Aggañña Sutta: The Buddha’s Theory of Evolution
By Adrian Chan-Wyles PhD
(Commissioned by the Buddhist-Marxism Alliance – UK – August, 2019)
The general (and logical) consensus is that the Pali Canon represents the earliest extant teachings of the historical Buddha, although this might only be one school's interpretation of what he taught. Nevertheless, as this is the only body of work we can work from, it must be used as a foundational example of what the Buddha taught, a system of thought that was added to and reinterpreted over-time. It may be that a cross-reference of the ideas contained within the Pali Canon echo the original teachings of the Buddha, and it is this content that must be used in assessing any Buddhist concept. The Buddha, regardless of the pristine nature of his logical thought, tended to engage the prevailing ideas and practices prevalent during his lifetime (anywhere from 1000 – 500 BCE), whilst subtly reinterpreting, adjusting and rejecting. Whilst advocating atheism he engaged theism. Whilst rejecting rebirth he used this notion as a punishment for moral impurity and the consequence of the continuation of ignorance. Whilst rejecting the norms of society (for the ordained Sangha), the monks and nuns remained dependent upon for their food, drink, clothing and other material objects (such as razors and bowls, etc.). Whilst rejecting the religious practices of other sects and religions, by and large he made use of their training techniques and their concepts (albeit in modified form). He rejected the caste system (and was particularly ‘scathing’ about the Brahmins, but was always careful to court this class of better educated intellectuals by winning them over to his view through clever ‘rhetorical’ argument. He advocated equality between men and women, but was reluctant to allow women to ordain as nuns. He advocated compassion toward all beings, and yet forbade the disabled, the destitute or serving soldiers from joining the Sangha (despite Buddhist monks being referred to as ‘bhikkhus’ or ‘beggars’). Why are these types of inconsistencies continuously appearing within the Buddhist teachings?
Was the Buddha hedging his bets? Was he a genius (who could not read and write according to current evidence), who tried to develop a certain ’popularity’ by developing a system of thought that no one could understand but himself, and which was designed to establish a cult-like following that could rival the Brahmins? It is possible, but is it likely? Another way of viewing the evidence is that where there is certainty and consistency – that is the Buddha’s original teaching – and where there is inconsistency and contradiction, this represents a distortion of the Buddha’s teaching generated either deliberately or by accident through the machinations of the ordained Sangha. It could be that in the centuries after the Buddha’s death, the different sections of the Buddhist Sangha that had been established all over India competed with one another for dominance amongst the laity (from whom they begged their living), and for influence over the monarchies and civil authorities of the areas they lived within. Although the Buddha’s message is ‘Revolutionary’ - essentially rejecting all aspects of the old society controlled by what he perceived as the ignorance of Brahmanism – the uneducated laity often sought a type of religious ritual that they could understand and relate to, as well as continuing to believe in rebirth and disembodied spirits, etc. This later development of interpretive Buddhism can be described as ‘counter-Revolutionary’ in nature, and considered to be something akin to ‘Trotskyism’ when viewed in relation to the Marxist-Leninism it sought to uproot and replace. The problem the revising elements of the Buddhist Sangha possessed was that the Buddha’s teachings relied heavily upon telling the truth and upon not lying. The Sangha ‘revised’ but also retained the original texts they were seeking to ‘adjust’. This was not a problem for thousands of years since the laity, by and large, could not read and write and had no personal access to the Buddha’s teachings or any way of assessing whether the monks were teaching the Dhamma correctly.
Therefore, every ‘sutta’ must be assessed with one eye upon its original content, and one eye on its revisionist content with a clear distinction being drawn between the two. The Buddha’s original teaching appears to be a core of secular, non-inverted logic that rejects the very religionism that was allowed to infiltrate Buddhist orthodoxy at a later date. His thinking is distinctly modern and reflects the thought processes that underpin modern science. Surely, when Marx and Engels praised Buddhist dialectics (as found within Early Buddhism), they were acknowledging the pristine use of dialectical logic as contained within many of the suttas. Even when it is understood that the many cultural vagaries of religionism has been integrated into many schools of Buddhism, there still remains a ‘detachment’ in the Buddha’s teachings that point the practitioner in the right direction, as if all the contradictory markers of revisionism are merely necessary expedients – a sought of outer shell if you like – contrived to carry the true message of the Dhamma forward, albeit heavily camouflaged by the outer structures of revisionism. This would be like the Communist Manifesto (by Marx and Engels) being craftily hidden within the Christian bible, or to put it another way, the authors of the Communist Manifesto pulling a cloak of religiosity around their irreligious teaching. The old way (predatory capitalism) is used as the quagmire from which freedom from the old way (Socialism) is to be achieved. The Buddha encourages his followers to ‘break free’ of the shackles of a primitive society defined by religiosity – and he does this by using the very religious terms he seeks to transcend.
In the Sinhala (Brahmi) script (which is related to Pali) – the name of the ‘Aggañña Sutta’ is written as ‘අග්ගඤ්ඤ සුත්රය’ which literally transliterates as the ‘Aggañña Sutraya’. The Pali-English Dictionary states the following definition: ‘aggañña : (adj.) known as the highest or foremost.’ The Aggañña Sutta is preserved as the 27th in the collection of the long discourses of the Buddha known as the ‘Digha Nikaya’. Due to the European habit of interpreting different philosophies and religions through the filter of Judeo-Christian theology, a number of translators and commentators interpret ‘Aggañña’ to mean ‘Genesis’, implying that this sutra is some type of Buddhist ‘creationist’ theory, which - when viewed in the light of Buddhistic cyclic existence - it obviously is not. Other, more applicable translations include ‘Primary Knowledge’, or ‘Knowledge of What Came Before’. Another meaning certainly implied in the Sinhala name is the ‘Highest Knowledge Held by the Sage Regarding the Origination of Existence’. Making this title succinct, this sutta could be termed ‘Sagely Formula Underlying Reality’ or ‘Knowledge of Reality’. Essentially, a type of transcendental understanding is suggested that is beyond the machinations of the ordinary human mind trapped within taints of greed, hatred and delusion. Once the ordinary human mind is permanently ‘cleared’ or ‘purified’ of greed, hatred and delusion, then the cause and effect process of building and sustaining cycles of reality and existence can be clearly cognized, not just from a personal perspective (common in many Buddhist suttas), but also on a far broader and universal scale. This sutta is in fact a highly potent intellectual (rhetorical) attack upon the privileged Brahmin caste and the Brahmanic system they upheld and represent. It is triggered by two disciples (Vasettha and Bharadvaja) of the Buddha who explain (when prompted by the Buddha) about the continuous insults and demeaning attitudes many Brahmins held for the Buddha and his followers. The Buddha’s approach is to explain that within the material universe of cause and effect, the Brahmin philosophical and theological claims used to justify their political, social and cultural dominance is mistaken, unscientific, and untrue.
The Buddha stresses that only his ‘Dhamma’ is the genuine path to escape the cycle of ‘samsara’, or the cycles of existence defined and driven by greed, hatred and delusion (the Buddha defines the notion of ‘rebirth’ as appearing to exist in the deluded state, but which disappears when enlightenment – or ‘perfect understanding’ is achieved). To do this the Buddha builds a logical argument (premised upon cause and effect), which fully explains to the Buddha’s satisfaction, how the world began and the Indian culture of his day developed. Broadly speaking, the Buddha explains what might be termed the first human expression of ‘evolutionary’ development. The modern theory of evolution (through natural selection) was co-founded by Charles Darwin and Alfred Russell Wallace around 1858. This teaches how life changes and adapts to its environment, and overtime organisms change shape and develop (or lose) various functions or attributes, etc. Within this framework, ‘devolution’ is as possible and inevitable as ‘evolution’ - with both adaptations often operating together to enhance survival and development of a species. Technically speaking, the term ‘evolution’ does not necessarily imply ‘progression’, but only ‘transformation’. Similarly, the term ‘devolution’ does not necessarily suggest ‘regression’ but only ‘transformation’, as the development of life is essentially ‘amoral’ and cannot be limited to contrived systems of preferred behaviours. The human foot, for instance, used to be very similar to the human hand and possessed an opposable thumb. However, when early humans adopted the behaviour of ‘bipedalism’, the opposable (and highly dexterous) thumb on the foot was lost and gave way to the clumsy but highly stable big toe – perfectly adapted to retaining balance whilst stood, walking and running, etc. Although the thumb on the foot ‘devolved’ and completely lost its opposability (regression), the over-all effect of this change was that a much greater ability (that of walking upright) was achieved for the human species.
In the Aggañña Sutta the Buddha uses a crushing logic (and appeal to common-sense) that is reminiscent of Marx (at least in-part). It is revealed that Vasettha was a former Brahmin before renouncing his life-style and becoming a Buddhist ascetic, and the bulk of this sutta is directed toward him (with the other disciple - Bharadvaja - not being mentioned again after the opening few paragraphs). It must be stated at this juncture that according to the Buddhist compilers (apparently quoting the Buddha and his disciples), the criticisms emanating from various representatives of the Brahmin caste are invariably ‘racist’, with open and continuous reference to ‘lighter’ or ‘darker’ skin-tone, accompanied by the further assumption that a lighter skin-tone is morally, culturally and spiritually ‘superior’ to its ‘darker’ variant. The Brahmins state that by living with ‘dark-skinned’ (lower caste) Buddhist monks, Vasettha is betraying not only his caste, but also his ‘race’, and that by doing this, he (and by inference the Buddha) are betraying the god Brahma – from whose ethereal body the entire world of reality emerges – and are placing the foundation of Indian civilization in jeopardy by so doing. According to the Buddhist tradition (which is often disputed by Brahmanic and Hindu thinkers), the Brahmins controlled ancient Indian society due to a ruthless ‘racist’ institution that was justified through an appeal to an elaborate religious myth that contained many primitive rituals and dangerous traditions. Although it is true that ‘racism’ of this type has existed within modern India (and does indeed permeate the institutions of caste), there is an idea that much of this derives from the European colonial presence in India over the last 500 years or so, and represents the infiltration of ancient Indian culture by Western racism, and that this is what is being seen in contemporary examples of caste associations and distinctions. Certainly, there is no logical reason to assume that the ancient Brahmanism as presented in the Buddhist teachings is the same Hinduism that survives in India, Sri Lanka and Bali today, other than in a very broad sense (of historical continuation). On the other hand, there is no denying the very real sense of ‘discrimination’ that exists between the four main castes (and numerous sub-castes) – with workers being firmly placed at the bottom (despite performing most of the production for the Brahmanic society that lives off their labour whilst simultaneously depriving them of any validity or self-worth). Also of note is the fact that the Buddha was himself of high-caste birth within the Brahmanic system (being a ‘kshatriya’ - or ‘warrior and king’ - the second highest caste just beneath the Brahmins or Hindu priests who protected the holy fire, and controlled the rhythm of daily life at the village level by being the only inhabitants with the spiritual and political power to light the daily fires of the many villages so that food could be cooked, water boiled and warmth gained).
Vasettha explains that the Brahmins state that they are born from Brahma’s mouth and therefore represent all his knowledge and wisdom – and therefore they are the highest of the castes. Brahmins possess light-skin, are good looking, well fed and well dressed. They are clever and can remember and recite the holy texts and possess the knowledge of how to make fire (there is no claim to literacy in the modern sense of being able to read and write). The Buddha responds by stating that all these assertions are premised upon a false belief. If the logical foundation is wrong, then it follows that the further assumptions made by the Brahmins have no basis in fact and must be rejected as untrue. The Buddha clarifies his position by explaining that although the religious myth of the Brahmins is that they are born ‘out of the mouth’ Brahma (as if they were his breath), in reality it is well-known that a Brahmin woman – just like any other human woman – conceives a child in her womb which is the consequence of coitus or sexual intercourse between a man and a woman. Furthermore, it is also common knowledge that Brahmin women – after carrying their children for nearly a year – give birth to their off-spring just like any other woman. The Buddha states that these things are seen all the time in the villages – but at no time has any one ever seen a Brahmin person born ‘from the mouth’ of Brahma. This is how the Buddha deconstructs the religious myth that all Brahmins use to justify their social and spiritual dominance, and firmly establishes the material basis of physical existence.
The Buddha then explains that there are four castes (‘varna’ or ‘vasta’) – and he does so in this order: , the kingly warriors (kshatriyas), the Brahmins, the merchants (vaisyas), and the workers (sudras) - all organized in order of skin-tone (with the lightest at the top and the darkest at the bottom). During the Buddha’s lifetime in North India many areas were politically taken controlled by the ‘kshatriyas’ who ruled Republics as warrior kings and referred to themselves as ‘nobility’ (sometimes even ‘elected’ into office). The Brahmins were still very influential in the area and possessed various aspects of spiritual and cultural control over the masses. This might represent a time when the Brahmins had not yet achieved full political and spiritual dominance of North India, as they had done in other parts of the country. In these other areas, the caste system firmly placed the Brahmins above the kingly warriors. The Buddha understands all this Brahmanic reality but rejects it as being premised upon a false logical premise. The Buddha explains that regardless of caste, each and every one of the four castes contains individuals who routinely manifest greed, hatred and delusion to exactly the same extent and in exactly the same manner. The assumed moral superiority (or degradation) associated with the castes meant nothing when compared with this observation. None – regardless of the religious myth they believed – were exempt from greed, hatred and delusion. All were infected equally with the three taints, and members of all castes committed crimes great and small. None of the castes possessed any superior moral attitudes or behaviour and therefore expressed no divine origination whatsoever. The Buddha, using observational logic, states that regardless of the assumption that certain castes were morally superior to other castes – all were in reality exactly the same and that no individuals were free of greed, hatred or delusions. This is because ‘caste’ is a false concept premised upon a non-existent religious myth. Caste and assumed caste superiority and inferiority were equally empty concepts. This stresses the humanist position that all living beings are essentially psychologically and behaviourally the same, and that this ‘sameness’ manifests in a multitude of different but related ways.
The Buddha then reiterates that it is only through his Dhamma that the cycle of greed, hatred and delusion can be overcome. If his moral path is not followed, then the cycle of greed, hatred and delusion (samsara) cannot be uprooted. If a practitioner does not practice psychological restraint (meditation), or physical control (sila), then eons of ignorance and delusion will not be uprooted. Brahmanic rituals and practices are a false path that only encourage the cycle of samsara and cannot uproot it. Brahanism is a form of social and political control disguised as ‘religion’. The Buddha knows this because he has explored all the spiritual teachings extant in his day and tested their hypotheses. He found none to be true from his own personal experience. Whilst penetrating deep into the psychological fabric of the universe, the Buddha stated that there was no Brahma, or heavens or any type of divine beings – these things only existed in the world of deluded perception and completely disappeared upon the attainment of enlightenment. However, even in the world of deluded beliefs, the Buddha’s view of the pantheon of gods were not the same as that envisioned by the Brahmins. The Brahmins were wrong even in their imaginations of the universe! This is the message the Buddha taught all the people who came for instruction, be they kings or beggars. Anyone can apply his teaching and be ‘free’. The Brahmins view of the universe is not just wrong, it is multidimensionally wrong. This most powerful of castes possessed the least powerful of imagined spiritual paths. Only the Buddha had trodden the path that had to be followed and only he had rediscovered the true ‘Dhamma’ that is applicable to all beings (human and non-human). The Brahmins only copied one another’s ignorance and not one of them had ever seen Brahma or attained to the highest meditative states. Having undermined the birth myth of the Brahmins and established that their psychology was no different to anyone else's, the Buddha now turns his attention toward the analysis of the physical universe.
Demonstrating a remarkable insight, the Buddha states (to Vasettha) that after a very long time this world will pass away. (If not a lucky guess, then how did he know this?) Furthermore, the Buddha suggests that at such a time all physical life will be extinguished on the Earth. At this point there is no appeal to supernatural events or miraculous happenings – the Buddha firmly states that there will be a massive extinction event (as modern science suggests). What happens to all the living beings? The Buddha suggests that they dwell in the World of Radiance. This is a world of conscious awareness that feeds upon rapture, which is self-luminous, traversing through the air, continuing in glory and continuously experiencing great bliss. Beings in this state have no sense of time but exist in this realm for eons upon eons of time fully immersed in disembodied bliss. This sounds very similar to the experience of ‘samadhi’ achieved by advanced meditators who (whilst sat in the mediation posture) transcend the very body that gives them life. Typically, those who return from extended periods in this state (sometimes days or weeks) report no sense of bodily discomfort (such as joint-pain, fatigue, thirst, hunger or toiletry needs) or the passing of time. Typically, there is a radiating bright light that appears to replace physical existence and a sense of profound personal happiness and a deep and sustained sense of loving kindness and compassion for the universe. In the jungles of Thailand, India (and other countries), the dead bodies of ancient ascetics have been found sat upright and cross-legged (usually at the foot of equally ancient trees). The bodies are generally beatific in expression (the individuals having physically passed away whilst experiencing this ‘bliss’), and when touched or disturbed these bodies quite literally fall into piles of dust. I suspect this is the model of personal experience the Buddha was accessing when he gave this teaching. This may be referred to as indigenous Indian scientific analysis which replaces religious imagination with verified personal experience (which at this present time cannot be compared to Western science which has not yet made a proper study of this phenomenon).
The Buddha then explains how the world evolved:
1) A dark, hot world formed, comprised only of water (with no moon, stars or sun).
2) The water cooled over a very long time and a layer of good-tasting scum formed across its surface.
3) This attracted (via the taint of greed) the attention of beings residing in the World of Radiance.
4) From this substance (which was like boiled, milky rice) the earth formed.
5) The earth was endowed with colour, odour and taste – being attractive like pure honey or ghee.
6) A disembodied being – driven by greed – tasted this sweet substance and generated ‘craving’ which spread through millions of other disembodied
beings.
7) As they ate chunks of the earth the stars, sun and the moon formed in the sky and these beings lost their spiritual radiance.
8) This created night and day, the three seasons and the passing of time and established a new cycle of the evolution of the earth.
9) After a very long time of consuming the earth these beings slowly lost their radiance and yet again assumed an ordinary, material existence. Some were good and some were bad, some were good looking and some were not. This is how differentiation between different human groups developed premised upon greed, hatred and delusion.
10) When the milky-substance was all gone, plants, trees and mushrooms, etc., started to grow again. The primitive humans, governed by greed switched their eating habits toward this vegetation and in their ignorance forgot where they had come from and continued to discriminate with their newly developed senses.
11) When the vegetation was exhausted, rice started to grow and the primitive humans switched their eating habits to it – not realizing the previous states of their existences which had come before.
12) All this happened over very long periods of time and the primitive humans formed into competing groups with no memory of their previous unity (as radiant beings). They form routines and habits which included mealtimes and discrimination when distributing resources. Violence broke out and various groups attained dominance through threats and murder.
13) Although some (good) groups forbade immoral actions, other groups would not listen and when these individuals were expelled, to hide their immorality they built huts of their own to live in. Behind these walls their immortality continued.
14) What was considered immoral in these ancient times – the Buddha tells us – was now considered acceptable in the India of his day. Powerful groups enslaved the weak and made them work for them – fetching food and water, whilst performing all kinds of menial tasks. Those who hoarded rice became fat and lazy whilst those who worked hard died of starvation.
15) Those who rejected this immoral lifestyle often went to live on the outskirts of settlements and built huts out of leaves, within which they meditated and lived a good life. These beings had regained an inkling of how to escape the cycle of deluded living through Dhamma – although this teaching was not yet perfected. This rekindled the genuine path of true spiritual endeavour. This is the origins of the Brahmin caste, but although they are now assumed to be the best, at the beginning they were considered the lowest.
16) There were also those who adopted the married life and developed all kinds of industries and trades – these became the vaisyas (or ‘merchants’).
17) The vaisyas employed the masses as manual workers and these became the ‘sudras’. At this time all this was correct with a minimum of exploitation.
18) The kshatriyas (kings and warriors) were originally farmers in charge of large swathes of land. Eventually this developed into ‘kings’ controlling this land now inhabited by thousands of beings.
19) If the members of the four castes live good lives that uproot greed, hatred and delusion, then their future lives will be radiant and full of splendor – but if they live bad lives full of greed, hatred and delusion, then their future existences will be blighted with pain and misery. Individuals who live a life that is a mixture of good and bad activities, then this is the reality each will experience in their future lives. This is all that can be expected if the Buddha’s Dhamma is not properly practiced.
20) The Buddha finishes his explanation of evolution by stating that it is only through becoming a ‘bhikkhu’ that any member of the four castes can truly escape the cycle of samsara. Brahmanism is a life premised upon greed, hatred and delusion, whilst the Buddha’s path teaches psychological and physical purification through meditation and the strict following of the Vinaya Discipline (as behaviour modification).
There is much in the Buddha’s theory of evolution that appears startlingly ‘modern’ in expression, but how could he have known these things thousands of years ago without access to scientific equipment or scientific theory? The Buddha himself rejects divine intervention and also stated that he was an ordinary being and not a god. He stated that anyone can gain the enlightenment he realized and that material reality has to be the starting point from which all logical and rational assessment begins. I believe the Aggañña Sutta to be humanity’s first (and earliest) expression of the theory of evolution.
©opyright: Adrian Chan-Wyles (ShiDaDao) 2019.
Sinhala Language References:
http://www.dhammikaweb.com/?p=1446
https://si.wikipedia.org/wiki/අග්ගඤ්ඤ_සූත්රය
http://www.budusarana.lk/budusarana/2014/01/24/tmp.asp?ID=vision04
http://lakshmanperera.blogspot.com/2018/04/blog-post_88.html
English Language References:
http://www.palicanon.org/en/sutta-pitaka/transcribed-suttas/majjhima-nikaya/142-mn-88-bhitika-sutta-the-cloak.html
https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/agganna#pali
https://www.sacred-texts.com/journals/mon/abudgen.htm
https://www.academia.edu/7498024/Devolution_and_Evolution_in_the_Agganna_Sutta_2013
Was the Buddha hedging his bets? Was he a genius (who could not read and write according to current evidence), who tried to develop a certain ’popularity’ by developing a system of thought that no one could understand but himself, and which was designed to establish a cult-like following that could rival the Brahmins? It is possible, but is it likely? Another way of viewing the evidence is that where there is certainty and consistency – that is the Buddha’s original teaching – and where there is inconsistency and contradiction, this represents a distortion of the Buddha’s teaching generated either deliberately or by accident through the machinations of the ordained Sangha. It could be that in the centuries after the Buddha’s death, the different sections of the Buddhist Sangha that had been established all over India competed with one another for dominance amongst the laity (from whom they begged their living), and for influence over the monarchies and civil authorities of the areas they lived within. Although the Buddha’s message is ‘Revolutionary’ - essentially rejecting all aspects of the old society controlled by what he perceived as the ignorance of Brahmanism – the uneducated laity often sought a type of religious ritual that they could understand and relate to, as well as continuing to believe in rebirth and disembodied spirits, etc. This later development of interpretive Buddhism can be described as ‘counter-Revolutionary’ in nature, and considered to be something akin to ‘Trotskyism’ when viewed in relation to the Marxist-Leninism it sought to uproot and replace. The problem the revising elements of the Buddhist Sangha possessed was that the Buddha’s teachings relied heavily upon telling the truth and upon not lying. The Sangha ‘revised’ but also retained the original texts they were seeking to ‘adjust’. This was not a problem for thousands of years since the laity, by and large, could not read and write and had no personal access to the Buddha’s teachings or any way of assessing whether the monks were teaching the Dhamma correctly.
Therefore, every ‘sutta’ must be assessed with one eye upon its original content, and one eye on its revisionist content with a clear distinction being drawn between the two. The Buddha’s original teaching appears to be a core of secular, non-inverted logic that rejects the very religionism that was allowed to infiltrate Buddhist orthodoxy at a later date. His thinking is distinctly modern and reflects the thought processes that underpin modern science. Surely, when Marx and Engels praised Buddhist dialectics (as found within Early Buddhism), they were acknowledging the pristine use of dialectical logic as contained within many of the suttas. Even when it is understood that the many cultural vagaries of religionism has been integrated into many schools of Buddhism, there still remains a ‘detachment’ in the Buddha’s teachings that point the practitioner in the right direction, as if all the contradictory markers of revisionism are merely necessary expedients – a sought of outer shell if you like – contrived to carry the true message of the Dhamma forward, albeit heavily camouflaged by the outer structures of revisionism. This would be like the Communist Manifesto (by Marx and Engels) being craftily hidden within the Christian bible, or to put it another way, the authors of the Communist Manifesto pulling a cloak of religiosity around their irreligious teaching. The old way (predatory capitalism) is used as the quagmire from which freedom from the old way (Socialism) is to be achieved. The Buddha encourages his followers to ‘break free’ of the shackles of a primitive society defined by religiosity – and he does this by using the very religious terms he seeks to transcend.
In the Sinhala (Brahmi) script (which is related to Pali) – the name of the ‘Aggañña Sutta’ is written as ‘අග්ගඤ්ඤ සුත්රය’ which literally transliterates as the ‘Aggañña Sutraya’. The Pali-English Dictionary states the following definition: ‘aggañña : (adj.) known as the highest or foremost.’ The Aggañña Sutta is preserved as the 27th in the collection of the long discourses of the Buddha known as the ‘Digha Nikaya’. Due to the European habit of interpreting different philosophies and religions through the filter of Judeo-Christian theology, a number of translators and commentators interpret ‘Aggañña’ to mean ‘Genesis’, implying that this sutra is some type of Buddhist ‘creationist’ theory, which - when viewed in the light of Buddhistic cyclic existence - it obviously is not. Other, more applicable translations include ‘Primary Knowledge’, or ‘Knowledge of What Came Before’. Another meaning certainly implied in the Sinhala name is the ‘Highest Knowledge Held by the Sage Regarding the Origination of Existence’. Making this title succinct, this sutta could be termed ‘Sagely Formula Underlying Reality’ or ‘Knowledge of Reality’. Essentially, a type of transcendental understanding is suggested that is beyond the machinations of the ordinary human mind trapped within taints of greed, hatred and delusion. Once the ordinary human mind is permanently ‘cleared’ or ‘purified’ of greed, hatred and delusion, then the cause and effect process of building and sustaining cycles of reality and existence can be clearly cognized, not just from a personal perspective (common in many Buddhist suttas), but also on a far broader and universal scale. This sutta is in fact a highly potent intellectual (rhetorical) attack upon the privileged Brahmin caste and the Brahmanic system they upheld and represent. It is triggered by two disciples (Vasettha and Bharadvaja) of the Buddha who explain (when prompted by the Buddha) about the continuous insults and demeaning attitudes many Brahmins held for the Buddha and his followers. The Buddha’s approach is to explain that within the material universe of cause and effect, the Brahmin philosophical and theological claims used to justify their political, social and cultural dominance is mistaken, unscientific, and untrue.
The Buddha stresses that only his ‘Dhamma’ is the genuine path to escape the cycle of ‘samsara’, or the cycles of existence defined and driven by greed, hatred and delusion (the Buddha defines the notion of ‘rebirth’ as appearing to exist in the deluded state, but which disappears when enlightenment – or ‘perfect understanding’ is achieved). To do this the Buddha builds a logical argument (premised upon cause and effect), which fully explains to the Buddha’s satisfaction, how the world began and the Indian culture of his day developed. Broadly speaking, the Buddha explains what might be termed the first human expression of ‘evolutionary’ development. The modern theory of evolution (through natural selection) was co-founded by Charles Darwin and Alfred Russell Wallace around 1858. This teaches how life changes and adapts to its environment, and overtime organisms change shape and develop (or lose) various functions or attributes, etc. Within this framework, ‘devolution’ is as possible and inevitable as ‘evolution’ - with both adaptations often operating together to enhance survival and development of a species. Technically speaking, the term ‘evolution’ does not necessarily imply ‘progression’, but only ‘transformation’. Similarly, the term ‘devolution’ does not necessarily suggest ‘regression’ but only ‘transformation’, as the development of life is essentially ‘amoral’ and cannot be limited to contrived systems of preferred behaviours. The human foot, for instance, used to be very similar to the human hand and possessed an opposable thumb. However, when early humans adopted the behaviour of ‘bipedalism’, the opposable (and highly dexterous) thumb on the foot was lost and gave way to the clumsy but highly stable big toe – perfectly adapted to retaining balance whilst stood, walking and running, etc. Although the thumb on the foot ‘devolved’ and completely lost its opposability (regression), the over-all effect of this change was that a much greater ability (that of walking upright) was achieved for the human species.
In the Aggañña Sutta the Buddha uses a crushing logic (and appeal to common-sense) that is reminiscent of Marx (at least in-part). It is revealed that Vasettha was a former Brahmin before renouncing his life-style and becoming a Buddhist ascetic, and the bulk of this sutta is directed toward him (with the other disciple - Bharadvaja - not being mentioned again after the opening few paragraphs). It must be stated at this juncture that according to the Buddhist compilers (apparently quoting the Buddha and his disciples), the criticisms emanating from various representatives of the Brahmin caste are invariably ‘racist’, with open and continuous reference to ‘lighter’ or ‘darker’ skin-tone, accompanied by the further assumption that a lighter skin-tone is morally, culturally and spiritually ‘superior’ to its ‘darker’ variant. The Brahmins state that by living with ‘dark-skinned’ (lower caste) Buddhist monks, Vasettha is betraying not only his caste, but also his ‘race’, and that by doing this, he (and by inference the Buddha) are betraying the god Brahma – from whose ethereal body the entire world of reality emerges – and are placing the foundation of Indian civilization in jeopardy by so doing. According to the Buddhist tradition (which is often disputed by Brahmanic and Hindu thinkers), the Brahmins controlled ancient Indian society due to a ruthless ‘racist’ institution that was justified through an appeal to an elaborate religious myth that contained many primitive rituals and dangerous traditions. Although it is true that ‘racism’ of this type has existed within modern India (and does indeed permeate the institutions of caste), there is an idea that much of this derives from the European colonial presence in India over the last 500 years or so, and represents the infiltration of ancient Indian culture by Western racism, and that this is what is being seen in contemporary examples of caste associations and distinctions. Certainly, there is no logical reason to assume that the ancient Brahmanism as presented in the Buddhist teachings is the same Hinduism that survives in India, Sri Lanka and Bali today, other than in a very broad sense (of historical continuation). On the other hand, there is no denying the very real sense of ‘discrimination’ that exists between the four main castes (and numerous sub-castes) – with workers being firmly placed at the bottom (despite performing most of the production for the Brahmanic society that lives off their labour whilst simultaneously depriving them of any validity or self-worth). Also of note is the fact that the Buddha was himself of high-caste birth within the Brahmanic system (being a ‘kshatriya’ - or ‘warrior and king’ - the second highest caste just beneath the Brahmins or Hindu priests who protected the holy fire, and controlled the rhythm of daily life at the village level by being the only inhabitants with the spiritual and political power to light the daily fires of the many villages so that food could be cooked, water boiled and warmth gained).
Vasettha explains that the Brahmins state that they are born from Brahma’s mouth and therefore represent all his knowledge and wisdom – and therefore they are the highest of the castes. Brahmins possess light-skin, are good looking, well fed and well dressed. They are clever and can remember and recite the holy texts and possess the knowledge of how to make fire (there is no claim to literacy in the modern sense of being able to read and write). The Buddha responds by stating that all these assertions are premised upon a false belief. If the logical foundation is wrong, then it follows that the further assumptions made by the Brahmins have no basis in fact and must be rejected as untrue. The Buddha clarifies his position by explaining that although the religious myth of the Brahmins is that they are born ‘out of the mouth’ Brahma (as if they were his breath), in reality it is well-known that a Brahmin woman – just like any other human woman – conceives a child in her womb which is the consequence of coitus or sexual intercourse between a man and a woman. Furthermore, it is also common knowledge that Brahmin women – after carrying their children for nearly a year – give birth to their off-spring just like any other woman. The Buddha states that these things are seen all the time in the villages – but at no time has any one ever seen a Brahmin person born ‘from the mouth’ of Brahma. This is how the Buddha deconstructs the religious myth that all Brahmins use to justify their social and spiritual dominance, and firmly establishes the material basis of physical existence.
The Buddha then explains that there are four castes (‘varna’ or ‘vasta’) – and he does so in this order: , the kingly warriors (kshatriyas), the Brahmins, the merchants (vaisyas), and the workers (sudras) - all organized in order of skin-tone (with the lightest at the top and the darkest at the bottom). During the Buddha’s lifetime in North India many areas were politically taken controlled by the ‘kshatriyas’ who ruled Republics as warrior kings and referred to themselves as ‘nobility’ (sometimes even ‘elected’ into office). The Brahmins were still very influential in the area and possessed various aspects of spiritual and cultural control over the masses. This might represent a time when the Brahmins had not yet achieved full political and spiritual dominance of North India, as they had done in other parts of the country. In these other areas, the caste system firmly placed the Brahmins above the kingly warriors. The Buddha understands all this Brahmanic reality but rejects it as being premised upon a false logical premise. The Buddha explains that regardless of caste, each and every one of the four castes contains individuals who routinely manifest greed, hatred and delusion to exactly the same extent and in exactly the same manner. The assumed moral superiority (or degradation) associated with the castes meant nothing when compared with this observation. None – regardless of the religious myth they believed – were exempt from greed, hatred and delusion. All were infected equally with the three taints, and members of all castes committed crimes great and small. None of the castes possessed any superior moral attitudes or behaviour and therefore expressed no divine origination whatsoever. The Buddha, using observational logic, states that regardless of the assumption that certain castes were morally superior to other castes – all were in reality exactly the same and that no individuals were free of greed, hatred or delusions. This is because ‘caste’ is a false concept premised upon a non-existent religious myth. Caste and assumed caste superiority and inferiority were equally empty concepts. This stresses the humanist position that all living beings are essentially psychologically and behaviourally the same, and that this ‘sameness’ manifests in a multitude of different but related ways.
The Buddha then reiterates that it is only through his Dhamma that the cycle of greed, hatred and delusion can be overcome. If his moral path is not followed, then the cycle of greed, hatred and delusion (samsara) cannot be uprooted. If a practitioner does not practice psychological restraint (meditation), or physical control (sila), then eons of ignorance and delusion will not be uprooted. Brahmanic rituals and practices are a false path that only encourage the cycle of samsara and cannot uproot it. Brahanism is a form of social and political control disguised as ‘religion’. The Buddha knows this because he has explored all the spiritual teachings extant in his day and tested their hypotheses. He found none to be true from his own personal experience. Whilst penetrating deep into the psychological fabric of the universe, the Buddha stated that there was no Brahma, or heavens or any type of divine beings – these things only existed in the world of deluded perception and completely disappeared upon the attainment of enlightenment. However, even in the world of deluded beliefs, the Buddha’s view of the pantheon of gods were not the same as that envisioned by the Brahmins. The Brahmins were wrong even in their imaginations of the universe! This is the message the Buddha taught all the people who came for instruction, be they kings or beggars. Anyone can apply his teaching and be ‘free’. The Brahmins view of the universe is not just wrong, it is multidimensionally wrong. This most powerful of castes possessed the least powerful of imagined spiritual paths. Only the Buddha had trodden the path that had to be followed and only he had rediscovered the true ‘Dhamma’ that is applicable to all beings (human and non-human). The Brahmins only copied one another’s ignorance and not one of them had ever seen Brahma or attained to the highest meditative states. Having undermined the birth myth of the Brahmins and established that their psychology was no different to anyone else's, the Buddha now turns his attention toward the analysis of the physical universe.
Demonstrating a remarkable insight, the Buddha states (to Vasettha) that after a very long time this world will pass away. (If not a lucky guess, then how did he know this?) Furthermore, the Buddha suggests that at such a time all physical life will be extinguished on the Earth. At this point there is no appeal to supernatural events or miraculous happenings – the Buddha firmly states that there will be a massive extinction event (as modern science suggests). What happens to all the living beings? The Buddha suggests that they dwell in the World of Radiance. This is a world of conscious awareness that feeds upon rapture, which is self-luminous, traversing through the air, continuing in glory and continuously experiencing great bliss. Beings in this state have no sense of time but exist in this realm for eons upon eons of time fully immersed in disembodied bliss. This sounds very similar to the experience of ‘samadhi’ achieved by advanced meditators who (whilst sat in the mediation posture) transcend the very body that gives them life. Typically, those who return from extended periods in this state (sometimes days or weeks) report no sense of bodily discomfort (such as joint-pain, fatigue, thirst, hunger or toiletry needs) or the passing of time. Typically, there is a radiating bright light that appears to replace physical existence and a sense of profound personal happiness and a deep and sustained sense of loving kindness and compassion for the universe. In the jungles of Thailand, India (and other countries), the dead bodies of ancient ascetics have been found sat upright and cross-legged (usually at the foot of equally ancient trees). The bodies are generally beatific in expression (the individuals having physically passed away whilst experiencing this ‘bliss’), and when touched or disturbed these bodies quite literally fall into piles of dust. I suspect this is the model of personal experience the Buddha was accessing when he gave this teaching. This may be referred to as indigenous Indian scientific analysis which replaces religious imagination with verified personal experience (which at this present time cannot be compared to Western science which has not yet made a proper study of this phenomenon).
The Buddha then explains how the world evolved:
1) A dark, hot world formed, comprised only of water (with no moon, stars or sun).
2) The water cooled over a very long time and a layer of good-tasting scum formed across its surface.
3) This attracted (via the taint of greed) the attention of beings residing in the World of Radiance.
4) From this substance (which was like boiled, milky rice) the earth formed.
5) The earth was endowed with colour, odour and taste – being attractive like pure honey or ghee.
6) A disembodied being – driven by greed – tasted this sweet substance and generated ‘craving’ which spread through millions of other disembodied
beings.
7) As they ate chunks of the earth the stars, sun and the moon formed in the sky and these beings lost their spiritual radiance.
8) This created night and day, the three seasons and the passing of time and established a new cycle of the evolution of the earth.
9) After a very long time of consuming the earth these beings slowly lost their radiance and yet again assumed an ordinary, material existence. Some were good and some were bad, some were good looking and some were not. This is how differentiation between different human groups developed premised upon greed, hatred and delusion.
10) When the milky-substance was all gone, plants, trees and mushrooms, etc., started to grow again. The primitive humans, governed by greed switched their eating habits toward this vegetation and in their ignorance forgot where they had come from and continued to discriminate with their newly developed senses.
11) When the vegetation was exhausted, rice started to grow and the primitive humans switched their eating habits to it – not realizing the previous states of their existences which had come before.
12) All this happened over very long periods of time and the primitive humans formed into competing groups with no memory of their previous unity (as radiant beings). They form routines and habits which included mealtimes and discrimination when distributing resources. Violence broke out and various groups attained dominance through threats and murder.
13) Although some (good) groups forbade immoral actions, other groups would not listen and when these individuals were expelled, to hide their immorality they built huts of their own to live in. Behind these walls their immortality continued.
14) What was considered immoral in these ancient times – the Buddha tells us – was now considered acceptable in the India of his day. Powerful groups enslaved the weak and made them work for them – fetching food and water, whilst performing all kinds of menial tasks. Those who hoarded rice became fat and lazy whilst those who worked hard died of starvation.
15) Those who rejected this immoral lifestyle often went to live on the outskirts of settlements and built huts out of leaves, within which they meditated and lived a good life. These beings had regained an inkling of how to escape the cycle of deluded living through Dhamma – although this teaching was not yet perfected. This rekindled the genuine path of true spiritual endeavour. This is the origins of the Brahmin caste, but although they are now assumed to be the best, at the beginning they were considered the lowest.
16) There were also those who adopted the married life and developed all kinds of industries and trades – these became the vaisyas (or ‘merchants’).
17) The vaisyas employed the masses as manual workers and these became the ‘sudras’. At this time all this was correct with a minimum of exploitation.
18) The kshatriyas (kings and warriors) were originally farmers in charge of large swathes of land. Eventually this developed into ‘kings’ controlling this land now inhabited by thousands of beings.
19) If the members of the four castes live good lives that uproot greed, hatred and delusion, then their future lives will be radiant and full of splendor – but if they live bad lives full of greed, hatred and delusion, then their future existences will be blighted with pain and misery. Individuals who live a life that is a mixture of good and bad activities, then this is the reality each will experience in their future lives. This is all that can be expected if the Buddha’s Dhamma is not properly practiced.
20) The Buddha finishes his explanation of evolution by stating that it is only through becoming a ‘bhikkhu’ that any member of the four castes can truly escape the cycle of samsara. Brahmanism is a life premised upon greed, hatred and delusion, whilst the Buddha’s path teaches psychological and physical purification through meditation and the strict following of the Vinaya Discipline (as behaviour modification).
There is much in the Buddha’s theory of evolution that appears startlingly ‘modern’ in expression, but how could he have known these things thousands of years ago without access to scientific equipment or scientific theory? The Buddha himself rejects divine intervention and also stated that he was an ordinary being and not a god. He stated that anyone can gain the enlightenment he realized and that material reality has to be the starting point from which all logical and rational assessment begins. I believe the Aggañña Sutta to be humanity’s first (and earliest) expression of the theory of evolution.
©opyright: Adrian Chan-Wyles (ShiDaDao) 2019.
Sinhala Language References:
http://www.dhammikaweb.com/?p=1446
https://si.wikipedia.org/wiki/අග්ගඤ්ඤ_සූත්රය
http://www.budusarana.lk/budusarana/2014/01/24/tmp.asp?ID=vision04
http://lakshmanperera.blogspot.com/2018/04/blog-post_88.html
English Language References:
http://www.palicanon.org/en/sutta-pitaka/transcribed-suttas/majjhima-nikaya/142-mn-88-bhitika-sutta-the-cloak.html
https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/agganna#pali
https://www.sacred-texts.com/journals/mon/abudgen.htm
https://www.academia.edu/7498024/Devolution_and_Evolution_in_the_Agganna_Sutta_2013