Cultivate World Peace

Epistemology – The Theory of Knowledge

Introduction

Epistemology is the theory of knowledge is the branch of philosophy concerned with the nature and scope (limitations) of knowledge. It attempts to answer us the basic question: what distinguishes true (sufficient) knowledge from false (insufficient) knowledge? Practically, wee see this questions translates into issues of scientific methodology: how can one develop theories or models that are better than competing theories? It also forms one of the pillars of the new sciences of cognition, which developed from the information processing approach to psychology, and from artificial intelligence, as an attempt to develop computer programs that mimic a human’s capacity to use knowledge in an intelligent way.

When we look at the history of epistemology, we can determine a clear trend, in spite of the confusion of many seemingly contradictory positions. The first theories of knowledge stressed its absolute, permanent character, whereas the later theories put the emphasis on its relativity or situation-dependence, its continuous development or evolution, and its active interference with the world and its subjects and objects. The whole trend moves from a static, passive view of knowledge towards a more and more adaptive and active one.

On the other hand in Buddhism, when we talk about the epistemology, we can say justifications for knowledge, or Pramana – Buddhism recognizes a set that is smaller than the others'. All accept perception and inference, for example, but in Buddhism the received textual tradition is an epistemological category equal to perception and inference.

Some schools of Buddhism, on the other hand, rejected an inflexible reverence of accepted doctrine. As the Buddha said, according to the canonical scriptures:

Do not accept anything by mere tradition ... Do not accept anything just because it accords with your scriptures ... Do not accept anything merely because it agrees with your pre-conceived notions ... But when you know for yourselves – these things are moral, these things are blameless, these things are praised by the wise, these things, when performed and undertaken, conduce to well-being and happiness – then do you live acting accordingly.

The Perception

The Buddhist concept of perception is that perception itself is fleeting as they themselves are caused by feelings. So the best way to understand the Buddhist standpoint we can say the "Paticca-samuppada" is one of the important perception in Buddhism. That is briefly as the dependent co-arising - From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications. From fabrications as a requisite condition comes consciousness. From consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-&-form. From name-&-form as a requisite condition come the six sense media. From the six sense media as a requisite condition comes contact. From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. From feeling as a requisite condition comes craving. From craving as a requisite condition comes clinging/sustenance. From clinging/sustenance as a requisite condition comes becoming. From becoming as a requisite condition comes birth. From birth as a requisite condition, then aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair come into play. Such is the origination of this entire mass of stress & suffering.

On the other hand, it can be also the Sa¤¤a which is included in the Five Aggregates. That is the Perception which is nothing but the act of perceiving. Thus it is a dynamic process, an activity. What does it perceive? It perceives colors such as blue, yellow, red, white, etc. This definition of sa~n~na seems to imply that the linguistic ability of man is associated with sa~n~na. The word sa~n~na also means symbol, and symbolization is closely associated with language. It is language that helps us to form ideas, and that is the reason why sa~n~na is sometimes translated as ideation. According to one's perception, one forms a point of view, an idea.

We identify ourselves with our ideas too: "This is my point of view, this is my idea, this is my opinion, this is what I meant" — these are all expressions identifying ourselves with ideation and perception. Sometimes this identification is so strong that we are ready to sacrifice our lives for the sake of an idea. Many wars are waged in the world propagating or defending ideas. As this is such a dominant form of clinging it has been singled out by the Buddha as ditth'upadana, clinging to a particular view one chooses to believe in. Identifying ourselves with various points of view we call ourselves democrats, socialists, eternalists, annihilationists, positivists.

Our ideas change due to changing emotions and circumstances. A friend becomes a foe, an enemy becomes an ally, a stranger becomes a spouse. Therefore in ideation too there is nothing constant and permanent; it is not possible to hold them fast as "I" and "mine" without coming to grief.

Memory is also associated with sa~n~na. That is why we are able to recognize a person we have met before. Through the faculty of memory we recall having existed in the past experiencing such and such events. By projecting the same kind of experience into the future we anticipate that we will exist in the future. Thus through the memory aspect of sa~n~na we posit the illusion of a self continuing through the three periods of past, present and future. But we little realize that the retrospection of the past and the anticipation of the future are both in fact done in the present moment itself.

How does sa~n~na form a wall in our private prison? Each one of us perceives the world around us through our own preconceived ideas. Let us take a very gross example. A doctor's perception of the world will be quite different from the perception of a politician or a businessman. A doctor looking at an apple might think of its nutritional value, a politician of the advantages and disadvantages permitting importation, the businessman of the commercial value. Thus we are so much conditioned by our interests and ideologies — some absorbed from upbringing, some from the culture we are exposed to, some from the academic and professional training we have acquired — that no two people can have identical perceptions. There are sufficient common factors in these aspects to allow us to form general superficial agreements with other individuals, but when we take into account all ramifications we have to conclude that as regards perception too each one of us lives in a private prison. If we wish to experience wisdom and happiness welling within ourselves, we have to give up clinging to our ideas, unlearn what we have spent years to learn, decondition ourselves and empty our minds.

Causes of Epistemology

What some consider the original positive Buddhist contribution to the field of metaphysics is Paticcasamudpada. It states that events are not pre-determined, nor are they random, and it rejects notions of direct causation, which are necessarily undergirded by a substantialist metaphysics. Instead, it posits the arising of events under certain conditions which are inextricable, such that the processes in question at no time are considered to be entities.

Paticcasapudpada goes on to posit that certain specific events, concepts, or realities are always dependent on other specific things. Craving, for example, is always dependent on, and caused by, emotion. Emotion is always dependent on contact with our surroundings. This chain of causation purports to show that the cessation of decay, death, and sorrow is indirectly dependent on the cessation of craving.

Naagaarjuna asserted a direct connection between, even identity of, dependent origination, anatta, and śuunyataa. He pointed out that implicit in the early Buddhist concept of dependent origination is the lack of any substantial being (anatta) underlying the participants in origination, so that they have no independent existence, a state identified as emptiness (śuunyatā), or emptiness of a nature or essence (sva-bhāva). That is what we can say about the causes of Epistemology in Buddhism.

Consideration of Truth

As we know that the Truth in Buddhism is called in Pali known as ‘Sacca’. Also it is come under the perfection in Buddhism. So in the Buddhist Perfection, it is the Truth which is known as follows: “Without truthfulness, virtue, etc., is impossible, and there can be no practice in accordance with one's vows. All evil states converge upon the transgression of truth. One who is not devoted to truth is unreliable and his word cannot be accepted in the future. On the other hand, one devoted to truth secures the foundation of all noble qualities. With truthfulness as the foundation, he is capable of purifying and fulfilling all the requisites of enlightenment. Not deceived about the true nature of phenomena, he performs the functions of all the requisites of enlightenment and completes the practice of the bodhisattva path.”

Furthermore, in Buddhism we can see that they are two kinds of Truths as:

1. The Ultimate Truth - This is the ultimate state of reality that is devoid of all ephemeral, temporal, transitional things that are found on this Earth. This is the destination of the perfect, enlightened being, and the ultimate liberation of all suffering.

2. The Relative Truth - This is the perception of reality as it exists on this Earth. So named because social conditions, human wisdom, lifestyles and human achievements are constantly in a state of flux. Growing an attachment to any Relative Truth is a cause of suffering.

Also other than the Eightfold Paths, Buddhism introduces Absolute and Relative Truth.

Abhidharmamaha-vibhasa-shastra defines that all understandable phenomena based on worldly common sense or rational traditions and customs that people agree upon with is the Relative Truth and that the truth of the reality that is clearly observed by those Saints without any defilement is the Absolute Truth. The commentary of the Middle Path (Mulamadhyamaka-karika) explains the absolute and relative truth by the empty nature of interdependent origination. The understanding of interdependent origination, that is, all phenomena arise or cease based on co-existing interdependent relationship, is called the Relative Truth. Interdependent origination is a temporary phenomenon. All things do not have permanent and unchangeable nature. Therefore, arising or ceasing is just a false image that has false name and function but no real substance. The arising is not real arising and ceasing is not real ceasing. The reality of no arising and no ceasing is called the nature of emptiness. Realizing the empty nature is the Absolute Truth.

The Absolute Truth and the Relative Truth, one is the empty nature of all phenomena and the other the temporary occurrence and function of all things, are in truth an indivisible method of non-duality. Even though the Relative Truth is not the ultimate, yet we may rely on it to search for the Absolute Truth. For example, language, action, ideal, and concept etc. are all Relative Truth. Yet, if we do not apply them, we are not going to be able to explain the Absolute Truth, which is beyond the Relative Truth, to sentient beings. If there is no way to realize the Absolute Truth, then there is no way to enter the Nirvana.

Conclusion

In my opinion I understand that epistemology in Buddhism is something which is the theory of knowledge that we gain from different angles in Buddhism. As in Buddhism we see that Buddhism teaches there are two ways of getting knowledges that are practically and theoretically.

As in Buddhism the theory of knowledge is mostly focus of the Paticcasamudpada that goes on to posit that certain specific events, concepts, or realities are always dependent on other specific things. Craving, for example, is always dependent on, and caused by, emotion. Emotion is always dependent on contact with our surroundings. This chain of causation purports to show that the cessation of decay, death, and sorrow is indirectly dependent on the cessation of craving.

The End