Mūlamadhyamakakārikā (MMK): Denying Tri-temporal Existence
by Satiman
Brief Note by Author:
MMK must be read through the right vision of ultimate truth not from the view of conventional truth. The apparent logical paradox of the knowledge of ultimate truth with respect to the knowledge of conventional may appear to be logical paradoxes or illogical reasonings. But in actuality, they are not so because the worldllings are fundamentally perverse. The ordinary worldlings are frightened when the ultimate truth is exposed and imparted to them. But the wise is delighted and rejoice at being expounded with the ultimate truth. The Buddhist teaching is to rectify views of perversion of the ordinary worldlings. It transforms the state of illusion into the state of enlightenment ; it converts consciousness into wisdom.
Introduction
Nāgārjuna’s conception of Eight Negations of neither Ceasing nor Arising, neither annihilationism nor eternalism, neither Identity nor Difference, Neither Appearance nor Disappearance encapsulates the principle of Dependent Co-arising. Dependent Co-arising rejects either permanent absolute existence or nihilistic absolute non-existence. Therefore, the tri-temporal existence in which a phenomenon traverses from the past phenomenon to the present phenomenon and ends in the future phenomenon does not exist in the ultimate sense. Conventionally, tri-temporal movement exists in three periods of time but only illusively in the deluded eyes of the worldlings. Since time and space do not exist in the ultimate sense. Hence,a phenomenon or existent which traverses tri-temporally through the past phenomenon, present phenomenon and future phenomenon do not exist in the ultimate sense. They only appear to exist tri-temporally in the forms of illusions or reified superimposition.
Moved and Unmoved
In the MMK.2.1 on ‘The Moved and the Unmoved’, Nāgārjuna elucidates that nothing is actually being moved in the tri-temporal existence of a phenomenon or existent. In the first place, time, space and existent or phenomenon do not exist as independent self-contained entities, therefore the entire phenomenon of tri-temporal existence does not exist in the ultimate sense but does exist illusively like a dream, magic, mirage and echo. Nāgārjuna denies tri-temporal existence of a phenomenon or existent as follows:
What has been moved, in the first instance, is not being
moved. What has not been moved is also not being moved.
Separated from what has been moved and has not been
moved, present moving is not known.
‘What has been moved’ refers to the past phenomenon or dharma. ’What has not been moved ‘ refers to the future phenomenon. ‘What has been moved is not being moved’ means that no movement occurs from the past to the present instance. ‘What has not been moved is also not being moved’ connotes that the movement of the phenomenon does not occur from the present instance to the future instance. In short, the past and future phenomena do not exist. When the past and the future phenomena do not exist, how could the present phenomenon exist? This is the logical paradox exposed by Nāgārjuna by utilizing the dialective negation of reduction ad absurdum.
Theory of Relativity
Albert Einstein (1879-1955), the celebrated physicist whose Theory of Relativity revolutionized Man’s thinking about the nature of space and time, uttered thus before his demise:
If I were to be born again, I’d like to be a Buddhist.
If one truly apprehends the Theory of Relativity expounded by Albert Einstein, it is not amazing at all to listen to such an utterance from the mouth of this renowned scientist, the father of modern Physics born in Germany. The Truth of Relativity is closely related to the principle of Dependent Co-arising.
When one is seated in an aeroplane, which is flying with a velocity of 200 Km per hour, one would experience that the aeroplane does not seem to fly at all if one does peep through the window to see the moving clouds outside. There is a great awakening here - An aeroplane, moving with any velocity, seems not to be stationary (0 km per hour ) when the velocity of the aeroplane is not compared with any object outside the aeroplane. But if an observer, observing the moving aeroplane from the ground level on earth, will perceive that the aeroplane will be moving at a relative velocity of 200 km per hour relatively to the earth which is non-moving. But if an observer, sitting in another aeroplane, flying at 250 km per hour perceives the same aeroplane which is flying exactly in the opposite direction, he will perceive that his aeroplane is actually flying at a relative velocity of 50 km per hour (250-200=50) relative to the other aeroplane. If both aeroplanes are flying in parallel in the same direction, then the observer in any of these two planes will perceive that his aeroplane is flying at a relative velocity of 450 km per hour (250+200 =450) and not either 200 or 250 km per hour. The velocities recorded in the respective aeroplanes are 250 km per hour and 200 km per hour which are called Absolute velocities of the respective aeroplanes. Therefore, the recorded velocity of 200 or 250 km per hour is not the relative velocity actually experienced by both observers in both planes. Only the relative velocity, which varies according to the environment, is experienced by the passengers. The absolute velocity of 200/250 km per hour is ultimately real. The absolute velocity recorded at the speedometer does not reflect the relative velocity but absolute velocity of the aeroplane. Thus, the relative velocity is illusionary while the absolute velocity mirrors the ultimate truth of Reality. Albert Einstein’s Theory of Relativity concurs with Dependent Co-arising. These are two great masters of Mankind proclaiming one common message – the ultimate truth of Reality. Absolute velocity is the absolute truth while relative velocity is merely conventional and illusive.
Since, in the first place, a person, phenomenon, time and space are insubstantial or empty of any intrinsic nature or signless, all events or occurrences are insubstantial or signless. Being insubstantial or signless, the tri-temporal existence is also insubstantial or signless. Being insubstantial or signles, tri-temporal existence is not evident. Perceiving the movement of airplane relatively to the same airplane reveals that it is not being moved. Another good illustration of the non-movement of tri-temporal existence is the flight of an aircraft moving in the clockwise direction from city A to city B along the same latitude while the earth rotates in the anti-clockwise direction from B to A. The aircraft moves from point A to point B while the earth moves in the opposite direction from point B to point A. Therefore, in the ultimately analysis, the aircraft has not moved any distance from point A to B as the distance traversed has been nullified by the same distance moved by the earth’s rotation.
Flight of Aircraft
-------------------------------------->
A B
<-------------------------------------
Rotation of Earth
The Albert Einstein’s theory of Relatively unveils that all phenomena are dependently co-arisen. In fact, Elbert Einstein’s wisdom concurs with that of Śākyamuni Buddha.
Logical Paradoxes
Let’s examine the dialectic negation by reduction ad absurdum employed Nāgārjuna to refute and floor his substantialist opponents. Nāgārjuna argued that if there exists movement in tri-temporal existence traversing through three periods of time successively, namely the past phenomenon, the present phenomenon and future phenomenon, there must first be the point of commencement of motion of the movement or change. He asked the substantialists, “Where is the point of commencement of the motion of the tri-temporal existence? He argued thus:
The point of commencement should either begin from
the past phenomenon or the future phenomenon to
create the present motion of tri-temporal movement.
The past phenomenon is defined by the substantialists as
what has been moved. Since it has been moved, how could
the motion of the movement begin from the movement which
has already started. This is a logical paradox raised by
Nāgārjuna to defeat the opponents by reduction ad absurdum.
If the commencement point is at the future phenomenon,
How could the motion start in the phenomenon which has
not been moved? This is another logical paradox exposed by
reduction ad absurdum. Since the point of commencement
can not be initiated in the past or in the future, no motion
of movement has occurred.
Nāgārjuna did not directly utilize the doctrine of Emptiness to refute the heretical views of the substantialists. If he were to utilize Emptiness directly in the philosophical disputations, he would be criticized as a promoter of Mahāyānic doctrine of Emptiness. Nāgārjuna was not interested to elevate himself by the promotion of the doctrine of Emptiness. He was more concerned about apologizing authentic Word of the Buddha and purifying the heretical views of the substantialists.
Conclusion
Nāgārjuna’s Eight Negations is tantamount to relinguishing all views including the view of Emptiness. Any view, whether it is substantial or insubstantial, tends to be linked to the egoistic self or Iness or Mineness. Relinguishing all views commitment to these conventions is tantamount to adhering to either absolute existence or absolute non-existence related respectively to eternalism or annihilationism. Nāgārjuna’s Eight Negations are comprehensive enough to destroy all substantial views. The Eight Negations are actually the expansion of the Kaccāyanagotta-sutta (SN), the quintessence of the tenet of Śākyamuni Buddha. The rejection of the tri-temporal movement of the past entity, present entity and future entity because it is a reified superimposition of self-identity into three entities of the past, present and future. Though tri-temporal existence does not exist in the ultimate analysis, it does exist illusively in terms of conventional realities. The view of Eight negations mirrors the Right View formulated by Gotama Buddha in he Noble Eight Fold Path. Whoever has penetrated this Right View of Eight Negations has developed the Perfection of Wisdom (Prajñāpāramitā). The view of Eight Negations seems to contradict the view of conventional truth. But it is actually the ultimate truth realized all enlightened ones. One becomes ethically supreme when the Eight Negationsare discerned intuitively. The Buddha perceives it and thus he becomes a Perfect Man. MMK, in actuality, expounds the message of enlightenment and soteriology. MMK is therefore is an invaluable treasure of humankind.
References and Recommended Readings:
- Kalupahana, David J, Mūlamadhyamakakārikā of Nāgārjuna. Dehli: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers Private Limited, 2004.
- Shun,Yin,A Discourse on Mūlamadhyamakakārikā. Taipei: Right Hearing Publication Society,1992.
- Winters Jonah, Thinking in Buddhism: Nāgārjuna’s Middle Way.http://www.bahai-library.org./personal/jw/other.pubs/Nāgārjuna
- Kalupahana David J., A History of Buddhist Philosophy: Continuities and Discontinuities. Dehli: Motilal Banarsidass Private Limited, 1992.
|
