|
Lafcadio Hearn - Kokoro
steadily lengthening. With increased longevity there surely may come into sudden being, through the
unfolding of the larger future brain, powers not less wonderful than the ability to remember former
births. The dreams of Buddhism can scarcely be surpassed, because they touch the infinite; but who can
presume to say they never will be realized?
NOTE.
It may be necessary to remind some of those kind enough to read the foregoing that the words "soul,"
"self," "ego," "transmigration," "heredity," although freely used by me, convey meanings entirely foreign
to Buddhist philosophy, "Soul," in the English sense of the word, does not exist for the Buddhist. "Self"
is an illusion, or rather a plexus of illusions. "Transmigration," as the passing of soul from one body to
another, is expressly denied in Buddhist texts of unquestionable authority. It will therefore be evident
that the real analogy which does exist between the doctrine of karma and the scientific facts of heredity is
far from complete. Karma signifies the survival, not of the same composite individuality, but of its
tendencies, which recombine to form a new composite individuality. The new being does not necessarily
take even a human form: the karma does not descend from parent to child; it is independent of the line of
heredity, although physical conditions of life seem to depend upon karma. The karma-being of a beggar
may have rebirth in the body of a king; that of a king in the body of a beggar; yet the conditions of either
reincarnation have been predetermined by the influence of karma.
It will be asked, What then is the spiritual element in each being that continues unchanged, - the spiritual
kernel, so to speak, within the shell of karma, - the power that makes for righteousness? If soul and body
alike are temporary composites, and the karma (itself temporary) the only source of personality, what is
the worth or meaning of Buddhist doctrine? What is it that suffers by karma; what is it that lies within the
illusion, - that makes progress, - that attains Nirvana? Is it not a self? Not in our sense of the word. The
reality of what we call self is denied by Buddhism. That which forms and dissolves the karma; that which
makes for righteousness; that which reaches Nirvana, is not our Ego in our Western sense of the word.
Then what is it? It is the divine in each being. It is called in Japanese Muga-no-taiga, - the Great
Self-without-selfishness. There Is no other true self. The self wrapped in illusion is called Nyorai-zo, -
(Tathagata-gharba), - the Buddha yet unborn, as one in a womb. The Infinite exists potentially in every
being. That is the Reality. The other self is a falsity, - -a lie, - a mirage. The doctrine of extinction refers
only to the extinction of Illusions; and those sensations and feelings and thoughts, which belong to this
life of the flesh alone, are the illusions which make the complex illusive self. By the total decomposition
of this false self, - as by a tearing away of veils, the Infinite Vision comes. There is no "soul": the Infinite
All-Soul is the only eternal principle in any being; - all the rest is dream.
What remains in Nirvana? According to one school of Buddhism potential identity in the infinite, - so
that a Buddha, after having reached Nirvana, can return to earth. According to another, identity more
than potential, yet not in our sense "personal." A Japanese friend says: - "I take a piece of gold, and say it
is one. But this means that it produces on my visual organs a single impression. Really in the multitude
of atoms composing it each atom is nevertheless distinct and separate, and independent of every other
atom. In Buddhahood even so are united psychical atoms innumerable. They are one as to condition; -
yet each has its own independent existence."
But in Japan the primitive religion has so affected the common class of Buddhist beliefs that it is not
incorrect to speak of the Japanese "idea of self." It is only necessary that the popular Shinto idea be
simultaneously considered. In Shinto we have the plainest possible evidence of the conception of soul.
|
