What Is The Paradoxs Of Nākārjuna?

1344 Words6 Pages
Sūnyatā and Paradoxes Introduction In his best known argumentative work, the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā (MMK), Nāgārjuna develops the “middle way” approach to metaphysics. He steers clear of both substantialism and nominalism, finding a path between the two. Crucial to his method is the Buddha 's theory of pratītyasamutpāda, or dependent arising. From this foundation, Nāgārjuna argues against svabhāva (essence) and for the notion of sūnyatā (emptiness). He contends that things do not exist in and of themselves, independently; rather, everything is “empty” of essence. In developing this concept, Nāgārjuna probes the limits of expressibility and thought. He argues that the nature of reality is ultimately inexpressible – that arguments about reality cannot be made. This claim engenders some interesting contradictions that prove to be quite significant. Thesis: In his argument for sūnyatā, Nāgārjuna explores these contradictions that appear at the limits, revealing paradoxes of both expressibility and ontology. Conventional and ultimate truth Nāgārjuna 's philosophy rests on his distinction between the two levels of reality and their respective truths. These are conventional reality and ultimate reality (and correspondingly, conventional truth and ultimate truth). Conventional truth encompasses common sense, truth by consensus, and truth by virtue of linguistic convention [2]. Ultimate truth, on the other hand, is the true nature of reality. Svabhāva For Nāgārjuna, the ultimate
Open Document