Mūlamadhyamakārikā (MMK.7) :
The Examination of the Conditioned (Samskrta-parīksā)
By Paramartha
Conditionality or Causality is always connected to concepts of time and space from the perspective of the ordinary worldlings. The worldlings perceive only the Conventional Truth of multiplicity but are ignorant of the Absolute Truth of Unity, Non-duality or Insubstantiality. When a phenomenon is perceived, they perceive that the preceding substantial event is the cause which produces the subsequent substantial event as an effect of the cause. The transformation or change from the first event (prior entity) to the second event (posterior entity) occurs substantially, linearly and tri-temporarily. In other words, any causality is conceived to have a beginning and an end. The cause contains the effect and the effect is contained in the cause. This is a substantialists’ view of ontology in the sense that every occurrence of phenomenon is perceived in terms of time and space. According to the Buddhist philosophy, this linear, substantial concept of cause and effect of tri-temporal existence resulting in transformation or change is an illusion. The enterprise of Nāgārjuna’s treatise ‘ The Philosophy of the Middle Way’ (Mūlamadhyamakakārikā,MMK) is orientated towards refuting such a view of tri-temporal substantial existence of a changing entity traversing the past time, the present time and the future time. Reification of objects or substantialism is an illusion in the ultimate analysis though it is apparent in the conventional reality. If and only if this illusion is not discerned, no Buddhist practitioner is able to gain self-awakening to discern and manifest the Buddha-mind. The manifestation of the Buddha-mind is generally spoken as the pure and infinite consciousness which liberates a sentient being. The pure and infinite consciousness is the fruit of the intuitive discernment of the absolute Truth of Unity which brings about human emancipation or salvation.
Nāgārjuna is highly celebrated and venerated by the Mahāyānists hitherto ̄a towering giant Mahāyāna philosopher just like Ibn ‘Arabī̄ is towering giant of Islamic Sufism. The former is an astute and highly proficient teacher of Emptiness (Śūnyatā). The latter is the master of expounding the Ocean of Unity (Waḥdat al-Wujud). Emptiness and Ocean of Unity are synonymous as both explicates the intimate relationship between phenomenal world and the Principle of Unity.
Nāgārjuna expounds the abstruse doctrinal points of Insubstantiality (Anātman) in terms of Dependent Co-arising (Pratītyasamutpāda) so that the profound message of the Buddha is made lucid or crystal clear to us. What is expounded in brief by Śākyamuni Buddha is expounded in detail by Nāgārjuna.
The Absolute Truth expounded by Śākyamuni Buddha is that tri-temporal existence traversing substantially from the past through the present time and moving into the future time does not exist. In relation to this illusive tri-temporal existence, the Exalted One also promulgates that time and space are also illusions. Tri-temporal existence is only valid and applicable to the movement of discrete entities. It is not valid and not applicable to all phenomena which do not actually exist in the forms of discrete entities. All phenomena are conglomerated into a universal Unity of the infinite cosmos without individual identities. Boundaries of the phenomenal world are falsely imagined and fabricated by the ordinary worldlings. Consequently, they erroneously, perceive signs, marks, characteristics or self-natures which do not exist in the first place.
Refutation Strategies
It is Dhamma-eye opening if one is able to comprehend the debating strategies of ratiocination and reductio ad absurdum brilliantly and skillfully adopted by Nāgārjuna to refute the wrong substantial views of his philosophical opponents in his MMK. MMK is a record of Nāgārjuna’s critique of the heretical views of the different early Hīnayāna Schools of Buddhist Thought which had sullied the authentic tenet of Śākyamuni Buddha. Nāgārjuna’s disputations against his opponents were not aimed to win philosophical debates but to apologize or defend the authentic Word of the Buddha.
Ratiocination is a methodical and logical argument using syllogism of the model of premise 1-premise 2-conclusion. Reduction ad absurdum is utilizing the point of argument of an opponent to defeat the opponent without advancing one’s own position. It is akin to taking the weapon of an opponent to kill the opponent. This is how Nāgārjuna convincingly outwitted his doctrinal opponents. His refutation technique is first to raise a logical praradox by capitalizing upon the intrinsic error contained in the key doctrinal point of the substantial opponents. Substantial ontology or ontological commitment is fundamentally erroneous. Nāgārjuna’s debating feat is enormously amazing and very convincing indeed as his arguments silenced or floored the opponents effectively. His critique of the Buddhist doctrine of Sarvāstivāda, one of the early Hīnayāna Schools of Buddhist Thought, is worth to be examined by any serious Buddhist scholar. Such examination of the heretical doctrines of the early Hīnayāna Schools of Buddhist Thought is very useful to comprehend the original Word of Śākyamuni Buddha.
Challenging the Sarvāstivāda
The Sarvāstivādins put forwards the Buddhist theory of Moments that a phenomenon or existent first arises and is followed by the moment of stasis that is change enduring before passing away. The stasis phase mirrors that a permanent substance exists. The Sarvāstivādins advocated that a permanent and immutable substance called Self-nature (Svabhāva) traverses tri-temporally undergoing changes its characteristics in the process. They exerted that only the attributes or characteristics change but the substance called Svabhāva (Self-nature) does not undergo change. Such exposition contradicts with the fundamental doctrine of Dependent Co-arising (Pratītyasamutpāda). Therefore, Nāgārjuna argued that “If there is a permanent and immutable self-nature, how could change or transformation process occurs?”. The logical paradox, raised by Nāgārjuna, instantaneously silenced or floored his substantialist opponents. It is worth to examine Nāgārjuna’s argument against the heretical view of Sarvāstivāda as ordinary worldlings are primarily substantialists deluded by the multiplicity of the empirical world.
Challenging Sautrā̄ntikas
The Sautrāntika expounded that a phenomenon arises and ceases immediately without going through the phase of stasis without any gap between the arising and ceasing. Sautrāntikas rejected concept of Stasis because stasis connotes substantial existent. They upheld faithfully the Buddhist doctrine of Insubstantiality. In other words, their theory implies that the cessation of a phenomenon can be internally caused or externally caused. Śākyamuni Buddha rejects both internal and external causations ( See MMK1.1). The Sautrāntikas provided their own view to defend their non-substantialist view of causality utilizing the analogy of light and darkness. They defended that when light appears, the darkness instantaneously disappears. Nāgārjuna dialectically opposed the Sautrāntikas thus:
The use of the analogy of illumination of light and darkness is not appropriate to defend non-substantiality. Illumination of light does not ensure the total elimination of darkness. What happens to the dark corner which is not reached by the light? If darkness can be destroyed without light reaching it, a spark of light here will destroy all the darkness of the world. Can the presence of a spark of light in this world destroy all the darkness in the universe ?
The opponents were immediately silenced or floored by Nāgārjuna’s refuting skill of reduction ad absurdum. The analogy of the light and darkness is not convincing enough to defend the theory of momentariness of the Sautrāntikas known as the Theory of Seed (Bijavāda).
Conclusion
The Buddhist Concept of conditionality or Dependent Co-arising is not applicable to independent self-contained entities which are substantial. In fact,if they are independent self-contained entities, they can not be conditioned by other external or internal conditions. ‘Independence’ connotes that no influence can alter it as it does not depend on others. To be discrete entities connotes that they are separate and independent. In Buddhist world-view, conditional relations are established to form an infinite Unity in which all phenomena embraced in it are supporting and are being supported. This mutualism constitutes an infinite network of interdependent phenomena constituting the Unity of the infinite cosmos- the Dharma Realm of Unity. It is the Truth of ‘One in Many and Many in One’ popularly described by the religious delivered poets in terms of the metaphor of Ocean and the Waves. The phenomena are waves and the Principle or Truth is the ocean. The Waves and Ocean are never separate. Likewise, the Unity and Multiplicity are also inseparable and interpenetrate.
Frankly speaking, if one can truly comprehend MMK, one also can apprehend Tao Te Ching of Lao Tze, Upaniṣads, Heart Sūtra, Bible or Koran.
If these world’s Classics or Scriptures can be intuively comprehended, there is no problem whatsoever to understand the relationship between creations (multiplicity) and the Creator God (Truth of Unity) of monotheism or between the phenomena and principle of Hua Yen Buddhism. Whatever is taken refuge in or worshipped for, it does not matter whether it is designated as Brahman, Tao, Buddha, God or Allah.These dissimilar designations refer to a common ineffable Truth. It is the highest Truth which is above and beyond all religions. All dualism or discrimination vanishes as the highest Absolute Truth of Unity or Oneness of the world or cosmos is discerned intuitively. The metaphor of the Ocean of Unity in which the undisturbed waves would eventually merge with the Ocean into Oneness is utilized by the Sufi saints to describe cosmic Unity. A towering Sufi giant, Ibn ‘Arabī, describes the relationship between the Phenomena and Principle or between creations and Creator using the concept of Ocean of Unity (Waḥdat al-wujūd). The disturbance of supreme spirituality is the superimposition of the illusive Self or Ego which makes human beings sinful. All sentient beings are originally or innately pure and supremely virtuous.
|
