A: Why is there no creation possible in
Buddhism? It has been said that one cannot find living beings at
the becoming of the universe for the essential reason that causes
have no beginning. If there were a beginning to the universe, there
would also have to be a beginning to consciousness. If we accepted
a beginning to consciousness, we would also have to accept that its
cause has a beginning, a sudden cause which would have instantly
produced consciousness; this would lead to a great many other
questions. If consciousness had arisen without cause, or from a
permanent cause, that cause would have to exist on. a permanent
basis, always, or not exist at all, ever. The fact that a
phenomenon exists intermittently proves that it depends on causes
and conditions. When all the conditions are met, the phenomenon is
produced. When those conditions are absent or incomplete, the
phenomenon does not appear. As causes have no beginning and stretch
back to infinity, the same thing must apply for living beings.
Creation is therefore not possible.
Let us now consider a particular phenomenon, a glacier for
example: it does indeed have a beginning. How was it created? The
outside world appears as a result of the acts of sentient beings
who use this world, These acts, or karmas, in turn originate in the
intentions and motivations of those beings who have not yet taken
control of their minds.
The "creator of the world," basically, is the mind. In the
Sutras, the mind is described as an agent. It is said that
consciousness has no beginning, but we must distinguish here
between gross consciousness and subtle consciousness. Many gross
consciousnesses appear as dependents of the physical aggregates, of
the body. This is evident when you consider the different neurons
and the functioning of the brain, but just because physical
conditions are met does not mean that this is enough to produce a
perception. In order for a perception which will have the faculty
to reflect and know an object to arise, it must have a
consubstantial cause. The fundamental consubstantial cause, of the
same substance as its result, will in this case be the subtle
consciousness. It is this same consciousness or subtle mind which
penetrates the parental cells at the moment of conception. The
subtle mind can have no beginning. If it had one, the mind would
have to be born of something that is not the mind. According to the
Kalacakra Tantra, one would have to return to the particles of
space to find the fundamental consubstantial causes of the external
physical world as well as of the bodies of sentient beings.
Buddhist cosmology establishes the cycle of a universe in the
following way: first there is a period of formation, then a period
where the universe endures, then another during which it is
destroyed, followed by a period of void before the formation of a
new universe. During this void, the particles of space subsist, and
from these particles the new universe will be formed. It is in
these particles of space that we find the fundamental
consubstantial cause of the entire physical world. If we wish to
describe the formation of the universe and the physical bodies of
beings, all we need do is analyse and comprehend the way in which
the natural potential of different chemical and other elements
constituting that universe was able to take shape from these space
particles. It is on the basis of the specific potential of those
particles that the structure of this universe and of the bodies of
the beings present therein have come about. But from the moment the
elements making up the world begin to set off different experiences
of suffering and happiness among sentient beings, we must introduce
the notion of karma -- that is, positive and negative acts
committed and accumulated in the past. It is difficult to determine
where the natural expression of the potential of physical elements
ends and the effect of karma -- in other words, the result of our
past acts -- begins. If you wonder what the relation might be
between karma and this external environment formed by natural laws,
it is time to explain what karma is.
Karma means, first of all, action. We distinguish one type of
karma which is of a mental nature, a mental factor of volition or
intention. There also exist physical and oral karmas. To understand
the connection between these physical, oral, or mental karmas and
the material world, we must refer to the tantric texts. The
Kalacakra Tantra in particular explains that in our bodies there
are to be found, at gross, subtle, and extremely subtle levels, the
five elements which make up the substance of the external world. It
is therefore in this context, I believe, that we must envision the
connection between our physical, oral, and mental karmas, and the
external elements.
----------------------------
i think it is like asking, the origin of you in your dream.
inside your dream, there's no origin or first cause of you. you
simply pop into the dream because of wandering thoughts(aka
thinking too much). when one realised everything is a dream, you
will be the Awakened One.
/\
A number of assertions were made in the above post which were
without basis and in fact goes against the facts of what we know.
The biggest problem I see is the denial that the universe has a
beginning (see http://creation.com/universe-had-a-beginning).
It seems that in order to maintain the Buddhist belief the fact and
truth of the universe; beginning is being denied. But such
denial is not new.
Down the centuries there have been many attempts to deny this
truth. Since the Greek philosopher Aristotle in the 4th century BC,
people have put forward the view that the universe is eternal, in
order to escape the implication that it had a beginning. If the
universe had a beginning, it has a Beginner. And if it has a
Beginner, then it is dependent, not self-sufficient; and that means
we are accountable, not autonomous beings. The persistent attempt
by thinkers, philosophers, and scientists down the ages to maintain
the eternity of the universe comes from the desire to avoid
attributing its origin to God - so that we do not need to
acknowledge that God is the proprietor of the universe, or that we
are dependent, accountable beings.
While such denial might still be understandable a couple of
centuries before, it cannot now be tenable to hold on to this
belief ever since modern science has discovered what has long ago
been penned in the first three words of the Bible, "In the
beginning....". The question of whether the universe has a
beginning is no longer up for dispute, though there is considerable
debate on HOW and WHEN the universe began. While I do no subscribe
to the Big Bang theory, I believe this theory has been thought up
to explain the undeniable fact that the universe did begin. See
also
http://www.harvardhouse.com/Scientific_Evidence_for_Beginning.htm