Mūlamadhyamakakārikā: Examination of the Five Aggregates

By Satiman

Introduction

Nāgārjuna examines the material form (rūpa) of the five aggregates in relation to the four great elements of Earth  , Water , Fire and Wind in terms of Dependent Co-arising (Pratītyasamutpāda). The other four aggregates of four mental phenomena of Feelings (Vedanā) , Perceptions (Saññā) , Volitions (Saṅkhārā) and Consciousness (Viññāṇa) are to be  similarly treated . The exposition of Rūpa is posited in order to refute the cause-effect or causal  theory of the Substantialists , namely Sarvāstivāda School which advocated the Theory of Self-nature or Intrinsic nature (Svabhāvavāda) and   those of other early Hī̄nayāna Schools of Buddhist Thought , offshoots of the Saṅgha schism with their respective heretical interpretations of the Original Word of Gotama Buddha  . Generally , the Substantialists advocated the simple cause-effect theory (kamma-vipāka-dhamma) of ontology which states that a single cause produces a single effect substantially . Nāgārjuna launched the critique against these  Substantialists who upheld  the substantial theory of cause and effect . According to the tenet of Dependent Co-arising and 24 Conditional Relations (Pațțhānanaya) ,  a cluster of conditions contigently co-produce a cluster of effects , that is, multiple causes producing multiple effects .  Nārgājuna made a critique of the Substantial Theory of Causality of the substantialists in order to apologize and purify the authentic tenet of ‘Sākyamuni Buddha and all other past Buddhas which have been contaminated by various heretical views .

Rejecting Substantialism

In  chapter one of Mūlamadhyamakakārikā (MMK) , Nāgārjuna rejects the Four Theories of Causation comprising Self-causation  , External Causation , Both Self and External Causations,  and Neither Self Nor External Causation . They are rejected because  all these substantial or metaphysical views of ontology are not compatible with the tenet of the 24 conditions or Dependent Co-arising  of all phenomena of the empirical world . Buddhist perspective of conditionality refutes that a single cause, giving rise to a single effect, is not evident or appropriate . Relational conditions dependently co-produce the actuality of the empirical world . The diversifying differentiations of the multiplicity are mere cosmic illusion and are unreal in the ultimate analysis. But at the conventional level ,they are not to be denied as they are pragmatic and useful for mundane interactions and intercommunication . The Middle path must be preserved to permit harmonious interpenetration between the illusive phenomena and the principle of ultimate Truth  . Buddhist teaching is to instruct and unveil that all phenomena are insubstantial and they are interrelated and interdependent in the  form of totality or oneness (Dharmadhātu-pratītyasamutpāda). Discrete entities, which exist independently as self-contained entities, do not exist . Language and concepts do not mirror the ultimate truth of actuality of the empirical world . Language and concepts, which describe the signs, marks or characteristics of all phenomena, are substantial view of ontological commitment .

Nāgārjuna defended the Doctrine of Insubstantiality (Anattā) or the Emptiness (‘Sūnyatā)  of inherent existence because the Substantialists, such as Sarvāstivādins, Vātsīputriyas, Saṃmītiyas , Sautrāntikas of the Buddhist Schools are ontological committed to all phenomena . Ontological commitment conflicts with Dependent Co-arising .

Rūpa Element

Nāgārjuna expounded the Insubstantiality or Emptiness of the Rūpa element in order to refute the substantial position of the aforementioned substantialist opponents . The Rūpa phenomenon is dependently co-arisen form the four elements of Earth , Water, Fire and Wind without any permanent substance, such as Self , Soul or Self-nature . Self , Soul or Self-nature is eternal or permanent and unchanging . This contradicts with the Buddhist fundamental doctrine of Anattā (Non-self) , Anicca (Impermanence)  and Paṭiccasamuppāda . Nārgārjuna, as usual, employed his sharp weapon of Reductio Ad Absurdum to question the position advanced by his philosophical opponents – the Substantialists  thus :

An effect is produced from the cause , how can an effect be distinct from the cause as you posit the notion of a permanent substance ?

Through the astute debating skill of Reductio Ad Absurdum , Nāgārjuna raised a logical paradox which could not be defended by the opponents . The argument of Nāgārjuna can be explicated as follows :

Since the cause and the effect contain a common permanent substance called intrinsic or self-nature , how could the effect differ from the cause in terms of intrinsic nature which is susposed to be permanent and immutable ? If there is a permanent, immutable self-nature , the intrinsic nature of the cause and that of the effect should remain unchanged . If the intrinsic nature is unalterable and permanent , the process of causal transformation can not occur.

Nāgārjuna posited that since the four Primary or Great Elements do not embody any permanent substance , they are subject to change . Since they are insubstantial and subject to transformation, consequently they can be easily conglomerated into a new phenomenon called Rūpa which is also empty of any permanent, unchanging permanent substance called self-nature . As the resultant Rūpa phenomenon is empty of any permanent substance , it is also subject to transformation or change when it is conditioned by other conditions which are empty of any permanent substance . When Rūpa phenomenon is conditioned and conglomerated with the phenomena of Feelings , Perceptions , Volitions and Consciousness , the five aggregates of the human personality are  constructed and manifest . As the five aggregates of the human personality are impermanent and can be conditioned to be transformed or changed again. When appropriate conditions, such as personal variable  kammas , the human being can be transformed into any other sentient being, such as Deva, Asura , Ghost, Animal or Hell-being upon death . When the human being has discerned the Actuality of the human personality or illusion of the multiplicity , the mutability of the human personality ceases and he becomes immutable and deathless emerging as a Tathāgata .The Tathāgata is the final transformation , immutable and  eternal . There will be no more future transformation and the esoteric journey is completed with the emergence of a Tathāgata . What is expected to be done spiritually has been consummated . There is no more to be done . The motive behind Nāgārjuna’s refutations against the Substantialists was not to win a philosophical debate but to pin-point that any substantialist view or ontological commitment impedes the self-enlightenment process .  It is essentially because of ontological commitment that the Dhamma eye  becomes blurred with the dust of cankers or taints which hinder the development of the wisdom of insight into the ultimate truth of Reality or things as they really are .It is important to note the common  enterprise of all esoteric religions that penetration into the Actuality of the Human Personality and the cosmos reduces the fallibility of man. The eventual full self-enlightenment will bring forth the infallibility of Man – the emergence of the maximally excellent man called  Arahant , Bodhisattva or  Buddha .  The message of self-awakening to the Truth of Insubstantiality  or Emptiness, in fact , is  the enterprise or foremost agenda of the entire MMK .

Conclusion

The fundamental theme of this chapter of MMK is to reject any permanent substance called Self , Soul or Self-nature . Nāgārjuna, in defence of the authentic Word of the Buddha, did not accept the simple cause-effect relation that the cause has the power to produce the effect ; the effect is contained in the cause . What Nāgārjuna was trying to convince the Substantialist opponents is that the Rūpa and the causes (four primary elements)  are dependently co-arisen. Rūpa can not arise solitarily . Neither can anyone of the four Primary Elements of Earth , Water, Fire and Wind  arise singly . The Rūpa and the four Primary Elements are one and the same and they are dependently co-arisen . Because of mutual dependence , the Rūpa is said to be empty of any permanent , immutable intrinsic nature. The same argument or logic is applicable to the other four aggregates of Feelings , Perceptions , Volitions and Consciousness . Therefore , the examination of the Emptiness of these four aggregates was not undertaken by Nāgārjuna as a similar ratiocination as it  is equally applied . It is evident therefore to discern that Dependent Co-arising (Pratītyasamutpāda)  is synonymous with the notion of ‘Sūnyatā (of self-nature) . In fact , ‘Sūnyatā is an effective expedient device (upāya) innovated by Nāgārjuna to help us  discern Pratītyasamutpāda. Without this device or skillful means of pedagogy , the Buddhist Theosophy may be too abstruse for many.  These explains why Nāgārjuna, the most astute and celebrated Mahāyāna philosopher, ever produced from the Indian soil, has been fervently and deeply venerated by Mahāyānists hitherto.