Part 10

The Mahāyāna - Prajñāpāramitā Sūtras and Mādhyamaka

By Quyen Ngo

(ii) Analysis of concepts and the transcending of views

The Prajñāpāramitā saw the Abhidharma’s contrast of the conditioned dharmas with Nirvāṇa as the basis for spiritual grasping, such as wanting to attain Nirvāṇa. Hence it re-emphasizes the total ‘letting go’ of all theories.[1]

Analysis of concepts shows that concepts are relative, conceptually dependent, and empty of inherent existence. For example, take the concept of short and long, one can only say something is short or long relative to something else (Santina, 1997: 162). The same is for existence and non-existence, neither has any meaning without the other; without the idea of existence, non-existence has no meaning. Again, it is the same for time: past, present and future are relative concepts. One speaks about the past depending on the present and future (Ibid). Thus all concepts are relative, interdependent, and empty of inherent existence. Therefore, in emptiness, all opposites, all alternatives, all extremes do not exist because they have no meaning (Santina, 1997: 147). Similarly, the investigation of knowledge reveals that the subject and the object are mutually interdependent, and are empty of inherent existence (Santina, 1997: 163).

If all concepts and knowledge are empty of inherent existence, to hold any view at all is to err. Also, one can become attached to views and is in danger of falling into the extremes of eternalism and nihilism, both of which come from not understanding Dependent Arising. Eternalism leads to grasping and craving, nihilism leads to failing to take life and morality seriously, both of which lead to suffering. To follow the middle way is to avoid both assertions (Garfield, 1995: 223). Thus, talk of emptiness is designed to help transcending all views, even the view of emptiness (Harvey, 1990: 102). But ignorant people, through discriminative thought produce craving and becoming, and thus suffer as a consequence. It is as if a painter, having painted a fearful picture of a demon, is then terrified by it (Santina, 1997: 164). Just as dreams cease upon waking, when the mind stops generating delusion and imagination. Even so, the mind that sees emptiness is free of conceptual construction, it sees things the way they really are (Gethin, 1998: 241).

(iii) Non-difference of saṃsāra and Nirvāṇa

Since saṃsāra is produced by discriminative thought, such as cause and effect, existence and non-existence, and these are actually relative and empty, then saṃsāra and Nirvāṇa can be said to be indifferent (Santina, 1997: 164). In other words, the difference between saṃsāra and Nirvāṇa is a subjective difference, not an objective difference. This brings out the notion of non-duality of Mahāyāna, and the non-differentiation of saṃsāra and Nirvāṇa (Santina, 1997: 145). From an ignorance point of view, which involves discriminative thought, reality appears as saṃsāra; but from the point of view of an understanding of Dependent Arising and emptiness, reality appears as Nirvāṇa (Ibid). Dependent Arising or emptiness is the bridge between the conventional and the ultimate level of truth.

(To be continued)