answer (Avyakruta). The Buddha
declared certain questions of distinctly metaphysical
character to be unanswerable. It is necessary that the
silence of the Buddha should be properly appraised. The
inexpressible (Avyakruta) occurs in many dialogues.
There are only ten but invariably enumerate as fourteen
and practically is The same order.
Avyakruta are explained in the Vaccayotta Sanyutta and
Avyakata Sanyutta of Sanyutta Nikaya, Mahanidana Sutta,
Brahmajala Sutta, Mahali Sutta and Pottapada Sutta of
Diganikaya. These are the ten unanswered questions.
1. Sassato loko - The world is eternal.
2. Assato loko - The world is not eternal.
3. Antava loko - The world is finite.
4. Anantava loko - The world is Infinite.
5. Tanjivantana sariran - The soul is identical with the
body.
6. Annancajivan annam sariram - The soul is different
from the body.
7. Hotitatagato parammaranan - The Tathagata exists
after death.
8. Na, hotitathagato Parammaranan The Thatagata does not
exist after death.
9. Hotica, na hotica Tathagato Parammaranan - The
Tathagata does and does not exist after death.
10. Neva hotica Nanahotica Tathagato - Parammaranan -
The Tathagata neither exists or does not exist after
death.
First four questions
Here, the first four questions are about the world.
Fifth and sixth questions have been asked regarding the
soul and the body and the last four questions are about
the saint (Tathagata). The Buddha has said that these
metaphysical questions should not be investigated by man
because they are - unfathomable questions regarding this
reason, some western scholars believed that The Buddha
did not know the answers for this question.
It should be noted here that Radhakrinan has rejected
the comment of A.B. Keith and said that The Buddha knew
the answers but did not express them because it is not
important to realize the salvation which He has taught.
Two questions
Now, two questions arise (i) whether, The Buddha had
known or not known the answers for these questions (ii).
If He knew the answers, why did he set aside these
questions?
The answer for the first question can be found in the
Simsapa Sutta of Sanyuttanikaya. Here the Buddha himself
explains using some simsapa leaves. The Buddha takes a
handful of the leaves in the simsapa forest and says
that what he has taught is like the leaves in His hand
and what he knew but did not teach is like the leaves in
the forest (eva mevakho bhikkhave etadeva bahutarani yan
kho pana maya abhinnaya anakkhatan). This means that he
claimed to know much more than he taught.
Second question
The answer to the second question or the reason to set
aside these ten unanswered questions, has been explained
in the Pottapada Sutta of Majjima Nikaya. According to
that Sutta the Buddha has explained to Pottapada that
answers for these questions are not important to
cessation of suffering and to realise the Nibbana.
Therefore the Buddha has set aside these questions. (Netan
atta sanhitan Na dhamma sanhitan... na nibbanaya, san
vattati, tasma tan maya avyakatan).
Further, He explains in Vaccagotta Sutta of Sanyutta
Nikaya The reason for setting aside these questions.
There the Buddha tells Ananda, why Vaccayotta was
answered by ‘silence.’ When I was asked by the wanders,
whether there was a self? I replied to him that there
was a self, Ananda, that would be siding with the
recluses and Brahamins who are eternalists.” But Ananda,
when I was asked ‘Isn’t there a self?’ I replied that it
did not exist. Ananda, that would be siding with those
recluses and Brahamins, who are annihilationists. Ayain,
Ananda, was asked by the wanderer, ‘Is there a self?’
Had I replied that there was a self it would be in
accordance with the knowledge, all things are
impermanant? Then Ven. Ananda answered it as, “Surely,
not Lord.” Again Ananda, when Vaccagotta asked, “Isn’t
there a self.
I replied that there was not. It would have been more
bewildering to the already bewildered Vaccagotta.
The Buddha says, ‘Ananda’, If I had answered the
questions with ‘yes’ or ‘no’, or accepted one of the
alternatives I would have been guilty of that very
dogmatism which he had been vehemently condemned by
others.
Instead of the usual opposition, between Sassatavada and
Uccedavada (affirmation and negation) The Buddha
substituted the more fundamental one between dogmatism
and criticism.
The Buddha has said to the Kaccayana in Sanyuttanikaya,
how He preached the doctrines: “Kaccayana, affirmation
is one stream, negation is the other stream. Tathagata
preaches His doctrine without grasping both these
streams.”
“Sabban attiti bho kaccayana ayan meko anto,
Sabban nattiti bho kaccayana ayan dutiyo anto,
Ete vbho ante anupagamma majjimena
Tatagato Dhamman deseti.”
This is his middle position. The Buddha has kept his
noble silence without answering the metaphysical
questions. |