Buddhist ethicists like Āryadeva and Śāntideva conceive of a perfectly ethical state in which, because of the way the morally mature experience the world, there is no tension between what one would like to do and what is right to do. The reason this is thought to be possible is because the source of any tension between how we would like to live and how we ought to live is characterized by the confusion with which ordinary people experience the world. As Āryadeva explains, this confusion is founded in a mistaken perception of things as permanent, pleasurable, pure, and having a self. By developing an experience characterized by accurate ascertainment of
things as impermanent, painful, impure, and selfless, confusion along with the vice that
accompanies it, is eliminated. The Buddhist moral solution, then, is the elimination of unhealthy mental states through resolving the confusion that pervades them.
Like the moral problem, the Buddhist ethical solution is firmly grounded in the mental domain. The moral problem is not focused on actions and consequences, but on specific phenomenological properties that characterize our experience of the world. Buddhist ethicists like Āryadeva and Śāntideva point to knowledge that transforms the way we experience the world as the moral solution rather than a mental faculty like will. Buddhist moral development goes beyond mere restraint. Since the moral problem is a type of confusion rather than emotions, these Buddhist ethicists employ knowledge rather than will as their moral solution.
According to Āryadeva, since attachment is engendered by confusion, it should be resolved through knowledge. He explains that, for example, it is through knowledge of the nature of the body that one can remove attachment to it. He suggests that similar knowledge into the nature of phenomena could resolve all disturbing attitudes: “Having heard that the body has no good qualities, attachment does not remain long. By that very path, are all [mental afflictions] not also extinguished?” (199).112 Having described the moral problem as confusion, Āryadeva explains that the solution to confusion is seeing dependent arising.
Just as tactile sensation pervades the body, confusion pervades all [afflicted mental states]. Thus, through overcoming confusion, all mental afflictions are also overcome.
And when one sees dependent arising, confusion will not occur. Thus, through all the effort made here, this very topic is to be explained. (135-136)113
112 lus la yon tan med thos nas // 'dod chags yun ring mi gnas te // lam de nyid kyis thams cad kyang // zad par 'gyur ba ma yin nam // (Toh. 3846, 10a).
113 lus la lus dbang ji bzhin du // gti mug kun la gnas gyur te // de phyir nyon mongs thams cad kyang // gti mug bcom pas bcom par ‘gyur // rten cing 'brel par 'byung ba ni // mthong na gti mug 'byung mi ‘gyur // de phyir 'bad pas kun gyis ‘dir // gtam de kho na bsnyad par bya // (Toh. 3846, 7b).
Āryadeva explains that his earlier presentation of afflicted mental states as being pervaded by confusion was necessary, so that he could explain how insight into dependent arising, meaning accurate knowledge of the status of things, could remove confusion and the vice that
accompanies it.
The accurate knowledge required for this ethical transformation is not a type of
knowledge in which one adjusts one’s desires and aversions to be more “realistic.” Nor is it a knowledge that helps one face suffering through understanding that one could not have done anything to avoid a certain misfortune. It is the type of knowledge that transforms the first- person experiential aspect of our moral life. The Buddhist ethical project does not merely aim for a state of equanimity in the face of the changing fortunes of one’s life. The goal is not for a stoic-like attitude in which we accept that we have limited control over the physical world and strive to leverage the influence we do have over the mental domain. Instead, the knowledge required for ethical transformation must correct the mistaken beliefs responsible for the
confusion that is the source of both epistemological error and immorality. This knowledge is not employed to cope with or accept the world, but to change the way we experience it. The solution is to see the world more accurately, so as to transcend the struggle in which there is a world with which one is in conflict, and which exerts power over one’s mental life. The knowledge that that is responsible for this transformation cannot be merely intellectual, but must also be instrumental in shaping our experience.
Throughout the Four Hundred Stanzas, Āryadeva emphasizes that a transformation of vision is what brings one to a moral state:
If one sees correctly, the supreme state [is reached], and if one sees [correctly] even a little, good rebirths [are reached]. Thus, thinking of the inner nature, the wise person constantlyengenders intelligence. (196)114
For Āryadeva, there is a link between correctly seeing the world, being wise, and leading a good life or living in a supreme state. The view is described as correct because it is based on the knowledge of the impermanent, unsatisfactory, and selfless nature of the things in the world:
Whoever comes to see existence as like a collection of machines and illusory beings, they, being deeply illuminated, will go to the supreme state. (174)115
Our ordinary perception of the world, including feelings and sensory data, is an expression of our state of confusion. All this portrays not only a partial, but also a distorted picture of the world, oneself, and one’s place in it.
While the moral problem is described as misunderstanding and misperception, the moral solution is described as a correct way of seeing based on an accurate understanding of the nature of oneself and the other things in the world. This correct way of seeing dissolves the confusion responsible for our suffering and destructive mental states. Śāntideva states,
In order to overcome suffering and to obtain happiness, they wander aimlessly in vice; the entirety of the dharma, the secret of the mind, is not known by them. (V:17)116 For these reasons, a necessary component of Śāntideva’s and Āryadeva’s Buddhist ethical practice is the development of metaphysical knowledge and epistemic accuracy.
Moral development proceeds from one's view and is measured by how complete or incomplete that view is. According to Āryadeva:
First reverse that which is non-meritorious, then reverse the [conception grasping at] a self, and finally, reversing all [wrong] views – whoever knows this is a wise person. (190)117
pa la // mkhas pas rtag tu blo gros bskyed // (Toh. 3846, 10a).
115 gang gis 'gro ba 'khrul 'khor gyi // tshogs 'dra sgyu ma'i skyes bu ltar // mthong par gyur pa de dag ches // gsal bar go 'phang dam par ‘gro // (Toh. 3846, 9a).
116 duḥkhaṃ hantuṃ sukhaṃ prāptuṃ te bhramanti mudhāmbare | yair etad dharmasarvasvaṃ cittaṃ guhyaṃ na bhāvitam //.
gang gis chos kyi gtso bo mchog // sems kyi gsang ‘di ma shes na // bde thob sdug bsngal gzhom ‘dod kyang // de dag don med gyi nar ‘khyam // (Toh. 3871, 10b)
To be intelligent in this context means to have insight into the nature of things, people, and events. Morally wise persons are not those who simply restrain themselves from engaging in wrong actions based on not wanting certain consequences; the morally wise person possesses a certain of view of herself and the world. This emphasis on the way one takes up the world is so important that Āryadeva makes the striking claim that,
It is preferable to slip even from ethics than from [correct] view in any way. Through ethics one goes to heaven; through view one goes to the highest state. (286)118
The reason for this emphasis on view over discipline is that the effort of discipline provides only a temporary moral solution, whereas an accurate understanding of the world removes wrong views entirely and brings about a stable moral state. Āryadeva further explains his reason for prioritizing view over discipline as follows:
When one correctly knows the abiding of consciousness and so forth [i.e. its arising, abiding, and perishing], mental afflictions will never remain in one's mind (150).119
He further states,
The matchless door to happiness, which is perilous for all wrong views, and is the object of all the Buddhas, that is called selflessness. (288)120
These passages make it clear that the resolution to the confusion that engenders non-virtuous mental afflictions is the knowledge that transforms our view of the world so that it is accurate. gang gis shes de mkhas pa yin // (Toh. 3846, 9b).
118śīlād api varaṃ sraṃso na tu dṛṣṭeḥ kathaṃ cana / śīlena gamyate svargo dṛṣṭyā yāti paraṃ padam // (Tillemans 1990: 33).
tshul khrims las ni nyams bla yi // lta las cis kyang ma yin te // tshul khrims kyis ni mtho ris 'gro // lta bas go 'phang mchog tu ‘gyur // (Toh. 3846, 13b).
119 gang gis rnam shes gnas la sogs // yang dag tu na rnam shes pa // de yod na ni nyon mongs rnams // nam yang blo gros la mi gnas // (Toh. 3846, 8a).
120 advitīyaṃśivadvāraṃ kudṛṣṭīnāṃ bhayaṃkaram / viṣayaḥ sarvabuddhānām iti nairātmyam ucyate // (Tillemans 1990: 39).
zhi sgo gnyis pa med pa dang // lta ba ngan rnams 'jig byed cing // sangs rgyas kun gyi yul 'gyur la // bdag med ces ni bya bar brjod // (Toh. 3846, 13b).
This accurate view of the world is not only incompatible with vice, but also characterizes the experience of the morally mature. Once again, we see that, in contrast to virtue ethics, the moral solution lies in correct metaphysical knowledge about ourselves and the world rather than virtue, practical wisdom, and will, and, in contrast to consequentialism, the moral concern is with the mental state of the agent rather than the consequences of actions.
5.5 Moral Language