A Buddhist Cosmological View — Vũ-trụ-quan Phật học (Refined TNH-voice Draft)¶
Refined English working draft from the TNH-voice pipeline translation of the 1957 journal article.
Author: Thạc-Đức
Source: Phật Giáo Việt Nam, issue 17–18, 1957
Pages: 7–11 of the journal scan
Attribution note: The byline Thạc-Đức is associated with Trần Thạc Đức, a pen name appearing in the 1950s Phật Giáo Việt Nam corpus. Scholarship by Adrienne Minh-Châu Lê identifies Thạc Đức as one of Thích Nhất Hạnh's pen names during his editorship of the journal (Lê 2024; see also Plum Village 2014).
This document is a pipeline-assisted translation produced from cleaned OCR text and then lightly refined for clarity and an early Thích Nhất Hạnh voice. It is offered as a research baseline and working draft.
A Buddhist Cosmological View¶
I. Introduction: Three Tendencies in Indian Thought¶
In the time of the Buddha, one of the most important questions in Indian thought was the question of the fundamental principle of all things. The Brahmajāla Sutta records as many as sixty-two explanations proposed by the philosophical schools of that period. Looking at them together, we may see three principal tendencies.
1. The doctrine of predestination (Pubba-kata-hetu)
The schools belonging to this tendency held that everything in the natural world and in the human world is arranged by predestination. All things unfold according to pre-existing laws. The value of human effort and material conditions is not recognized.
2. The doctrine of divine will (Issara-nimmāna-hetu)
The schools belonging to this tendency maintained that all things exist through the will of a divine being. This divine being is Brahmā, and the central representative of this tendency is Brahmanism.
3. The doctrine of chance or causelessness (Ahetu-apaccaya)
The schools belonging to this tendency did not accept the principle of cause and effect. All phenomena arise and exist by chance, without following any law or principle.
The first and second tendencies place all responsibility in the hands of a supernatural power. Personal responsibility cannot become a real question here. Misfortune and blessing alike are things human beings cannot determine. Human actions, whether wholesome or unwholesome, are not seen as the force that brings about success or failure, flourishing or decline.
The third tendency also cannot establish a foundation for personal moral responsibility. If everything is merely accidental, then good is accidental, evil is accidental, misfortune and blessing are accidental as well. Nothing remains that can serve as a standard for human conduct. Because of this, human beings cannot gradually move toward truth, beauty, and goodness. On the contrary, they can easily slide down into wrongdoing and dissipation.
From the standpoint of reason, these doctrines contain many shortcomings. From the standpoint of human life, the consequences they bring are dark and discouraging. None of them can give human beings the deep confidence needed to establish their lives. Nor do they affirm the necessary capacities already present in the human person.
The Buddha taught the principle of the universe (nguyên lý của vũ trụ) as a foundation for a true way of life. That principle had to accord with the truth of countless phenomena, and that way of life had to lead human beings toward the fulfillment of ethical and spiritual value. The Buddha's purpose in teaching the Dīrgha Āgama was not to attack the theoretical systems of others. It was to reject mistaken views that could obstruct morality and liberation in human life.
II. The Worldview of Conditionality and the Principle of Dependent Arising¶
The worldview taught by the Buddha is a worldview of conditionality (paṭicca-samuppāda). All phenomena rely on one another in order to come into being. All are intimately connected with one another. Without this connection, not a single thing could be established. This connection is what is called cause and condition.
In the sutras, the terms cause (hetu), condition (paccaya), conditioning factor (nidāna), and arising (samudaya) are different names pointing to this same relationship. The Buddha defined conditionality in this way:
When this is, that is.
When this arises, that arises.
When this is not, that is not.
When this ceases, that ceases.
To say, "When this is, that is; when this is not, that is not," is to describe the relationship among things existing at the same time. To say, "When this arises, that arises; when this ceases, that ceases," is to describe the relationship among things existing at different times.
All dharmas arise, cease, and exist within this very close network of mutual relationship. No dharma, no phenomenon, can exist independently or absolutely. When cause comes first and effect follows later, this is called temporally successive cause and effect. When cause and effect are simultaneous, this is called simultaneous cause and effect. One cause may bring about different effects according to the conditions that accompany it. Therefore there can be no absolute cause, and there can be no absolute effect.
The world is woven of systems of simultaneous conditionality, viewed from the standpoint of space, and systems of temporally successive conditionality, viewed from the standpoint of time. This is the Buddhist understanding of causation.
In the sutras and treatises, the term conditioned dharmas (saṃkhata-dhamma) refers precisely to the phenomena of this world of conditionality. All things are impermanent and changing, and this too is because of conditional relationship. In a world of conditionality, there cannot be phenomena that are permanent and eternal. On the basis of this understanding of dependent arising, Buddhism rejects the idea of a world created by a self-existent Supreme God. This is something we cannot fail to recognize.
According to the teaching of the Avataṃsaka School, the whole universe is an endlessly interpenetrating system of dependent arising. In this way, Avataṃsaka doctrine is established upon the causal vision already present in the Āgamas.
The Abhidharma works of Southern Buddhism also classified conditions in order to observe and understand them. This was one of the principal tasks of the Theravāda scholastics. The Mahāpakaraṇa distinguishes twenty-four conditions; volume 25 of the Śāriputra Abhidharma Treatise distinguishes ten conditions; and the Sarvāstivāda school upholds four conditions.
Here, we will briefly examine only two kinds: temporally successive cause and effect, and simultaneous cause and effect.
III. Simultaneous and Successive Causality in the Structure of the World¶
1. Simultaneous causality is also the question of subject and object.
The Buddha taught that what we call the world arises from the meeting of awareness and its objects. Apart from this meeting, there is nothing that can be called the world.
Bhikkhus, I will teach you what is meant by "everything." Listen carefully.
What is called "everything"? It is the eye in relation to forms, the ear in relation to sounds, the nose in relation to odors, the tongue in relation to tastes, the body in relation to tangible objects, and the mind in relation to mental objects.
Bhikkhus, this is called "everything."
— Saṃyutta Nikāya
Thus the world is established upon the knowing relationship between the six sense faculties and the six sense objects. Outside the six faculties and the six objects, everything is without meaning for us. Therefore, as the Buddha taught, if there is no subjective side, there is no objective side; if there is no object, there is no subject. If the relationship between subject and object is removed, the world cannot be established.
Everything is founded upon this relationship, just as two bundles of reeds can stand only by leaning against each other:
Friends, just as two bundles of reeds, tied together and leaning upon each other, are able to stand, so too, with nāmarūpa [Danh Sắc] as condition, consciousness is; with consciousness as condition, nāmarūpa is...
If one of those two bundles of reeds is taken away, the other falls. If the other is taken away, this one falls. In the same way, friend, with the cessation of nāmarūpa, consciousness ceases; with the cessation of consciousness, nāmarūpa ceases...
Nāmarūpa (le nom et la forme) refers here to the physiological and psychological organization of sentient beings, serving as the object for consciousness, the subjective aspect of cognition. But nāmarūpa is not something existing separately outside consciousness. The two depend on one another in order to be established. Between them there is a profound relationship. It is not that one comes first and the other later. Apart from that relationship, neither can be established.
2. Successive causality is also the question of continuity in existence.
All phenomena are impermanent and always changing, yet nothing is utterly cut off or annihilated. There is no individual entity that is eternal and unchanging, yet there are always streams of phenomena continuing without interruption. All things transform continuously according to definite principles.
The Buddha gave particular attention to explaining the continuity of the stream of life, that is, the phenomena of sentient beings. He taught that the fundamental driving forces of saṃsāric birth and death are ignorance and craving. Sentient beings themselves are formations made of the whole body of past experience and past karmic causes. Through present karmic causes, sentient beings move toward future phases of life.
From the standpoint of logic, the Buddha illuminated the law of heterogeneous causes and heterogeneous fruits. From the standpoint of psychology, he explained the law of homogeneous causes and equal-flow fruits. From the metaphysical standpoint, he set forth the law of the Twelve Links of Dependent Origination.
Although twenty-five centuries ago terminology and forms of expression were still limited, the texts of the Four Āgamas were already able to express these subtle teachings.
IV. The Inclusive Meaning of Causality and the Vision of Interwoven Dependent Arising¶
In sum, the Buddhist understanding of cause and effect, in its narrow sense, is simply the law of causality. But in its broader sense, it is not merely a set of causal relations of a theoretical kind. The Buddhist view of causality also embraces ethical and liberating relationships. Its breadth extends throughout the ten directions, and its length penetrates the past, the future, and the present. The one is intimately related to the all, and the all can be understood through the one.
An ancient Vietnamese Zen master expressed this principle in two marvelous lines:
If there is being, it is present in the smallest speck of dust;
If there is non-being, the whole world is not.
(Tác hữu trần sa hữu / Vi không nhất thiết không)
A grain of dust may be small, yet it exists through its relationship with the whole. The whole may be vast, yet if it loses its relationship with a tiny grain of dust, it cannot be established. Therefore another Zen master of the Lý dynasty said:
Heaven and earth are gathered on the tip of a hair;
The sun and moon are contained in a mustard seed.
(Càn khôn tận thị mao đầu thượng / Nhật nguyệt bao hàm giới tử trung)
Here, great and small are no longer merely great and small. A mustard seed may be tiny, yet it has been formed through its relationship with the whole. The entire universe has come together to bring it into being, just as it has come together with the entire universe to bring forth the sun and the moon. If it is there, then all is there. If it is not there, then all is not. "Heaven and earth can lie upon the tip of a single hair" means precisely this.
The world, the universe, and the myriad beings are woven together by endless systems of interdependent causes and conditions. This is a fundamental and profound insight of Buddhism. Upon this insight are established transcendent systems of teaching and wondrous methods of practice.
Modern science has moved beyond a simple, one-directional notion of causality and has come closer to the Buddhist vision of dependent arising in its infinite interweaving. We may hope that one day the torch of the teaching of causes and conditions will shine forth fully, continuing to dispel notions of predestination, chance, and divine creation, so that humankind may soon recognize its path.
Terminology Notes¶
Principle of the universe¶
The phrase principle of the universe, nguyên lý của vũ trụ / nguyên lý vũ trụ, is used here in relation to the central Buddhist teaching of causes and conditions. The wording is somewhat formal in English, but it preserves the philosophical force of the Vietnamese: the article is not speaking only of a moral rule or a practical method, but of the underlying principle by which phenomena arise, continue, and cease.
This principle is closely related to paṭicca-samuppāda (Pāli) / pratītya-samutpāda (Sanskrit), usually translated as dependent arising or dependent origination. It is also expressed through the language of hetu and paccaya — causes and conditions. This draft sometimes glosses the phrase as the law of causes and conditions, yet retains principle of the universe on introduction to keep the original philosophical register.
Dependent arising, dependent origination, and interwoven dependent arising¶
The Vietnamese text moves among related terms and doctrinal fields: nhân duyên, duyên sinh, duyên khởi, and trùng trùng duyên khởi. This draft generally renders:
- nhân duyên as causes and conditions or conditionality;
- duyên sinh as dependent arising;
- duyên khởi as dependent origination or dependent arising, depending on context;
- trùng trùng duyên khởi as interwoven dependent arising, endlessly interpenetrating dependent arising, or dependent arising in its infinite interweaving.
The later term interbeing is not used as the main translation here, even though it is thematically related. Because this article was written in 1957, the translation keeps closer to the early doctrinal vocabulary.
Dharma / phenomenon¶
The Vietnamese and Buddhist technical vocabulary often uses pháp in a broad sense, meaning dharmas, phenomena, things, or elements of experience. This draft keeps dharma where the doctrinal register matters, and uses phenomenon or everything where the English needs to remain open and readable.
Nāmarūpa / name-and-form¶
The term nāmarūpa appears in the Vietnamese source as Danh Sắc, with a French gloss in parentheses: (le nom et la forme). This corresponds to the Sanskrit/Pāli term nāmarūpa, often translated into English as name-and-form.
In this article it is explained as the physiological and psychological organization of sentient beings, in mutual relationship with consciousness. Because Thích Nhất Hạnh later used nāmarūpa directly in English-language teachings, this refined draft keeps the Indic term in the main translation where the technical doctrine is being discussed, while giving the English gloss "name-and-form" at first mention.
This choice also avoids making the phrase sound like an ordinary English compound. In this context, nāmarūpa is not simply "a name" plus "a form"; it points to the psycho-physical basis of experience as understood in the teaching of dependent arising.
Predestination, divine will, and chance¶
The three views discussed in the opening section are rendered as:
- the doctrine of predestination for túc mệnh luận;
- the doctrine of divine will for thần ý luận;
- the doctrine of chance or causelessness for ngẫu nhiên luận.
These are not meant as exact equivalents to modern Western philosophical categories. They are working translations of the tendencies described in the article: fixed fate, creation by divine will, and the denial of causal order.
Editorial Note on Voice¶
This translation aims for an early Thích Nhất Hạnh voice rather than the later, more familiar Plum Village teaching style. The source is a 1957 philosophical article, not a later Dharma talk or meditation manual. For that reason, this draft preserves the article's conceptual structure and doctrinal vocabulary, while moving the English register toward shorter sentences, clearer verbs, and a more poetic cadence.
Pipeline Provenance¶
Baseline translation produced by tnh-gen using prompt
translate_journal_section_tnh_voice_en version 1.0, model gpt-5.4, generated
2026-05-07. Section boundaries and document context from default_section version 1.0.
Source: cleaned OCR from tests/golden/journal-pipeline/5page/. Full artifact chain at
tests/golden/journal-pipeline/walkthrough/clean_translate_5page/.
This file is a standalone editorial-refinement draft derived from that baseline.
Bibliography¶
Primary Source¶
Thạc-Đức [attr. Thích Nhất Hạnh]. "Vũ-trụ-quan Phật học." Phật Giáo Việt Nam, nos. 17–18 (1957): 7–11. Digitized copy available via Thư Viện Hoa Sen: thuvienhoasen.org/a26248/tap-chi-phat-giao-viet-nam.
Scholarship on Phật Giáo Việt Nam and Thích Nhất Hạnh's Early Writings¶
Lê, Adrienne Minh-Châu. "Toward National Buddhism: Thích Nhất Hạnh on Buddhist Nationalism and Modernity in the Journal Phật Giáo Việt Nam, 1956–1959." Journal of Vietnamese Studies 19, no. 1 (February 2024): 9–48. doi.org/10.1525/jvs.2024.19.1.9.
Lê, Adrienne Minh-Châu. "Engaged Buddhism and Vietnamese Nation-building in the Early Writings of Thích Nhất Hạnh." Kyoto Review of Southeast Asia, no. 35 (2023). kyotoreview.org/issue-35/vietnamese-nation-building-early-writings-of-thich-nhat-hanh.
Lê, Adrienne Minh-Châu. "Thich Nhat Hanh: Becoming Thay." Tricycle: The Buddhist Review (Winter 2022). tricycle.org/magazine/thich-nhat-hanh-vietnam.
Biographical and Reference Sources¶
Plum Village. "Thich Nhat Hanh: Extended Biography." Plum Village, 2014. plumvillage.org/about/thich-nhat-hanh/biography. (Lists Thạc Đức among the pen names used by Thích Nhất Hạnh in the 1950s.)
Thư Viện Phật Việt. "Trần Thạc Đức — Phật giáo Việt Nam và hướng đi nhân bản đích thực." thuvienphatviet.com/tran-thac-duc-phat-giao-viet-nam-va-huong-di-nhan-ban-dich-thuc. (Vietnamese-language source discussing Trần Thạc Đức's contributions to the journal.)