A different emptiness

The opponents of Nagarjuna’s theory of emptiness assert that it is destructive which, in other words, amounts to an assertion that Nagarjuna is marketing nihilism which boils down to a total rejection of reality.  Of course, Nagarjuna denies this as one might expect.  Who wants to be thought of as a nihilist?  But Nagarjuna’s subsequent explanation as to why his theory is not nihilistic is difficult to follow if not muddled because the idea of emptiness takes on a new meaning. His explanation is not based on the Nikaya’s or the Agama’s notion of emptiness which is summed up here: 

“Ananda, that which is not there, I view that as empty, but what remains there, I view that as really existing.  Ananda, this is called practising true emptiness” (MA 191).

Nagarjuna’s idea of emptiness is equivalent to dependent origination (pratitya-samutpada).  He says in his karikas, “Whatever is dependently originated, that is declared to be emptiness (MMK XXIV: 18).  But to reiterate, this isn’t the notion of emptiness that the Buddha explained to Ananda.  Nagarjuna is using emptiness in a double sense that’s different from the earlier meaning.  First, he wants us to understand that entities are devoid or empty of reality or svabhâva which is the same as saying they are unreal.  Next, he wants us to understand the real is empty or devoid of plurality (prapañcha-shunya) which includes verbalization and thought-contructs.  

Emptiness is thus inexpressible (avâcya, anabhilâpya), maybe even something like a black hole.  From this one gets the sense that emptiness is total negation without positive implication.  There is no indication that there is a synthesis in which all things are, from the ultimate standpoint, phenomenalizations of Mind in which the conditioned reflects into the unconditioned, which is why all things [the conditioned] are devoid of reality [the unconditioned] and why true reality [pure Mind] is devoid of plurality.  Perhaps it is true that Nagarjuna’s emptiness helps us to overcome the pretensions of language that hide reality.  But the price might be nihilism.

 

Comments

[thezennist]

self-arisen moon:

This is a good example of what I mean by a different emptiness than the notion of emptiness in the Nikayas and Agamas. You could say that emptiness after the Buddha's nirvana becomes ontic, but in a completely negative sense.

[self-arisen moon]

If emptiness is possible,
Then all objects are possible, all levels attainable.
If emptiness is impossible,
Then everything else is (impossible)as well.

- Nagarjuna