4

CSome people say that the doctrine of Kamma and the doctrine of "no self" in Buddhism are contradictory. The reason they give this view is that the Buddhist doctrine of karma is meant to explain the relationship between cause and effect. The evil man must receive the bad consequences, the good man will certainly enjoy good results. However, the doctrine of not-self means that there is a constant subject constant, which is fall (àtman). If there is no permanent self, then who is the agent and who is responsible for the consequences of the action. Thus, the doctrine of karma and non-self is contradictory. Logically, such argumentation is rational, but in terms of the personality and thought of the Buddha, then the Buddha is a self-proclaimed, fully enlightened knowledge, see and know the truth, Do not see this point of contradiction? Have to wait for the posterity to detect this contradiction point? If we think that his teachings are consistent in meaning, how do we explain this problem? 

To explain this problem, the writer based on two points to discuss the problem: 1) Linguistics, 2) Thought. 

"No-self" is the word translated from Sanskrit nir-àman, Pali text is called anattan. Nir means nirvana or nirvana; from àtman means self, soul, life, essence. The concept of "self" is found very early in the Vedas and in the Upanisads, which later developed into jiva in Jains. [1], purusa in the Suttas, pudgala in the Sect, is one of the 18 sects of Buddhism. Thus, nir and àman combine these two words into nouns, denying the existence of an entity, such as the hairless tortoise; The word "is not" refers to the expression of non-masterly reality, such as this pen? If you do not master the pen, the answer must be "this pen is not mine." "Not" does not mean "no", it has but does not belong to me. This is the meaning of the words  "phi"  and  "void" . Like nir-àman. According to "Han harmony dictionary" definition from nir-àtman is not self, not self, fallen self. The term used by the Chinese and Vietnamese is "not self". But here, we need to pay attention, the word "invisible" The word "hollow" is explained as "a property", in the Vietnamese sense called "no", but the word "phi" is explained as "disability", meaning "not "  "No" and "not" are two completely different meanings. The word "no" is a description of the empty state, which words have meanings corresponding to the meaning that the Buddha describes in terms of the pratītya-samutpāda of the self?  

Before determining which of these two words to use, let us examine the meaning of the Buddha's description of man in the category of panca-skandha, ie rupa-skandha, samjana-skandha, samkhara-skandha and vijnàna-skandha. To clarify this meaning, we base on the "Saccaka Sutra"  [2]  in the "Middle Sutra", the Buddha and Niganthaputta Saccaka pagoda discussed as follows:  

According to this record, Niganthaputta Saccaka is a fearless, crowded advocate. He came to the Buddha to discuss the subject of "no self", because he heard the Buddha taught his disciples: "Rust, life, thought, action, consciousness is impermanent, not self. The dialogue is as follows: 

- Niganthaputta Saccaka used an example of questioning the Buddha. He asked: All the herbs are on the soil to mature, the soil is the place where all the plants are born. Likewise, the good and the unwholesome work in the form of mindfulness of the five aggregates, if Gotama thinks that these five aggregates are impermanent, what produces all this good and evil? 

- Before answering this question, the Buddha identified the main problem of the Saccaka, he asked: So does he say that: "Lust, life, thought, action, consciousness is my self?" 

- Saccaka replied, "That's right." 

The Buddha asked: What is the king of Kosala's Pasenadi power over the country the king is ruling?  

- Saccaka replied: Of course there is the power to decide matters in the territory of the king. 

- The Buddha asked: Then he said, "Rust, life, thought, action, consciousness is my self", then he has power over rúpa, life, idea, action, awake. 

- Saccaka silently did not reply. 

- So, this Saccaka! Lust, feeling, thoughts, actions, consciousness is often or impermanent? 

- Impermanent. 

- What is impermanent, that suffering or lost? 

- Suffering 

- What is impermanent, suffering, mutilated, is it reasonable to see that it is mine, is me, is my self? 

- No, Gotama. 

Here is the dialogue between the Buddha and the infidel Niganthaputta Saccaka. Through the content of this dialogue, it gives us a very specific sense of self. The Buddha called what Upanisad called "fall" (àtman) which is constituted by form, feeling, perception, action, and consciousness. In that there is no concept of subjective meaning, that self is constant, because its existence is always in the passive state of the dependent origination, which is the meaning that the Buddha brought to the end. Comment: "Not" does not mean not, the existence of the five aggregates is the existence of dependent origination. The existence of such a Buddha called fake, which is not real, the unreal called "non-self". From this point of view, we can come to a conclusion, The word used by the Buddha to describe man's causation is the word "non-self" rather than "selflessness . " Because the Buddha denied the view of the permanent unchanging self of the Upanisads, he did not assume that there was no self. This is the point that we need to keep in mind. 

Then the problem of those who say that the doctrine of "karma" and "no-self" in Buddhism is inherently contradictory, we have enough reason to explain the ideas of these two theories consistently. , no conflict, we need to modify the use of the word "no-self" to "non-self" to avoid misunderstanding. 

The doctrine of karma in Buddhism is the explanation of the causal relationship, paying special attention to the causal relationship of psychological activity. Hence, any behavior directed by ignorance is the cause of bad outcomes, and behavior that is directed by lucid sense is the cause of good results. Thus, the result of a good or bad action is not a muscular movement, it is a participation of consciousness. Consciousness is the master of all actions. The change of bad (irrational) consciousness into a good sense of (human reason) is a process of training the mind. The process of training the mind is the process of reconciliation between the inner and the outer, or rather the coordination between the "consciousness of the world" (cognitive subject) and the "dharma" (cognizant object); Consciousness (also called consciousness) can not exist independently of matter,life, thought and action, legal world is the concept world, the image of the external world is identity, virginity and exposure. Thus, the formation of the cognitive subject and the cognitive object is the aggregation of conditions, since life is always a flowing stream, not standing still, so a correct understanding, consciousness must also depend. Things change that perception to fit reality. Such awareness, the Buddha called: "As true knowledge tri".

On the other hand, the mind is constantly changing; this transformation is similar to the meaning of "no self". Karma and non-self are two different concepts, but united in meaning. So the question: Who is the agent? Who is the fruit of life? The correct answer is:  "There is karma without the author. This warmth is quenched, the warmth is constant ..." [3] . This is the meaning of the relationship between karmic and non-karmic cause in Buddhism. END=NAM MO SAKYAMUNI BUDDHA.( 3 TIMES ).VIETNAMESE TRANSLATE ENGLISH BY=THICH CHAN TANH.THE MIND OF ENLIGHTENMENT.VIETNAMESE BUDDHIST NUN=GOLDEN LOTUS MONASTERY=AUSTRALIA,SYDNEY.1/7/2018.