In this blog, we embark on a profound exploration of Buddhist philosophy through the lens of śūnyatā—emptiness or voidness. Far from being nihilistic, this journey reveals a rich spectrum of insights into the nature of self and reality as seen through the evolving perspectives of five major Buddhist schools.
Part of our broader series on the intersections between Eastern philosophy and modern science, this discussion highlights how ancient ideas resonate with contemporary debates in physics, consciousness studies, and epistemology. Let’s delve into the wisdom of śūnyatā!
Image Credit: Buddho
Theravāda (Śrāvaka Perspective)
The Theravāda tradition emphasizes the doctrine of anattā (no-self), rejecting the notion of a permanent, unchanging essence or svabhāva. This foundational view dismantles the concept of a personal or intrinsic self, urging practitioners to meditate on the impermanent and interdependent nature of phenomena, which is understood through the five aggregates (pañca skandhas):
Rūpa (Form): The physical body or material existence.
Vedanā (Feelings): Sensations categorized as pleasant, unpleasant, or neutral.
Saṅkhāra (Mental Formations): Impressions, volition, and personality traits.
Saṃjñā (Perception): Sensory and mental recognition.
Vijñāna (Consciousness): Awareness of experiences.
Each of these is impermanent and interdependent, collectively giving rise to the mistaken notion of a continuous "I."
Dream Analogy
In a dream, you perceive yourself as a person having experiences—a dream self. Upon waking, you realize that the dream person, body, and experiences were all imagined and lacked any inherent reality. Similarly, the aggregates create an illusion of selfhood, but no essence or "true self" exists within them. This is compared to the alātacakra (firebrand circle), where a spinning light creates the illusion of a circle, though no circle exists.
Meditative Practice
Preparation: Sit quietly, take refuge, and cultivate a compassionate mind (bodhicitta).
Contemplation: Reflect on the transient nature of the aggregates. Like the dream self, the "I" is an appearance without essence.
Realization: Perceive the emptiness (śūnyatā) of the self. This insight dissolves the attachment to ego, reducing desires, fears, and selfish tendencies.
Benefits
By realizing the emptiness of the self:
Suffering diminishes as attachment to "I" fades.
Dualistic distinctions between self and others dissolve, fostering universal compassion.
Emotional burdens such as anger, guilt, and resentment lose their grip, leading to liberation.
Image Credit: Shambala
Mahāyāna's Chittamātra (Mind-Only) School
Moving deeper, the Chittamātra (Mind-Only) school introduces the idea that all phenomena are manifestations of consciousness. According to this view, external reality lacks independent existence, and understanding emptiness involves recognizing the mind’s central role in shaping experience.
The Chittamatra (Mind-Only) school asserts that true realization requires understanding the emptiness not only of the self but also of the external world. Both subject (the perceiver) and object (the perceived) are empty, appearing only as projections within consciousness.
The Three Levels of Reality in the Mind-Only School
According to the Chittamatra (Mind-Only) school, reality is understood through three levels:
Parikalpita (Imaginary): This is the conventional world of duality—subject and object, self and others. It is likened to a dream, existing only in the mind, and lacks inherent reality.
Paratantra (Dependent): The dependent level arises due to causes and conditions, often described through the principle of pratitya samutpada (dependent origination). Experiences emerge and dissolve based on prior impressions.
Parinishpanna (Ultimate): The ultimate truth is pure cognition—momentary flashes of awareness (shanika vijnana). These flashes are the nature of "mind-only," devoid of self or other, free from clinging.
Dream Analogy in the Chittamatra (Mind-Only) School
The Mind-Only school makes a crucial extension of the dream analogy: "As in the dream, so in the waking." Just as in a dream, both the dreaming subject (you) and the objects (like a flower) are mere appearances in the dreaming mind, in waking life, the body, mind, and external world are also appearances—this time within consciousness. .
Erasing the Distinction Between Waking and Dreaming
The school addresses the natural tendency to separate waking and dreaming. Through rigorous philosophical debate and analysis, it argues that, phenomenologically, there is no essential difference. Both waking and dreaming are modes of subjective experience.
When challenged, the school counters objections about waking's perceived solidity and coherence by demonstrating that our sense of reality in dreams feels just as vivid until we wake up. Both states arise and dissolve within the mind, showcasing the illusory nature of what we consider "real."
The Unified Reality of Perceiver and Perceived: Insights from Chittamatra Philosophy
The Chittamatra (Mind-Only) school makes a profound assertion: "Blue and the perception of blue are non-different" (Neelo tad dheeyo abhedah). This means the object (blue) and its perception arise as a single, inseparable experience in the mind. Despite the illusion of an external reality and an internal perceiver, careful examination reveals no boundary; all appearances arise in the mind.
Dreams and Waking Unified: Just as dreams are mental projections devoid of independent existence, the waking world, too, is a projection of the mind. There is no philosophical basis for an external reality separate from one's experience.
Empty Subject and Object: Both the perceiver (subject) and the perceived (object) are empty of independent existence. They arise and dissolve within the same continuum—the mind.
Compassion and Wisdom: Meditating on this emptiness fosters the realization of non-duality, dissolving distinctions between self and others. Compassion (karuna) emerges naturally, coupled with the wisdom (prajna) of emptiness. Together, they lead to the bodhicitta—an enlightened mind dedicated to liberating all beings from suffering.
This perspective helps transcend fear and desire, as both the "outside" world and the "self" are understood to lack substance. Meditation on these insights liberates one from attachment and duality, revealing the emptiness of both self and phenomena.
Image Credit: ananda
Madhyamaka: The Middle Way
The Madhyamaka school, founded by Nāgārjuna, refines the concept of emptiness further. It argues that all phenomena are devoid of intrinsic nature, existing only in dependence on other factors.
Nagarjuna's seminal work, the Mūla-Madhyamaka-Kārikā, systematically demonstrates the emptiness (śūnyatā) of all phenomena.
Critique of Chittamatra: While agreeing that the self and objects are empty, Madhyamaka argues that even the mind lacks inherent reality.
Radical Emptiness: Every concept—mind, Atman, Brahman, Buddha, Nirvana—is shown to be empty of inherent essence. Logic serves as the primary tool for deconstruction.
Self-Reflexive Philosophy: Nagarjuna acknowledges that even the Madhyamaka view is empty, emphasizing the absence of fixed perspectives. This non-assertion avoids dogmatic stances, aiming for ultimate freedom.
Ancient Indian Debates: Vada, Jalpa, and Vithanda
In ancient India, debates were categorized into three types: Vada, Jalpa, and Vithanda.
Vada: This type of debate focuses on genuine inquiry into truth. It involves a respectful exchange of ideas between a teacher and student or two sincere seekers of knowledge. The primary goal is to understand and explore different perspectives.
Jalpa: This type of debate is more adversarial, focusing on defeating the opponent's view and establishing one's own. It's akin to a legal argument, where the goal is to win, not to arrive at truth.
Vithanda: This is a more sophisticated form of debate, where the aim is not to establish any particular truth, but to dismantle all opposing viewpoints. The Madhyamaka school of Buddhism, founded by Nagarjuna, embraced this approach. They believed that all philosophical systems, with their inherent limitations, are ultimately inadequate in grasping the true nature of reality.
Sri Ramakrishna, a 19th-century saint, famously used the analogy of watches to illustrate this point. He said, "Everybody thinks as his own watch is running right." Just as someone wearing two watches can never be sure of the correct time, different philosophical systems offer conflicting perspectives on reality, leading to confusion.
The Need to Sweep Aside Concepts
Nagarjuna argued that the true nature of reality cannot be grasped through conceptual frameworks. He believed that "conceptual proliferation" (prapancha) obscures the truth. By engaging in Vithanda, he aimed to "sweep aside" these conceptual clutter and point towards the ultimate reality that lies beyond the grasp of human reason.
This framework of debate, developed centuries ago, continues to have relevance today, reminding us of the importance of critical thinking, respectful dialogue, and the limitations of human reason in understanding the true nature of reality.
The Paradox of Walking: Nagarjuna's Critique
In One of the early chapters in his Mula Madhyamaka Karika (Fundamental Verses on the Middle Way), is on walking. Forget Nirvana, enlightenment, self, not-self, God, Brahman, Atman, forget all that. Something as simple as walking, taking a step. He said that's also empty, you can't make sense of it. Why?
So in walking there is the walker, there is the act of walking and the space which is being traversed, the ground which is being walked upon, right? That's very common sense. And then the Nyaya school, which is a realist school, they would say if you are a walker, if you are walking, you're the one who is walking, the action of walking is in you. You are the doer, you are the agent of that action, and the action is, where is this action? This action is in you, you are walking, common sense, sort of.
Nagarjuna says who is walking? There are only two possibilities, the walker is walking or the non-walker is walking. The non-walker obviously is not walking by definition so we will say of course the walker is walking but the walker is the one who has already got by definition the action of walking in him so if he is walking dvir gamanam syat then he is walking twice?
Nagarjuna, through this seemingly simple thought experiment, aims to demonstrate the absurdity of inherent existence (svabhava). He argues that if a "walker" possesses an inherent nature of "walking," it leads to a logical contradiction.
The Argument
Who is Walking?
Nagarjuna poses the question: Who is the one performing the act of walking?
He eliminates the "non-walker" as a possibility, as a non-walker, by definition, cannot walk.
Therefore, the "walker" must be the one performing the act of walking.
The Problem of Inherent Action:
If the "walker" inherently possesses the action of "walking," it implies that the act of walking is already present within the walker.
This leads to the absurdity of "double walking": the walker (who already possesses the action of walking) then proceeds to perform the act of walking again.
Demonstrating Absurdity:
This logical contradiction demonstrates the absurdity of attributing an inherent nature (like "walking") to any entity.
If entities possessed inherent qualities, it would lead to logical inconsistencies and paradoxes.
Nagarjuna's Point
This argument highlights the interconnectedness of all phenomena.
The act of "walking" is not an inherent property of the "walker." It arises from a complex interplay of factors: the walker's intention, the physical and mental capacities of the walker, the environment, etc.
The "walker" and the "act of walking" are interdependent, arising together within a dynamic process.
Nagarjuna uses this seemingly simple example to demonstrate the limitations of language and logic when applied to the nature of reality. By highlighting the inherent contradictions in attributing fixed, inherent qualities to entities, he aims to show the emptiness of all phenomena, their lack of inherent existence.
Two Truths: Samvriti Satya and Paramārtha Satya
Nagarjuna introduced the concept of two truths: samvriti satya (conventional truth) and paramārtha satya (ultimate truth).
Conventional Truth: This is the level of everyday reality where things appear to exist as separate entities.
Ultimate Truth: This is the level of emptiness, where all phenomena are seen as interconnected and devoid of inherent existence.
Nagarjuna emphasized the importance of both truths. While ultimate truth is the goal, it cannot be grasped without acknowledging the validity of conventional truth.
Image Credit: Apramada
Swatantrika vs. Prasangika
Two major schools of Madhyamaka thought emerged:
Swatantrika: This school emphasizes independent arguments to establish emptiness.
Prasangika: This school, favored by the Dalai Lama, argues that attempting to independently establish emptiness through arguments is itself a form of conceptual proliferation. They emphasize the importance of "reductio ad absurdum" – demonstrating the absurdity of all other philosophical positions to reveal the emptiness of all concepts.
Ultimately, Nagarjuna's message is that true liberation comes not from grasping at concepts like "emptiness," but from recognizing the emptiness of all concepts and resting in the direct experience of reality.
The Ultimate Truth and Emptiness in Madhyamaka
The Madhyamakas use the dream analogy to critique the mind-only school's assertion that the mind is real. They ask whether the mind—conceptualized as flashes of cognition—is inherently existent.
To illustrate this, consider the analogy of a fist. A fist appears as a singular entity, but upon analysis, it resolves into parts—fingers, tissues, and cells. Continuing deeper, even the smallest components, such as atoms or subatomic particles, face the question: are they single or composed of parts? If partless, they cannot interact or form structures. If they have parts, further division is inevitable.
Nagarjuna and the Madhyamakas extend their deconstruction of reality by examining the concept of the tiniest particle and its implications for the mind-only school's view of instantaneous cognition (shanika vignana).
If the tiniest particle is truly indivisible, it cannot have dimensions—no top, bottom, or sides—rendering it unable to form connections or build the material universe. Conversely, if it has dimensions, it is divisible into smaller parts, and the cycle of analysis continues indefinitely.
Applying the same logic to cognition, they ask whether an instantaneous flash of awareness is single or composite. If single and without duration, it cannot function as an experience, which inherently involves a beginning, middle, and end. However, if it has duration, it consists of parts and is no longer a single flash.
By dismantling the foundation of the mind-only school's claims, the Madhyamakas reveal that the very idea of a self-existent mind generating reality is also empty. This aligns with their central teaching: all phenomena, including the mind, are devoid of inherent existence (śūnyatā).
Madhyamaka and the Dream
Madhyamaka defines the ultimate truth as escaping all conceptual alternatives (chatushkoti): existence, non-existence, both, or neither. This emptiness (śūnyatā) applies universally—to the self, mind, Brahman, and even the world.
Using the dream analogy, the Madhyamakas emphasize that not only are the dream characters and objects empty, but the dreaming mind itself is also empty. There is no experience of the dreaming mind separate from the dream. Similarly, in waking or deep sleep, the mind cannot be experienced independent of its corresponding state.
Madhyamaka Critique of Vedanta and Samkhya
The Madhyamakas challenge the Vedantic and Samkhyan assertion of an independent consciousness that experiences the world. They argue that consciousness (subject) and the experienced world (object) are interdependent, like two bales of hay leaning against each other—remove one, and the other collapses. Neither has an independent existence; both are empty.
This critique highlights the Madhyamaka principle that ultimate reality is beyond all dualities. The analysis of this perspective in the context of Vedanta can form an engaging exploration for another discussion.
The Danger of Misunderstanding Emptiness
Nagarjuna warned against grasping emptiness as a definitive philosophy or ultimate truth. He stated, "Shunyata (emptiness) is the antidote to all the poisons of samsara. But if someone clings to shunyata itself, there is no saving them."
He likened this mistake to catching a snake by the wrong end, which only causes harm. Emptiness serves to liberate one from samsara and lead to nirvana. However, clinging to it transforms it into yet another conceptual trap, undermining its liberating potential.
Meditation on Emptiness in Madhyamaka
Meditation in the Madhyamaka tradition involves contemplating the vast emptiness of all phenomena. In this state of emptiness, the dissolution of problems naturally occurs.
For an unenlightened being, samsara arises within this emptiness, appearing with its fundamentally empty nature. For an enlightened being, nirvana arises within the same emptiness, revealing everything—including the world and oneself—as peaceful and imbued with Buddha nature.
Both samsara and nirvana are empty, and even emptiness itself must not be grasped as a final truth, as doing so would perpetuate delusion.
Image Credit: thecontempativelife
The Shentong School: The Luminous Emptiness
The Shentong school, also called Maha Madhyamaka or Yogachara Madhyamaka, presents a synthesis of Madhyamaka and Yogachara philosophies. While classical Madhyamaka emphasizes the emptiness (shunyata) of all phenomena, including the mind, the Shentong school introduces the notion of "luminous emptiness." It asserts that the void is not a barren nothingness but is inherently luminous, a clear light of awareness that underlies all appearances.
This clear light is described as irreducible and beyond conceptual grasp, differentiating it from Yogachara's dualistic concept of mind. The Shentongpas argue that the Madhyamaka's relentless dismantling of concepts leads to this luminosity, an ultimate reality that cannot be negated. This "clear light of the void" aligns closely with Advaita Vedanta's idea of nondual consciousness, although Tibetan Buddhists often distance themselves from such comparisons.
Despite criticisms from classical Madhyamakas, the Shentong school holds that recognizing this luminous emptiness explains why samsara and nirvana arise from the void, transcending mere conceptual denial. It emphasizes that even the Madhyamaka's tool of conceptual negation is ultimately a subtle concept that dissolves into the irreducible awareness upon realization.
The Five Reasons for Teaching the Nature of Clear Light
The Shentong school justifies teaching the concept of Buddha nature and luminous emptiness despite its ineffable nature by giving five reasons:
Encouragement for the Hesitant: Many feel unworthy of the ultimate truth. The teaching assures them they already possess the Buddha nature.
Humbling Spiritual Pride: It dispels arrogance by emphasizing that this nature is universal, not exclusive.
Correcting Misinterpretations: To prevent Madhyamakas from negating the ultimate reality itself.
Inspiration for All: It uplifts those burdened by feelings of sin or limitation, reminding them of their inherent purity.
Promoting Compassion: Recognizing the shared nature of all beings fosters immediate compassion and service.
The Clear Light of the Void: Shentong's Unique Contribution
The Shentong interpretation emphasizes the luminous awareness underlying all experience, termed the "clear light of the void." Historically, the Shentong tradition faced suppression, but its teachings remain integrated into Tibetan Buddhist meditation, especially in tantric practices.
Shentong's key example is the dream analogy. Both good dreams and nightmares arise from the same mind, which is real, even as the dreams themselves are empty. Similarly, samsara and nirvana arise from the same luminous awareness.
Meditation involves sitting quietly and observing the manifestations of this clear light, dissolving them into their underlying luminous reality. This practice parallels the Upanishadic insight, Pratibodha viditam matam amritattvam hi vindate—realizing consciousness in every experience leads to immortality.
Summing Up the Five Stages of Shunyata
Each school builds upon earlier insights, progressively revealing deeper dimensions of emptiness. Tibetan Buddhism integrates these perspectives, encouraging practitioners to see Śūnyatā not as nihilistic but as a liberating realization of interdependence and potentiality.
School | Key Teaching | View on Śūnyatā (Emptiness) | Meditation Focus | Main Proponent/Inspiration | Unique Contribution |
Shravaka (Theravada) | No-self (Anatta); focus on individual liberation | Emptiness of self; no essence in the five skandhas | Analyze and realize the absence of self in five skandhas | Teachings of the historical Buddha (Siddhartha Gautama) | Foundation of Buddhist philosophy; emphasis on personal liberation (Arhatship). |
Mind-Only (Chitta Matra) | Reality as mental projections; mind as the ultimate truth | Emptiness of both subject (self) and object (world) | Meditate on the emptiness of subject-object distinctions | Asanga and Vasubandhu | Introduced Parikalpita, Paratantra, and Parinispanna (three levels of reality). |
Madhyamaka - Swatantrika | All concepts, including mind, are empty | Emptiness of self, objects, and mind | Logical analysis to realize emptiness of all constructs | Bhaviveka | Independent reasoning to deconstruct views; paved way for Prasangika Madhyamaka. |
Madhyamaka - Prasangika | Radical emptiness of all phenomena; ultimate non-conceptual truth | Emptiness of self, objects, mind, and conceptual frameworks | Meditate on the emptiness of all concepts, including emptiness itself | Nagarjuna and Chandrakirti | Rejection of all philosophical positions; logical refutation (reductio ad absurdum). |
Shentong | Emptiness is luminous; clear light of the void (pure awareness) | Emptiness as the luminous essence of all experiences | Contemplation of awareness as the basis of samsara/nirvana | Dolpopa Sherab Gyaltsen | Combines Madhyamaka and Mind-Only; echoes Advaita Vedanta's view of pure consciousness (Chit). |
This journey into Buddhist thought illuminates how differing interpretations of emptiness shape our understanding of reality and the path to liberation. Inspired by Swami Sarvapriyananda’s discourse, it reflects the richness of Buddhist philosophy in its quest for truth.
Shunyata, far from nothingness, hints at fullness (Purnam)—to be explored further.
Comments