Misplaced Pages

Nagarjuna: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 18:49, 3 May 2015 editWpaul1972 (talk | contribs)148 edits Other works← Previous edit Latest revision as of 17:53, 20 December 2024 edit undoMartinevans123 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers234,251 edits seems to be unsourcedTag: Undo 
(485 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Short description|3rd-century Indian Buddhist philosopher}}
{{Other uses}} {{Other uses}}
{{EngvarB|date=September 2014}} {{EngvarB|date=January 2024}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=September 2014}} {{Use dmy dates|date=January 2024}}
{{Infobox person {{Infobox philosopher
| name = Nāgārjuna | name = Nāgārjuna
| native_name = नागार्जुन
| image = Nagarjuna at Samye Ling Monastery.JPG
| image = Nagarjuna with 84 mahasiddha cropped.jpg
| birth_date = c. 150 CE
| image_size = 200px | image_size = 200px
| caption = Painting of Nāgārjuna
| caption = Golden statue of Nāgārjuna at ], ].
| birth_date = c. 150 CE
| birth_place = ]<ref name="kalupahana">Kalupahana, David. ''A History of Buddhist Philosophy.'' 1992. p. 160</ref>
| birth_place = ]{{sfn|Kalupahana|1994|p=160}}
| death_date = c. 250 CE
| death_date = c. 250 CE
| death_place = India
| religion = ] | death_place = India
| known = Credited with founding the ] school of ] ] | occupation = ] teacher, ] and philosopher
| notable_works = '']''
| occupation = ] teacher and philosopher
| spouse = | notable_ideas = {{plainlist|
* ]
| parents =
* ]
| children =
* ]}}
|}}
| influences = {{flatlist|
'''Nāgārjuna''' ({{lang-sa|नागार्जुन}}, {{lang-te|నాగార్జునుడు}}, {{bo|t=ཀླུ་སྒྲུབ་|w=klu sgrub}} {{zh|t=龍樹|p=Lóngshù}}, {{nihongo|龍樹|''Ryūju''}}, {{lang-si|නාගර්ජුන}}, c. 150 – c. 250 CE) is widely considered one of the most important Buddhist philosophers after ].<ref>Garfield, Jay L. (1995), The Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way, Oxford: Oxford University Press</ref> Along with his disciple ], he is considered to be the founder of the ] school of ]. Nāgārjuna is also credited with developing the philosophy of the ] sūtras and, in some sources, with having revealed these scriptures in the world, having recovered them from the ]s (snake-people). Furthermore, he is traditionally supposed to have written several treatises on ] as well as serving a term as the head of ].<ref>Hsing Yun, Xingyun, Tom Manzo, Shujan Cheng Infinite Compassion, Endless Wisdom: The Practice of the Bodhisattva Path Buddha's Light Publishing Hacienda Heights California</ref>
* ]
* ]}}
| school_tradition = {{plainlist|
* ] ]
* ]
* ]}}
|region=]
* ]
| era=]
}}
'''Nāgārjuna''' (]: नागार्जुन, ''Nāgārjuna''; {{Circa|150|250 CE}}) was an Indian monk and ] ] of the ] (Centrism, Middle Way) school.<ref>Walser (2005) p. 1-3.</ref> He is widely considered one of the most important Buddhist philosophers.<ref name=Garfield>Garfield, Jay L. (1995), ''The Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way'', Oxford: Oxford University Press.</ref>


Nāgārjuna is widely considered to be the founder of the Madhyamaka school of ] and a defender of the ] movement.<ref name="Garfield" /><ref>Walser (2005) p. 3.</ref> His '']'' (''Root Verses on Madhyamaka'', MMK) is the most important text on the Madhyamaka philosophy of ]. The MMK inspired a large number of commentaries in Sanskrit, Chinese, Tibetan, Korean and Japanese and continues to be studied today.<ref>Garfield (1995), p. 87.</ref>
==History==
{{MahayanaBuddhism}}
Very little is reliably known of the life of Nāgārjuna, since the surviving accounts were written in Chinese<ref>Rongxi, Li; Dalia, Albert A. (2002). , Berkeley CA: Numata Center for Translation and Research, pp. 21–30</ref> and Tibetan centuries after his death. According to some accounts, Nāgārjuna was originally from South India.<ref name="kalupahana"/><ref>Buddhist Art & Antiquities of Himachal Pradesh By Omacanda Hāṇḍā (Page 97)</ref> Some scholars believe that Nāgārjuna was an advisor to a king of the ].<ref name="kalupahana"/> Archaeological evidence at Amarāvatī indicates that if this is true, the king may have been ], who ruled between 167 and 196 CE. On the basis of this association, Nāgārjuna is conventionally placed at around 150–250 CE.<ref name="kalupahana"/>


== History ==
According to a 4th/5th-century biography translated by ], Nāgārjuna was born into a ] family<ref>Notes on the Nagarjunikonda Inscriptions, Dutt, Nalinaksha. The Indian Historical Quarterly 7:3 1931.09 pp.633–653 "..Tibetan tradition which says that Nagarjuna was born of a brahmin family of Vidarbha."</ref> in ]<ref>Geri Hockfield Malandra, ''Unfolding A Mandala: The Buddhist Cave Temples at Ellora'', SUNY Press, 1993, p. 17</ref><ref>Shōhei Ichimura, ''Buddhist Critical Spirituality: Prajñā and Śūnyatā'', Motilal Banarsidass Publishers (2001), p. 67</ref><ref>Bkra-śis-rnam-rgyal (Dwags-po Paṇ-chen), Takpo Tashi Namgyal, ''Mahamudra: The Quintessence of Mind and Meditation'', Motilal Banarsidass Publishers (1993), p. 443</ref> (a region of ]) and later became a Buddhist.
] (where Nāgārjuna may have lived and worked according to Walser) and ] (the birthplace of Nāgārjuna according to Kumārajīva)]]


=== Background ===
Some sources claim that in his later years, Nāgārjuna lived on the mountain of ] near the city that would later be called ] ("Hill of Nāgārjuna").<ref name="hirakawa">Hirakawa, Akira. Groner, Paul. ''A History of Indian Buddhism: From Śākyamuni to Early Mahāyāna.'' 2007. p. 242</ref> The ruins of Nāgārjunakoṇḍa are located in ], ]. The ] and ] nikāyas are known to have had ] in Nāgārjunakoṇḍa.<ref name="hirakawa"/>
India in the first and second centuries CE was politically divided into various states, including the ] and the ]. At this point in ], the Buddhist community was already divided into various ] and had spread throughout India.


At this time, there was already a small and nascent Mahāyāna movement. Mahāyāna ideas were held by a minority of Buddhists in India at the time. As Joseph Walser writes, "Mahāyāna before the fifth century was largely invisible and probably existed only as a minority and largely unrecognized movement within the fold of nikāya Buddhism."<ref>Walser (2005), p. 43.</ref> By the second century, early ] such as the '']'' were already circulating among certain Mahāyāna circles.<ref>Mäll, Linnart. ''Studies in the Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā and other essays.'' 2005. p. 96</ref>
==Writings==
There exist a number of influential texts attributed to Nāgārjuna though, as there are many ] attributed to him, lively controversy exists over which are his authentic works. The only work that all scholars agree is Nagarjuna's is the '']'' (Fundamental Verses on the Middle Way), which contains the essentials of his thought in twenty-seven chapters.


=== Life ===
According to one view, that of Christian Lindtner,<ref>Lindtner, C. (1982). Nagarjuniana: studies in the writings and philosophy of Nāgārjuna, Copenhagen: Akademisk forlag, page 11</ref> the works definitely written by Nagarjuna are:
Very little is reliably known of the life of Nāgārjuna and modern historians do not agree on a specific date (1st to 3rd century CE) or place (multiple places in India suggested) for him.<ref name=":0">Walser (2005), p. 60.</ref> The earliest surviving accounts were written in Chinese and Tibetan centuries after his death and are mostly ] accounts that are historically unverifiable.<ref name=":0" />
* ''Mūlamadhyamaka-kārikā'' (Fundamental Verses of the Middle Way)
* ''Śūnyatāsaptati'' (Seventy Verses on Emptiness)
* ''Vigrahavyāvartanī'' (The End of Disputes)
* {{IAST|''Vaidalyaprakaraṇa''}} (Pulverizing the Categories)
* ''Vyavahārasiddhi'' (Proof of Convention)
* {{IAST|''Yuktiṣāṣṭika''}} (Sixty Verses on Reasoning)
* {{IAST|''Catuḥstava''}} (Hymn to the Absolute Reality)
* ''Ratnāvalī'' (Precious Garland)
* {{IAST|''Pratītyasamutpādahṝdayakārika''}} (Constituents of Dependent Arising)
* ''Sūtrasamuccaya''
* {{IAST|''Bodhicittavivaraṇa''}} (Exposition of the Enlightened Mind)
* {{IAST|''Suhṛllekha''}} (Letter to a Good Friend)
* {{IAST|''Bodhisaṃbhāra''}} (Requisites of Enlightenment)


Some scholars such as Joseph Walser argue that Nāgārjuna was an advisor to a king of the ] dynasty which ruled the ] in the second century.<ref name=":1">Walser (2005), p. 61.</ref>{{sfn|Kalupahana|1994|p=160}} This is supported by most of the traditional hagiographical sources as well.<ref name=":3"/> Archaeological evidence at ] indicates that if this is true, the king may have been ] (c. second half of the 2nd century). On the basis of this association, Nāgārjuna is conventionally placed at around 150–250 CE.<ref name=":1" />{{sfn|Kalupahana|1994|p=160}}
In addition to works mentioned above, several others are attributed to
]]]
Nāgārjuna. There is an ongoing, lively controversy over which of those
Walser thinks that it is most likely that when Nāgārjuna wrote the ''Ratnavali'', he lived in a mixed monastery (with Mahāyānists and non-Mahāyānists) in which Mahāyānists were the minority. The most likely sectarian affiliation of the monastery according to Walser was Purvasailya, Aparasailya, or ] (which were ] sub-schools).<ref>Walser (2005), p. 87.</ref>
works are authentic. Contemporary research suggest that these works belong
to a significantly later period, either to late 8th or early 9th century CE,
and hence can not be authentic works of Nāgārjuna.


He also argues that "it is plausible that he wrote the ''Ratnavali'' within a thirty-year period at the end of the second century in the ] region around Dhanyakataka (modern-day ])."<ref name=":1" />
However, several works considered important in esoteric Buddhism are
attributed to Nāgārjuna and his disciples by traditional historians
like Tāranātha from 17th century Tibet. These historians try to account
for chronological difficulties with various theories. For example a
propagation of later writings via mystical revelation. For a useful
summary of this tradition, see Wedemeyer 2007.


=== Traditional hagiography ===
Lindtner considers that the ''Māhaprajñāparamitopadeśa'' "]" is not a genuine work of Nāgārjuna. This work is only attested in a Chinese translation by ].There is much discussion as to whether this is a work of Nāgārjuna, or someone else. ], who translated one third of the work into French, felt that it was the work of a North Indian ] of the ] school who later became a convert to the ]. The Chinese scholar-monk ] felt that it was the work of a South Indian and that Nāgārjuna was quite possibly the author. These two views are not necessarily in opposition and a South Indian Nāgārjuna could well have studied the northern Sarvāstivāda. Neither of the two felt that it was composed by Kumārajīva, which others have suggested.
According to Walser, "the earliest extant legends about Nāgārjuna are compiled into ]’s biography of Nāgārjuna, which he translated into Chinese in about 405 CE."<ref name=":3">Walser (2005), p. 66.</ref> According to this biography, Nāgārjuna was born into a ] family<ref>"Notes on the Nagarjunikonda Inscriptions", Dutt, Nalinaksha. ''The Indian Historical Quarterly'' 7:3 1931.09 pp. 633–53 "..Tibetan tradition which says that Nāgārjuna was born of a brahmin family of ]."</ref><ref>Geri Hockfield Malandra, ''Unfolding A Mandala: The Buddhist Cave Temples at Ellora'', SUNY Press, 1993, p. 17</ref><ref>Shōhei Ichimura, ''Buddhist Critical Spirituality: Prajñā and Śūnyatā'', Motilal Banarsidass Publishers (2001), p. 67</ref><ref>Bkra-śis-rnam-rgyal (Dwags-po Paṇ-chen), Takpo Tashi Namgyal, ''Mahamudra: The Quintessence of Mind and Meditation'', Motilal Banarsidass Publishers (1993), p. 443</ref> and later became a Buddhist. The traditional religious hagiographies place Nāgārjuna in various regions of India (Kumārajīva and Candrakirti place him in ] region of South India,<ref>{{cite book |author=Buddhist Text & Research Society |title=Journal |date=1895 |volume=3-5 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ubwoAAAAYAAJ |page=16}}</ref><ref>Transaction - Indian Institute of World Culture, Issue 73, Indian Institute of World Culture, 1987, p. 5</ref> ] in south ])<ref name=":3" />


Traditional religious hagiographies credit Nāgārjuna with being associated with the teaching of the ] sūtras as well as with having revealed these scriptures to the world after they had remained hidden for some time. The sources differ on where this happened and how Nāgārjuna retrieved the sutras. Some sources say he retrieved the sutras from the land of the ]s.<ref>Walser (2005), pp. 69, 74.</ref>
==Philosophy==
] rising out of the water are offering Buddhist sutras.]]
], India|200px]]
] "Nagarjuna Conqueror of the Serpent" (1925)]]
From studying his writings, it is clear that Nāgārjuna was conversant with many of the ] philosophies and with the Mahāyāna tradition. However, determining Nāgārjuna's affiliation with a specific ] is difficult, considering much of this material has been lost. If the most commonly accepted attribution of texts (that of ]) holds, then he was clearly a Māhayānist, but his philosophy holds assiduously to the Śrāvaka '']'', and while he does make explicit references to Mahāyāna texts, he is always careful to stay within the parameters set out by the Śrāvaka canon.


Nāgārjuna himself is often depicted in composite form comprising human and ] characteristics. Nāgas are snake-like supernatural beings of great magical power that feature in ], ] and ].<ref>Walser (2005), p. 74.</ref> Nāgas are found throughout Indian religious culture, and typically signify intelligent serpents or dragons that are responsible for rain, lakes, and other bodies of water. In Buddhism, a naga can be a symbol of a realised ] or wise person.<ref>{{Cite web|last=Berger|first=Douglas|title=Nagarjuna (c. 150—c. 250)|url=http://www.iep.utm.edu/nagarjun/|access-date=2 May 2017|website=Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy}}</ref>
Nagarjuna may have arrived at his positions from a desire to achieve a consistent exegesis of the Buddha's doctrine as recorded in the ]. In the eyes of Nagarjuna, the Buddha was not merely a forerunner, but the very founder of the Madhyamaka system.<ref>Christian Lindtner, ''Master of Wisdom.'' Dharma Publishing 1997, page 324.</ref> David Kalupahana sees Nagarjuna as a successor to ] in being a champion of the middle-way and a reviver of the original philosophical ideals of the Buddha.<ref>David Kalupahana, ''Mulamadhyamakakarika of Nagarjuna: The Philosophy of the Middle Way.'' Motilal Banarsidass, 2005, pages 2,5.</ref>

Traditional sources also claim that Nāgārjuna practised ] alchemy (]). Kumārajīva's biography for example, has Nāgārjuna making an elixir of invisibility, and Bus-ton, ] and ] all state that he could turn rocks into gold.<ref>Walser (2005), pp. 75-76.</ref>

Tibetan hagiographies also state that Nāgārjuna studied at Nālanda University. However, according to Walser, this university was not a strong monastic center until about 425. Also, as Walser notes, "Xuanzang and Yijing both spent considerable time at Nālanda and studied Nāgārjuna’s texts there. It is strange that they would have spent so much time there and yet chose not to report any local tales of a man whose works played such an important part in the curriculum."<ref>Walser (2005), p. 78</ref>

Some sources (] and the other Tibetan historians) claim that in his later years, Nāgārjuna lived on the mountain of Śrīparvata near the city that would later be called ] ("Hill of Nāgārjuna").<ref name="hirakawa">Hirakawa, Akira. Groner, Paul. ''A History of Indian Buddhism: From Śākyamuni to Early Mahāyāna.'' 2007. p. 242</ref><ref>Walser (2005), p. 72.</ref> The ruins of Nāgārjunakoṇḍa are located in ], ]. The ] and ] nikāyas are known to have had ] in Nāgārjunakoṇḍa.<ref name="hirakawa" /> The archaeological finds at Nāgārjunakoṇḍa have not resulted in any evidence that the site was associated with Nagarjuna. The name "Nāgārjunakoṇḍa" dates from the medieval period, and the 3rd-4th century inscriptions found at the site make it clear that it was known as "Vijayapuri" in the ancient period.<ref>{{cite book |author = K. Krishna Murthy |url = https://books.google.com/books?id=4gBSWyLTSzkC&pg=PA1 |title = Nāgārjunakoṇḍā: A Cultural Study |publisher=Concept Publishing Company |year=1977|page=1|oclc=4541213 }}</ref>

=== Other Nāgārjunas ===
There are a multitude of texts attributed to "Nāgārjuna", many of these texts date from much later periods. This has caused much confusion for the traditional Buddhist biographers and ]. Modern scholars are divided on how to classify these later texts and how many later writers called "Nāgārjuna" existed (the name remains popular today in Andhra Pradesh).<ref name=":4">Walser (2005), p. 69.</ref>

Some scholars have posited that there was a separate Aryuvedic writer called Nāgārjuna who wrote numerous treatises on ]. Also, there is a later Tantric Buddhist author by the same name who may have been a scholar at ] University and wrote on ].<ref>Hsing Yun, Xingyun, Tom Manzo, Shujan Cheng Infinite Compassion, Endless Wisdom: The Practice of the Bodhisattva Path Buddha's Light Publishing Hacienda Heights California</ref><ref name=":4" /> According to ], he originally belonged to a Brahmin family from eastern India and later became Buddhist.<ref>{{Cite book|last=Lopez|first=Donald S. Jr.|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=emWMDwAAQBAJ|title=Seeing the Sacred in Samsara: An Illustrated Guide to the Eighty-Four Mahasiddhas|date=28 May 2019|publisher=Shambhala Publications|isbn=978-0-8348-4212-0|pages=75|language=en}}</ref>

There is also a ] figure of the same name who was said to have travelled to the Himalayas. Walser thinks that it is possible that stories related to this figure influenced Buddhist legends as well.<ref name=":4" />

==Works==
{{Buddhist Philosophy sidebar}}

There exist a number of influential texts attributed to Nāgārjuna; however, as there are many ] attributed to him, lively controversy exists over which are his authentic works.

===''Mūlamadhyamakakārikā''===
{{Main|Mūlamadhyamakakārikā}}

The ''Mūlamadhyamakakārikā'' is Nāgārjuna's best-known work. It is "not only a grand commentary on the Buddha's discourse to ],<ref>See {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130329025311/http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.015.than.html |date=29 March 2013 }}</ref> the only discourse cited by name, but also a detailed and careful analysis of most of the important discourses included in the ] and the ], especially those of the ''Atthakavagga'' of the ''Sutta-nipata''.{{sfn|Kalupahana|1994|p=161}}
{{blockquote|Utilizing the Buddha's theory of ], Nagarjuna demonstrated the futility of metaphysical speculations. His method of dealing with such metaphysics is referred to as "middle way" (''madhyama pratipad''). It is the middle way that avoided the substantialism of the ] as well as the nominalism of the ].{{sfn|Kalupahana|1992|p=120}}}}
In the ''Mūlamadhyamakakārikā'', "ll experienced phenomena are ]. This did not mean that they are not experienced and, therefore, non-existent; only that they are devoid of ] because, like a dream, they are mere projections of human consciousness. Since these imaginary fictions are experienced, they are not ]."{{sfn|Kalupahana|1992|p=120}}

===Major attributed works===
According to ], the ''Madhyamakasastrastuti'' attributed to ] (<abbr>c.</abbr> 600 – c. 650) refers to eight texts by Nagarjuna:<blockquote>the ''(Madhyamaka)karikas'', the ''Yuktisastika'', the ''Sunyatasaptati'', the ''Vigrahavyavartani'', the ''Vidala'' (i.e. ''Vaidalyasutra/Vaidalyaprakarana''), the ''Ratnavali'', the ''Sutrasamuccaya'', and ''Samstutis'' (Hymns). This list covers not only much less than the grand total of works ascribed to Nagarjuna in the Chinese and Tibetan collections, but it does not even include all such works that Candrakirti has himself cited in his writings.<ref>Ruegg, David Seyfort, ''<nowiki>''The Literature of the Madhyamaka School of Philosophy in India,''</nowiki>'' Otto Harrassowitz Verlag, 1981, p. 8.</ref></blockquote>According to one view, that of Christian Lindtner, the works definitely written by Nāgārjuna are:<ref>Lindtner, C. (1982). ''Nagarjuniana: studies in the writings and philosophy of Nāgārjuna'', Copenhagen: Akademisk forlag, p. 11.</ref>

*''Mūlamadhyamaka-kārikā'' (Fundamental Verses of the Middle Way, MMK), available in three ] manuscripts and numerous translations.<ref>Ruegg, David Seyfort, ''<nowiki>''The Literature of the Madhyamaka School of Philosophy in India,''</nowiki>'' Otto Harrassowitz Verlag, 1981, p. 9.</ref>
*''Śūnyatāsaptati'' (Seventy Verses on Emptiness), accompanied by a prose commentary ascribed to Nagarjuna himself.
*''Vigrahavyāvartanī'' (The End of Disputes).
*{{IAST|''Vaidalyaprakaraṇa''}} (Pulverizing the Categories), a prose work critiquing the ].
*''Vyavahārasiddhi'' (Proof of Convention).
*{{IAST|''Yuktiṣāṣṭika''}} (Sixty Verses on Reasoning).
*{{IAST|''Catuḥstava''}} (Four Hymns): ''Lokātīta-stava'' (Hymn to transcendence), ''Niraupamya-stava'' (to the Peerless), ''Acintya-stava'' (to the Inconceivable), and ''Paramārtha-stava'' (to Ultimate Truth).<ref>Fernando Tola & Carmen Dragonetti, ''Nagarjuna's Catustava, Journal of Indian Philosophy'' 13 (1):1-54 (1985)</ref>
*''Ratnāvalī'' (Precious Garland), subtitled (''rajaparikatha''), a discourse addressed to an Indian king (possibly a ] monarch).<ref>Ruegg, David Seyfort, ''<nowiki>''The Literature of the Madhyamaka School of Philosophy in India,''</nowiki>'' Otto Harrassowitz Verlag, 1981, p. 24.</ref>
*{{IAST|''Pratītyasamutpādahṝdayakārika''}} (Verses on the heart of ]), along with a short commentary (''Vyākhyāna'').
*], an anthology of various sutra passages.
*{{IAST|''Bodhicittavivaraṇa''}} (Exposition of the ]).
*{{IAST|''Suhṛllekha''}} (Letter to a Good Friend).
*{{IAST|''Bodhisaṃbhāraśāstra''}} (Requisites of ]), a work the path of the Bodhisattva and ], it is quoted by Candrakirti in his commentary on ]'s four hundred. Now only extant in Chinese translation (] 1660).<ref>Ruegg, David Seyfort, ''<nowiki>''The Literature of the Madhyamaka School of Philosophy in India,''</nowiki>'' Otto Harrassowitz Verlag, 1981, p. 29.</ref>

Other scholars have challenged and argued against some of the above works being Nagarjuna's. David F. Burton notes that Christian Lindtner is "rather liberal" with his list of works and that other scholars have called some of these into question. He notes how Paul Williams argued convincingly that the {{IAST|''Bodhicittavivaraṇa''}} must be a later text.<ref name=":2">Burton, David F. (2015). ''Emptiness Appraised: A Critical Study of Nagarjuna's Philosophy,'' pp. 13-14. Routledge.</ref> In his study, Burton relies on the texts that he considers "least controversial": ''Mūlamadhyamaka-kārikā, Vigrahavyāvartanī, Śūnyatāsaptati,'' {{IAST|''Yuktiṣāṣṭika''}}, {{IAST|''Catuḥstava''}}, {{IAST|''Vaidalyaprakaraṇa''}} and ''Ratnāvalī''.<ref name=":2" />

Similarly, Jan Westerhoff notes how there is uncertainty about the attribution of Nagarjuna's works (and about his life in general). He relies on six works: MMK, ''Vigrahavyāvartanī, Śūnyatāsaptati,'' {{IAST|''Yuktiṣāṣṭika''}}, {{IAST|''Vaidalyaprakaraṇa''}} and ''Ratnāvalī,'' all of which "expound a single, coherent philosophical system," and are attributed to Nagarjuna by a variety of Indian and Tibetan sources.<ref>Westerhoff (2009), pp. 5-6.</ref>

The Tibetan historian ] considers the first six to be the main treatises of Nāgārjuna (this is called the "yukti corpus", ''rigs chogs''), while according to ] only the first five are the works of Nāgārjuna. TRV Murti considers ''Ratnāvalī'', ''Pratītyasamutpādahṝdaya'' and ''Sūtrasamuccaya'' to be works of Nāgārjuna as the first two are quoted profusely by Chandrakirti and the third by ].<ref>TRV Murti, ''Central philosophy of Buddhism'', pp. 89–91</ref>

=== Other attributed works ===
In addition to works mentioned above, numerous other works are attributed to Nāgārjuna, many of which are dubious attributions and later works. There is an ongoing, lively controversy over which of those works are authentic. Christian Lindtner divides the various attributed works as "1) correctly attributed, 2) wrongly attributed to him, and 3) those which may or may not be genuine."<ref>Lindtner 1982, p. 10.</ref>

Lindtner further divides the third category of dubious or questionable texts into those which are "perhaps authentic" and those who are unlikely to be authentic.

Those which he sees as ''perhaps'' being authentic include:<ref>Lindtner 1982, pp. 12-14.</ref>

* ''Mahāyānavimsika'', it is cited as Nagarjuna's work in the '']'' as well as by Atisha'','' Lindtner sees the style and content as compatible with the yukti corpus. Survives in Sanskrit.
* ''Bodhicittotpādavidhi,'' a short text that describes the sevenfold write for a bodhisattva,
* ''Dvadasakāranayastotra,'' a madhyamaka text only extant in Tibetan,
* ''(Madhyamaka-)Bhavasamkrānti,'' a verse from this is attributed to Nagarjuna by ].
* ''Nirālamba-stava,''
* ''Sālistambakārikā,'' only exists in Tibetan, it is a versification of the '']''
* ''Stutytitastava,'' only exists in Tibetan
* ''Danaparikatha,'' only exists in Tibetan, a praise of giving (dana)
* ''Cittavajrastava,''
* ''Mulasarvāstivadisrāmanerakārikā,'' 50 karikas on the Vinaya of the ]
* ''Dasabhumikavibhāsā,'' only exists in Chinese, a commentary on the ]
* ''Lokapariksā,''
* ''Yogasataka,'' a medical text
* ''Prajñadanda''
* ''Rasavaisesikasutra,'' a ] (biochemical) text
* ''Bhāvanākrama,'' contains various verses similar to the '']'', it is cited in the ''Tattvasamgraha'' as by Nagarjuna
* ''Rasratnakar'' deals with the formation of mercury compounds.
Ruegg notes various works of uncertain authorship which have been attributed to Nagarjuna, including the ''Dharmadhatustava'' (Hymn to the ], which shows later influences), ''Mahayanavimsika, Salistambakarikas,'' the ''Bhavasamkranti,'' and the ''Dasabhumtkavibhāsā.''<ref>Ruegg, David Seyfort, ''<nowiki>''The Literature of the Madhyamaka School of Philosophy in India,''</nowiki>'' Otto Harrassowitz Verlag, 1981, pp. 28-46.</ref> Furthermore, Ruegg writes that "three collections of stanzas on the virtues of intelligence and moral conduct ascribed to Nagarjuna are extant in Tibetan translation": ''Prajñasatakaprakarana'', ''Nitisastra-Jantuposanabindu'' and ''Niti-sastra-Prajñadanda.''<ref>Ruegg, David Seyfort, ''<nowiki>''The Literature of the Madhyamaka School of Philosophy in India,''</nowiki>'' Otto Harrassowitz Verlag, 1981, p. 27.</ref>

=== Attributions which are likely to be false ===
Meanwhile, those texts that Lindtner considers as questionable and likely inauthentic are: <blockquote>''Aksarasataka, Akutobhaya (Mulamadhyamakavrtti), Aryabhattaraka-Manjusriparamarthastuti, Kayatrayastotra, Narakoddharastava, Niruttarastava, Vandanastava, Dharmasamgraha, Dharmadhatugarbhavivarana, Ekaslokasastra, Isvarakartrtvanirakrtih (A refutation of God/Isvara), Sattvaradhanastava, Upayahrdaya, Astadasasunyatasastra, Dharmadhatustava, Yogaratnamala.''<ref>Lindtner 1982, pp. 14-17.</ref></blockquote>Meanwhile, Lindtner's list of outright wrong attributions is: <blockquote>''] (Dà zhìdù lùn), Abudhabodhakaprakarana'', ''Guhyasamajatantratika'', ''Dvadasadvaraka'', ''Prajñaparamitastotra,'' and ''Svabhavatrayapravesasiddhi.''<ref>Lindtner 1982, pp. 11-12.</ref></blockquote>Notably, the '']'' (] 1509, "Commentary on the great ]") which has been influential in Chinese Buddhism, has been questioned as a genuine work of Nāgārjuna by various scholars including ]. This work is also only attested in a Chinese translation by ] and is unknown in the Tibetan and Indian traditions.<ref>Ruegg, David Seyfort, ''<nowiki>''The Literature of the Madhyamaka School of Philosophy in India,''</nowiki>'' Otto Harrassowitz Verlag, 1981, p. 32.</ref>

Other works are extant only in Chinese, one of these is the ''Shih-erh-men-lun'' or 'Twelve-topic treatise' (*''Dvadasanikaya'' or *''Dvadasamukha-sastra''); one of the three basic treatises of the Sanlun school (]).<ref>Ruegg, David Seyfort, ''<nowiki>''The Literature of the Madhyamaka School of Philosophy in India,''</nowiki>'' Otto Harrassowitz Verlag, 1981, p. 28.</ref>

Several works considered important in ] are attributed to Nāgārjuna and his disciples by traditional historians like Tāranātha from 17th century Tibet. These historians try to account for chronological difficulties with various theories, such as seeing later writings as mystical revelations. For a useful summary of this tradition, see Wedemeyer 2007. Lindtner sees the author of some of these tantric works as being a tantric Nagarjuna who lives much later, sometimes called "Nagarjuna II".<ref>Lindtner 1982, p. 11.</ref>

==Philosophy==
], Scotland]]


===Sunyata=== ===Sunyata===
{{main|Śūnyatā}}
Nāgārjuna's primary contribution to ] is in the use of the concept of ], or "emptiness," which brings together other key Buddhist doctrines, particularly ] "not-self" and ] "dependent origination", to refute the metaphysics of the Sarvastivāda and ] (extinct non-Mahayana schools). For Nāgārjuna, as for the Buddha in the early texts, it is not merely ] that are "selfless" or non-substantial; all phenomena are without any ], literally "own-being", "self-nature", or "inherent existence" and thus without any underlying essence. They are ''empty'' of being independently existent; thus the heterodox theories of svabhāva circulating at the time were refuted on the basis of the doctrines of early Buddhism. This is so because all things arise always dependently: not by their own power, but by depending on conditions leading to their coming into ], as opposed to ]. As part of his analysis of the emptiness of phenomena in the ], Nagarjuna critiques svabhāva in several different concepts. He discusses the problems of positing any sort of inherent essence to causation, movement, change and personal identity. Nagarjuna makes use of the Indian logical tool of the ] to attack any essentialist conceptions. Nagarjuna’s logical analysis is based on four basic propositions:

Nāgārjuna's major thematic focus is the concept of ] (translated into English as "emptiness") which brings together other key Buddhist doctrines, particularly ] "not-self" and ] "dependent origination", to refute the metaphysics of some of his contemporaries. For Nāgārjuna, as for the Buddha in the early texts, it is not merely ] that are "selfless" or non-substantial; all phenomena (dhammas) are without any ], literally "own-being", "self-nature", or "inherent existence" and thus without any underlying essence. They are ''empty'' of being independently existent; thus the heterodox theories of svabhāva circulating at the time were refuted on the basis of the doctrines of early Buddhism. This is so because all things arise always dependently: not by their own power, but by depending on conditions leading to their becoming —coming into ]—, as opposed to ].

Nāgārjuna means by real any entity which has a nature of its own (svabhāva), which is not produced by causes (akrtaka), which is not dependent on anything else (paratra nirapeksha).<ref>S.Radhakrishnan, ''Indian philosophy'' Volume 1, p. 607</ref>

Chapter 24 verse 14 of the '']'' provides one of Nāgārjuna's most famous quotations on emptiness and co-arising:<ref name="siderits">{{cite book | last1 = Siderits | first1 = Mark | last2 = Katsura | first2 = Shoryu | title = Nagarjuna's Middle Way: Mulamadhyamakakarika (Classics of Indian Buddhism) | publisher = Wisdom Publications | year = 2013 | isbn = 978-1-61429-050-6 | pages=175–76}}</ref>

{{blockquote|''sarvaṃ ca yujyate tasya śūnyatā yasya yujyate<br />sarvaṃ na yujyate tasya śūnyaṃ yasya na yujyate''<br />

All is possible when emptiness is possible.<br />Nothing is possible when emptiness is impossible.}}

As part of his analysis of the emptiness of phenomena in the '']'', Nāgārjuna critiques svabhāva in several different concepts. He discusses the problems of positing any sort of inherent essence to causation, movement, change and personal identity. Nāgārjuna makes use of the Indian logical tool of the ] to attack any essentialist conceptions. Nāgārjuna's logical analysis is based on four basic propositions:


:All things (dharma) exist: affirmation of being, negation of non-being :All things (dharma) exist: affirmation of being, negation of non-being
Line 75: Line 164:
:All things (dharma) neither exist nor do not exist: neither affirmation nor negation <ref>Dumoulin, Heinrich (1998) Zen Buddhism: a history, India and China, Macmillan Publishing, 43</ref> :All things (dharma) neither exist nor do not exist: neither affirmation nor negation <ref>Dumoulin, Heinrich (1998) Zen Buddhism: a history, India and China, Macmillan Publishing, 43</ref>


To say that all things are 'empty' is to deny any kind of ontological foundation, therefore Nagarjuna's view is often seen as a kind of ontological ]<ref>Westerhoff, Jan. Nagarjuna's Madhyamaka: A Philosophical Introduction.</ref> or a metaphysical ].<ref>Siderits, Mark. Nagarjuna as anti-realist, Journal of Indian Philosophy December 1988, Volume 16, Issue 4, pp 311-325.</ref> To say that all things are 'empty' is to deny any kind of ontological foundation; therefore Nāgārjuna's view is often seen as a kind of ontological ]<ref>Westerhoff, Jan. Nagarjuna's Madhyamaka: A Philosophical Introduction.</ref> or a metaphysical ].<ref>Siderits, Mark. Nagarjuna as anti-realist, Journal of Indian Philosophy December 1988, Volume 16, Issue 4, pp 311-325.</ref>


Understanding the nature of the emptiness of phenomena is simply a means to an end, which is ]. Thus Nagarjuna's philosophical project is ultimately a soteriological one meant to correct our everyday cognitive processes which mistakenly posits ] on the flow of experience. Understanding the nature of the emptiness of phenomena is simply a means to an end, which is ]. Thus Nāgārjuna's philosophical project is ultimately a soteriological one meant to correct our everyday cognitive processes which mistakenly posits ] on the flow of experience.

Some scholars such as ] and T.R.V. Murti held that Nāgārjuna was the inventor of the Shunyata doctrine; however, more recent work by scholars such as Choong Mun-keat, Yin Shun and Dhammajothi Thero has argued that Nāgārjuna was not an innovator by putting forth this theory,<ref>Yìn Shùn, An Investigation into Emptiness (Kōng zhī Tànjìu 空之探究) (1985)</ref><ref>Choong, The Notion of Emptiness in Early Buddhism (1999)</ref><ref>Medawachchiye Dhammajothi Thero, The Concept of Emptiness in Pali Literature</ref> but that, in the words of Shi Huifeng, "the connection between emptiness and dependent origination is not an innovation or creation of Nāgārjuna".<ref>Shi huifeng: “Dependent Origination = Emptiness”—Nāgārjuna’s Innovation?</ref>


===Two truths=== ===Two truths===
{{main|Two truths doctrine}}
Nāgārjuna was also instrumental in the development of the ], which claims that there are two levels of truth or reality in Buddhist teaching, the ultimate reality (''paramārtha satya'') and the conventionally or superficial reality (''saṃvṛtisatya''). The ultimate truth to Nagarjuna is the truth that everything is empty of essence,<ref>Garfield, Jay. Empty Words: Buddhist Philosophy and Cross-cultural Interpretation, pp. 91.</ref> this includes emptiness itself ('the emptiness of emptiness'). While some (Murti, 1955) have interpreted this by positing Nagarjuna as a ] and thus making ultimate truth a metaphysical ] or an "ineffable ultimate that transcends the capacities of discursive reason",<ref name="Siderits, Mark 2003">Siderits, Mark, On the Soteriological Significance of Emptiness, Contemporary Buddhism, Vol. 4, No. 1, 2003.</ref> others such as Mark Siderits and Jay Garfield have argued that Nagarjuna's view is that "the ultimate truth is that there is no ultimate truth" (Siderits) and that Nagarjuna is a "semantic anti-dualist" who posits that there are only conventional truths.<ref name="Siderits, Mark 2003"/> Hence according to Garfield:


Nāgārjuna was also instrumental in the development of the ], which claims that there are two levels of truth in Buddhist teaching, the ultimate truth (''paramārtha satya'') and the conventional or superficial truth (''saṃvṛtisatya''). The ultimate truth to Nāgārjuna is the truth that everything is empty of essence,<ref>Garfield, Jay. Empty Words: Buddhist Philosophy and Cross-cultural Interpretation, p. 91.</ref> this includes emptiness itself ('the emptiness of emptiness'). While some (Murti, 1955) have interpreted this by positing Nāgārjuna as a ] and thus making ultimate truth a metaphysical ] or an "ineffable ultimate that transcends the capacities of discursive reason",<ref name="Siderits, Mark 2003">Siderits, Mark, ''On the Soteriological Significance of Emptiness, Contemporary Buddhism'', Vol. 4, No. 1, 2003.</ref> others such as Mark Siderits and ] have argued that Nāgārjuna's view is that "the ultimate truth is that there is no ultimate truth" (Siderits) and that Nāgārjuna is a "semantic anti-dualist" who posits that there are only conventional truths.<ref name="Siderits, Mark 2003" /> Hence according to Garfield:
<blockquote>Suppose that we take a conventional entity, such as a table. We analyze it to demonstrate its emptiness, finding that there is no table apart from its parts . So we conclude that it is empty. But now let us analyze that emptiness . What do we find? Nothing at all but the table’s lack of inherent existence. . To see the table as empty is to see the table as conventional, as dependent.<ref>Garfield, J. L. (2002). Empty words, pp. 38–39</ref></blockquote>


<blockquote>Suppose that we take a conventional entity, such as a table. We analyze it to demonstrate its emptiness, finding that there is no table apart from its parts . So we conclude that it is empty. But now let us analyze that emptiness . What do we find? Nothing at all but the table's lack of inherent existence. . To see the table as empty is to see the table as conventional, as dependent.<ref>Garfield, J. L. (2002). ''Empty words'', pp. 38–39</ref></blockquote>
In articulating this notion in the ''Mūlamadhyamakakārikā'', Nāgārjuna drew on an early source in the '']'',<ref>{{cite book|last=Kalupahana|first=David J.|title=Nāgārjuna: The Philosophy of the Middle Way|year=1986|publisher=State University of New York Press}}</ref> which distinguishes definitive meaning (''nītārtha'') from interpretable meaning (''neyārtha''):

{{quote|By and large, Kaccayana, this world is supported by a polarity, that of existence and non-existence. But when one reads the origination of the world as it actually is with right discernment, "non-existence" with reference to the world does not occur to one. When one reads the cessation of the world as it actually is with right discernment, "existence" with reference to the world does not occur to one.
In articulating this notion in the ''Mūlamadhyamakakārikā'', Nāgārjuna drew on an early source in the '']'',{{sfn|Kalupahana|1986}} which distinguishes definitive meaning (''nītārtha'') from interpretable meaning (''neyārtha''):
{{blockquote|By and large, Kaccayana, this world is supported by a polarity, that of existence and non-existence. But when one reads the origination of the world as it actually is with right discernment, "non-existence" with reference to the world does not occur to one. When one reads the cessation of the world as it actually is with right discernment, "existence" with reference to the world does not occur to one.


By and large, Kaccayana, this world is in bondage to attachments, clingings (sustenances), and biases. But one such as this does not get involved with or cling to these attachments, clingings, fixations of awareness, biases, or obsessions; nor is he resolved on "my self". He has no uncertainty or doubt that just stress, when arising, is arising; stress, when passing away, is passing away. In this, his knowledge is independent of others. It's to this extent, Kaccayana, that there is right view. By and large, Kaccayana, this world is in bondage to attachments, clingings (sustenances), and biases. But one such as this does not get involved with or cling to these attachments, clingings, fixations of awareness, biases, or obsessions; nor is he resolved on "my self". He has no uncertainty or doubt that just stress, when arising, is arising; stress, when passing away, is passing away. In this, his knowledge is independent of others. It's to this extent, Kaccayana, that there is right view.


"Everything exists": That is one extreme. "Everything doesn't exist": That is a second extreme. Avoiding these two extremes, the Tathagata teaches the Dhamma via the middle...<ref>Thanissaro Bhikkhu (1997). </ref>{{refn|group=lower-alpha|The version linked to is the one found in the nikayas, and is slightly different from the one found in the Samyuktagama. Both contain the concept of teaching via the middle between the extremes of existence and non-existence. See A.K. Warder, ''A Course in Indian Philosophy.'' Motilal Banarsidass Publ., 1998, pages 55–56, or for the full text of both versions with analysis see pages 192–195 of Choong Mun-keat, ''The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism: A comparative study basted on the Sutranga portion of the Pali Samyutta-Nikaya and the Chinese Samyuktagama''; Harrassowitz Verlag, Weisbaden, 2000. Nagarjuna does not make reference to "everything" when he quotes the agamic text in his MMK; in this regard see ], ''Nagarjuna: The Philosophy of the Middle Way''. SUNY Press, 1986, page 232.}} "Everything exists": That is one extreme. "Everything doesn't exist": That is a second extreme. Avoiding these two extremes, the Tathagata teaches the Dhamma via the middle...<ref>Thanissaro Bhikkhu (1997). </ref>}}
The version linked to is the one found in the nikayas, and is slightly different from the one found in the ''Samyuktagama''. Both contain the concept of teaching via the middle between the extremes of existence and non-existence.<ref>A.K. Warder, ''A Course in Indian Philosophy.'' Motilal Banarsidass Publ., 1998, pp. 55–56</ref><ref>For the full text of both versions with analysis see pp. 192–95 of Choong Mun-keat, ''The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism: A comparative study based on the Sutranga portion of the Pali Samyutta-Nikaya and the Chinese Samyuktagama''; Harrassowitz Verlag, Weisbaden, 2000.</ref> Nagarjuna does not make reference to "everything" when he quotes the agamic text in his ''Mūlamadhyamakakārikā''.{{sfn|Kalupahana|1986|p=232}}
}}


===Relativity=== === Causality ===
{{See also|Causality}}
Nagarjuna also taught the idea of relativity; in the Ratnāvalī, he gives the example that shortness exists only in relation to the idea of length. The determination of a thing or object is only possible in relation to other things or objects, especially by way of contrast. He held that the relationship between the ideas of "short" and "long" is not due to intrinsic nature (svabhāva). This idea is also found in the Pali Nikāyas and Chinese Āgamas, in which the idea of relativity is expressed similarly: "That which is the element of light ... is seen to exist on account of darkness; that which is the element of good is seen to exist on account of bad; that which is the element of space is seen to exist on account of form."<ref>], ''Causality: The Central Philosophy of Buddhism.'' The University Press of Hawaii, 1975, pages 96–97. In the Nikayas the quote is found at SN 2.150.</ref>


Jay L. Garfield describes that Nāgārjuna approached causality from the ] and ]. Nāgārjuna distinguished two dependent origination views in a causal process, that which causes effects and that which causes conditions. This is predicated in the ], as conventional truth and ultimate truth held together, in which both are empty in existence. The distinction between effects and conditions is controversial. In Nāgārjuna's approach, cause means an event or state that has power to bring an effect. Conditions, refer to proliferating causes that bring a further event, state or process; without a metaphysical commitment to an occult connection between explaining and explanans. He argues nonexistent causes and various existing conditions. The argument draws from unreal causal power. Things conventional exist and are ultimately nonexistent to rest in the ] in both causal existence and nonexistence as casual emptiness within the ] doctrine. Although seeming strange to Westerners, this is seen as an attack on a reified view of causality.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Garfield|first1=Jay L|title=Dependent Arising and the Emptiness of Emptiness: Why Did Nāgārjuna Start with Causation?|journal=Philosophy East and West|date=April 1994|volume=44|issue=2|pages=219–50|doi=10.2307/1399593|jstor=1399593|s2cid=51932733 |url=https://scholarworks.smith.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1023&context=phi_facpubs}}</ref>
===Nagarjuna as Ayurvedic physician===
According to Frank John Ninivaggi, Nagarjuna was also a practitioner of ]. First described in the Sanskrit medical treatise '']'', of which he was the compiler of the ], many of his conceptualisations, such as his descriptions of the circulatory system and blood tissue (described as ]) and his pioneering work on the therapeutic value of specially treated minerals knowns as ''bhasmas'', which earned him the title of the "father of ]".<ref>Frank John Ninivaggi ''Ayurveda: A Comprehensive Guide to Traditional Indian Medicine for the West'', page 23. (Praeger/Greenwood Press, 2008). ISBN 978-0-313-34837-2.</ref>


==Influence== ===Relativity===
{{see also|Relativism}}
According to Jay Garfield, Nagarjuna is a 'titanic figure' in the history of ]:
Nāgārjuna also taught the idea of relativity; in the Ratnāvalī, he gives the example that shortness exists only in relation to the idea of length. The determination of a thing or object is only possible in relation to other things or objects, especially by way of contrast. He held that the relationship between the ideas of "short" and "long" is not due to intrinsic nature (svabhāva). This idea is also found in the Pali Nikāyas and Chinese Āgamas, in which the idea of relativity is expressed similarly: "That which is the element of light ... is seen to exist on account of darkness; that which is the element of good is seen to exist on account of bad; that which is the element of space is seen to exist on account of form."{{sfn|Kalupahana|1975|loc=96-97: "In the Nikayas the quote is found at SN 2.150."}}


== Comparative philosophy ==
{{quote|...his influence in the Mahayana Buddhist world is not only unparalleled in that tradition but exceeds in that tradition the influence of any single Western philosopher. The degree to which he is taken seriously by so many eminent Indian, Chinese, Tibetan, Korean, Japanese, and Vietnamese philosophers, and lately by so many Western philosophers, alone justifies attention to his corpus.<ref>Garfield & Priest, Nāgārjuna and the Limits of Thought, 2002</ref>}}


=== Hinduism ===
Also Gadjin M. Nagao writes:
Nāgārjuna was fully acquainted with the classical Hindu philosophies of ] and even the ].<ref>TRV Murti, ''The central philosophy of Buddhism'', p. 92</ref> Nāgārjuna assumes a knowledge of the definitions of the sixteen categories as given in the ], the chief text of the Hindu Nyaya school, and wrote a treatise on the pramanas where he reduced the ] of five members into one of three. In the Vigrahavyavartani Kārika and Vaidalya Prakarana Nāgārjuna criticized the nyaya theory of pramanas (means of knowledge)
{{quote|Nagarjuna who lived around the second or third C.E., was a great philosopher and monk-scholar second only to the Buddha. It was owing to him that Mahāyāna Buddhism got a firm philosophical foundation and almost all forms of Mahāyāna schools of later times regard and accept him as their founder.<ref>{{cite book|last=Nagao|first=Gadjin|title=Madhyamika and Yogacara: A Study of Mahayana Philosophies|publisher=State University of New York Press|year=1991|page=173|isbn=9780791401873}}</ref>}}


=== Mahāyāna Buddhism ===
In contrast, Richard P. Hayes writes:
Nāgārjuna was conversant with many of the ] philosophies and with the Mahāyāna tradition; however, determining Nāgārjuna's affiliation with a specific ] is difficult, considering much of this material has been lost. If the most commonly accepted attribution of texts (that of Christian Lindtner) holds, then he was clearly a Māhayānist, but his philosophy holds assiduously to the Śrāvaka '']'', and while he does make explicit references to Mahāyāna texts, he is always careful to stay within the parameters set out by the Śrāvaka canon.
{{quote|Nagarjuna's writings had relatively little effect on the course of subsequent Indian Buddhist philosophy. Despite his apparent attempts to discredit some of the most fundamental concepts of ], abhidharma continued to flourish for centuries, without any appreciable attempt on the part of abhidharmikas to defend their methods of analysis against Nagarjuna's criticisms. And despite Nagarjuna's radical critique of the very possibility of having grounded knowledge (pramana), the epistemological school of ] and ] dominated Indian Buddhist intellectual circles, again without any explicit attempt to answer Nagarjuna's criticisms of their agenda. Aside from a few commentators on Nagarjuna's works, who identified themselves as Madhyamikas, Indian Buddhist intellectual life continued almost as if Nagarjuna had never existed.<ref>Hayes, Richard P. Nagarjuna: Master of Paradox, Mystic or Perpetrator of Fallacies?, 2003</ref>}}


Nāgārjuna may have arrived at his positions from a desire to achieve a consistent exegesis of the Buddha's doctrine as recorded in the ]. In the eyes of Nāgārjuna, the Buddha was not merely a forerunner, but the very founder of the Madhyamaka system.<ref>Christian Lindtner, ''Master of Wisdom.'' Dharma Publishing 1997, p. 324.</ref> David Kalupahana sees Nāgārjuna as a successor to ] in being a champion of the middle-way and a reviver of the original philosophical ideals of the Buddha.<ref>David Kalupahana, ''Mulamadhyamakakarika of Nāgārjuna: The Philosophy of the Middle Way.'' Motilal Banarsidass, 2005, pp. 2, 5.</ref>
The importance of Nagarjuna's thought for contemporary Western philosophy is also gaining more attention.<ref>Garfield, Jay L. and Graham Priest. “Nāgārjuna and the Limits of Thought.” Philosophy East and West 53 (January 2003): 1-21; Jones, Richard H. Nagarjuna: Buddhism's Most Important Philosopher, 2014; Westerhoff, Jan. Nāgārjuna’s Madhyamaka: A Philosophical Introduction, 2009.</ref>


=== Pyrrhonism and its influence ===
==Iconography==
{{see also|Similarities between Pyrrhonism and Buddhism}}
Nāgārjuna is often depicted in composite form comprising human and ] characteristics. Often the naga aspect forms a canopy crowning and shielding his human head. The notion of the naga is found throughout Indian religious culture, and typically signifies an intelligent serpent or dragon, who is responsible for the rains, lakes and other bodies of water. In Buddhism, it is a synonym for a realised ], or wise person in general. The term also means "elephant".
Because of the high degree of similarity between Nāgārjuna's philosophy and ], particularly the surviving works of ],<ref>Adrian Kuzminski, ''Pyrrhonism: How the Ancient Greeks Reinvented Buddhism'' 2008</ref> According to ] this is because Nagarjuna was likely influenced by Greek Pyrrhonist texts imported into India.<ref>Thomas McEvilley, ''The Shape of Ancient Thought'' 2002 pp 499-505</ref> ] (c. 360 – c. 270 BCE), the founder of this school of ], was himself influenced by Indian philosophy. Pyrrho travelled to India with ]'s army and studied with the ]s. According to ], Pyrrho's teachings are based on ], because the Greek terms ''adiaphora'', ''astathmēta'' and ''anepikrita'' in the ''Aristocles Passage'' resemble the Buddhist ].{{sfn|Beckwith|2015|p=28}} According to him, the key innovative tenets of Pyrrho's scepticism were only found in Indian philosophy at the time and not in Greece. {{sfn|Beckwith|2015|p=221}}

However, other scholars, such as ]<ref>] "Greek Buddha: Pyrrho's encounter with early Buddhism in central Asia", ''Contemporary Buddhism'', 2016, pp 195-215</ref> and Charles Goodman<ref>Charles Goodman, "Neither Scythian nor Greek: A Response to Beckwith's Greek Buddha and Kuzminski's "Early Buddhism Reconsidered"", ''Philosophy East and West'', University of Hawai'i Press Volume 68, Number 3, July 2018 pp. 984-1006</ref> question Beckwith's conclusions about the degree of Buddhist influence on Pyrrho.
==English translations==

===Mulamadhyamakakarika===
{{Main|Mulamadhyamakakarika}}

===Other works===
{| class="wikitable" border="1"
|-----
! Author
! Title
! Publisher
! Notes
|-----
| Garfield, Jay || The Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way: Nāgārjuna’s Mūlamadhyamakakārikā. || Oxford University Press, 1995.
| Translation with notes of Nāgārjuna’s principal work
|-----
| Jones, Richard || Nagarjuna: Buddhism's Most Important Philosopher, 2nd ed. || Jackson Square Books, 2014
| Plain English translations of all of Nāgārjuna’s six principal philosophical works with notes and essays
|-----
| Loizzo, Joseph || Nagarjuna's Reason Sixty (Yuktisastika) with Candrakirti's Commentary (Yuktisastikavrrti) || Columbia University Press, 2007
| Standing midway between his other masterpieces on philosophy and religion, in the Reason Sixty Nagarjuna describes the central thrust of his therapeutic philosophy of language – the elimination of cognitive bias and affective resistances to the gradual cultivation of nondualistic wisdom and compassion.
|-----
| Kawamura, L. || Golden Zephyr || Dharma, 1975
| Translation of the Suhrlekkha with a Tibetan commentary
|-----
| Bhattacharya, Johnston and Kunst || The Dialectical Method of Nagarjuna
| Motilal, 1978
| A superb translation of the Vigrahavyavartani
|-----
| Lindtner, C.
| Master of Wisdom: Writings of the Buddhist Master Nāgārjuna
| Dharma, 1986
| An excellent introduction to Madhyamika, Master of Wisdom contains two hymns of praise to the Buddha, two treatises on Shunyata, and two works that clarify the connection of analysis, meditation, and moral conduct. Includes Tibetan verses in transliteration and critical editions of extant Sanskrit.
Tibetan Translation (product ID: 0-89800-286-9)
|-----
| Lindtner, C. || Nagarjuniana || Motilal, 1987
| Contains Sanskrit or Tibetan texts and translations of the
Shunyatasaptati, Vaidalyaprakarana, Vyavaharasiddhi (fragment),
Yuktisastika, Catuhstava and Bodhicittavivarana. A translation only
of the Bodhisambharaka. The Sanskrit and Tibetan texts are given
for the Vigrahavyavartani. In addition a table of source sutras is
given for the ].
|-----
| ] || Nagarjuna's "Seventy Stanzas"
| Snow Lion, 1987
| Translation of the Shunyatasaptati with Tibetan commentary
|-----
| Tola, Fernando and Carmen Dragonetti
| Vaidalyaprakarana
| South Asia Books, 1995
|-----
| Westerhoff, Jan
| Nāgārjuna’s Vigrahavyāvartanī: The Dispeller of Disputes
| Oxford University Press, 2010.
|-----
| Jamieson, R. C.
| Nagarjuna's Verses on the Great Vehicle
and the Heart of Dependent Origination
| D.K., 2001
| Translation and edited Tibetan of the Mahayanavimsika and the Pratityasamutpadahrdayakarika, including work on texts from the cave temple at Dunhuang, Gansu, China
|-----
| Hopkins, Jeffrey
| Nagarjuna's Precious Garland: Buddhist Advice for Living and Liberation
| Snow Lion Publications, 2007
| ISBN 1-55939-274-6
|-----
|Brunnholzl, Karl
|In Praise of Dharmadhatu
|Snow Lion Publications, 2008
|Translation with commentary by the 3rd Karmapa
|-----
|}


== See also == == See also ==
{{col div |colwidth = 35em }}
* ] * ]
* ]
* ] * ]
* ] * ]
* ] * ]
* ] * ]
* ] * ]
* ] * ]
* ] * ]
* ]
* ] * ]
{{colend}}


==Notes== == References ==
=== Citations ===
{{reflist|group=lower-alpha|2}}
{{Reflist}}


==References== === Sources ===
{{Reflist|2}} {{refbegin|40em}}
* {{cite book |last = Beckwith |first = Christopher I. |title = Greek Buddha: Pyrrho's Encounter with Early Buddhism in Central Asia |publisher=] |year=2015 |url = http://press.princeton.edu/chapters/s10500.pdf |isbn=9781400866328 }}

* Garfield, Jay L. (1995), ''The Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way''. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
==Sources==
*Garfield, Jay L. (1995), ''The Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way''. Oxford: Oxford University Press. * Garfield, Jay L. and Graham Priest (2003), “Nāgārjuna and the Limits of Thought”, ''Philosophy East and West'' 53 (January 2003): 1-21.
* Jones, Richard H. (2014), ''Nagarjuna: Buddhism's Most Important Philosopher'', 2nd ed. New York: Jackson Square Books.
*Garfield, Jay L. and Graham Priest (2003), “Nāgārjuna and the Limits of Thought”, Philosophy East and West 53 (January 2003): 1-21.
* {{Citation | last = Kalupahana | first = David J. | year =1975| title =Causality: The Central Philosophy of Buddhism | publisher = The University Press of Hawaii | isbn = 9780824802981 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=GOYGAAAAYAAJ}}
*Jones, Richard H. (2014), ''Nagarjuna: Buddhism's Most Important Philosopher''. New York: Jackson Square Books.
*Kalupahana, David J. (1986),''The Philosophy of the Middle Way''. Albany: SUNY Press. * {{Citation | last = Kalupahana | first = David J. | year =1986 | title = The Philosophy of the Middle Way |location=Albany | publisher = SUNY Press | isbn = 9780887061486 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=0O6_coQ1odMC}}
* {{Citation | last = Kalupahana | first = David J. | year = 1992 | title = The Principles of Buddhist Psychology |url= | location = Delhi | publisher =Sri Satguru Publications }}
*Lamotte, E., ''Le Traite de la Grande Vertu de Sagesse'', Vol I (1944), Vol II (1949), Vol III (1970), Vol IV (1976), Institut Orientaliste: Louvain-la-Neuve.
* {{Citation | last = Kalupahana | first = David J. | year = 1994 | title =A history of Buddhist philosophy | location = Delhi | publisher = Motilal Banarsidass Publishers Private Limited | isbn = 9780824814021 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=SlDArya3YvcC}}
*Mabbett, Ian, (1998, “The problem of the historical Nagarjuna revisited”, Journal of the American Oriental Society, 118(3): 332–346.
* Lamotte, E., ''Le Traite de la Grande Vertu de Sagesse'', Vol I (1944), Vol II (1949), Vol III (1970), Vol IV (1976), Institut Orientaliste: Louvain-la-Neuve.
*Murti, T. R. V. (1955), ''The Central Philosophy of Buddhism''. George Allen and Unwin, London. 2nd edition: 1960.
* Lindtner, Christian (1982).'' Nagarjuniana: Studies in the Writings and Philosophy of Nāgārjuna'' Akademisk forlag.
*Murty, K. Satchidananda (1971), ''Nagarjuna''. National Book Trust, New Delhi. 2nd edition: 1978.
* Mabbett, Ian, (1998), “The problem of the historical Nagarjuna revisited”, ''Journal of the American Oriental Society'', 118(3): 332–46.
*Ramanan, K. Venkata (1966), ''Nāgārjuna's Philosophy''. Charles E. Tuttle, Vermont and Tokyo. Reprint: Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi. 1978. (This book gives an excellent and detailed examination of the range and subtleties of Nagarjuna's philosophy.)
* Murti, T. R. V. (1955), ''The Central Philosophy of Buddhism''. George Allen and Unwin, London. 2nd edition: 1960.
*Ruegg, D. Seyfort (1981), ''The literature of the Madhyamaka school of philosophy in India (A History of Indian literature)'', Harrassowitz, ISBN 978-3-447-02204-0.
* Murty, K. Satchidananda (1971), ''Nagarjuna''. National Book Trust, New Delhi. 2nd edition: 1978.
*Sastri, H. Chatterjee, ed. (1977), ''The Philosophy of Nāgārjuna as contained in the Ratnāvalī''. Part I . Saraswat Library, Calcutta.
* Ramanan, K. Venkata (1966), ''Nāgārjuna's Philosophy''. Charles E. Tuttle, Vermont and Tokyo. Reprint: Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi. 1978.
*Streng, Frederick J. (1967), ''Emptiness: A Study in Religious Meaning''. Nashville: Abingdon Press.
* Ruegg, D. Seyfort (1981), ''The literature of the Madhyamaka school of philosophy in India (A History of Indian literature)'', Harrassowitz, {{ISBN|978-3-447-02204-0}}.
*Tuck, Andrew P. (1990), ''Comparative Philosophy and the Philosophy of Scholarship: on the Western Interpretation of Nāgārjuna'', Oxford: Oxford University Press.
* Sastri, H. Chatterjee, ed. (1977), ''The Philosophy of Nāgārjuna as contained in the Ratnāvalī''. Part I . Saraswat Library, Calcutta.
*Walser, Joseph. (2005),''Nāgārjuna in Context: Mahāyāna Buddhism and Early Indian Culture''. New York: Columbia University Press.
* ] (1967), ''Emptiness: A Study in Religious Meaning''. Nashville: Abingdon Press.
*Westerhoff, Jan (2009), ''The Dispeller of Disputes: Nāgārjuna's Vigrahavyāvartanī''. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
*Westerhoff, Jan (2009), ''Nāgārjuna's Madhyamaka. A Philosophical Introduction''. Oxford: Oxford University Press. * Tuck, Andrew P. (1990), ''Comparative Philosophy and the Philosophy of Scholarship: on the Western Interpretation of Nāgārjuna'', Oxford: Oxford University Press.
* Walser, Joseph (2002), , ''Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies'' 25 (1-2), 209-262
*Wedemeyer, Christian K. (2007), ''Āryadeva's'' Lamp that Integrates the Practices: ''The Gradual Path of Vajrayāna Buddhism according to the Esoteric Community Noble Tradition''. New York: AIBS/Columbia University Press.
* Walser, Joseph (2005), ''Nāgārjuna in Context: Mahāyāna Buddhism and Early Indian Culture''. New York: Columbia University Press.
* Westerhoff, Jan (2010), ''The Dispeller of Disputes: Nāgārjuna's Vigrahavyāvartanī''. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
* Westerhoff, Jan (2009), ''Nāgārjuna's Madhyamaka. A Philosophical Introduction''. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
* Wedemeyer, Christian K. (2007), ''Āryadeva's'' Lamp that Integrates the Practices: ''The Gradual Path of Vajrayāna Buddhism according to the Esoteric Community Noble Tradition''. New York: AIBS/Columbia University Press.
{{refend}}


== External links == == External links ==
{{Commons category|Nagarjuna}} {{Commons category|Nagarjuna}}
{{wikiquote}} {{Wikiquote}}
{{wikisource|Saṃyukta Āgama 301: Kātyāyana Gotra Sūtra}} {{Wikisource|Saṃyukta Āgama 301: Kātyāyana Gotra Sūtra}}
* {{cite SEP |url-id=nagarjuna |title=Nāgārjuna |last=Westerhoff |first=Jan Christoph }}
{{wikiversity|Buddha oracle#4 Small Steps (Nagarjuna)}}
* {{cite EB1911 |author = Rhys Davids, T. W. |author-link = Thomas William Rhys Davids |wstitle=Nāgārjuna |volume=19 |page=151 }}
*{{sep entry|nagarjuna|Nāgārjuna|Jan Christoph Westerhoff}}
* {{IEP|nagarjun|Nagarjuna}} * {{cite IEP |url-id=nagarjun |title = Nagarjuna }}
* *
* *
* Translated by Prof. Vidyakaraprabha and Bel-dzek * Translated by Prof. Vidyakaraprabha and Bel-dzek
* Translated by Alexander Berzin * Translated by Alexander Berzin
* {{Internet Archive author |sname=Nāgārjuna}}
* Byoma Kusuma Nepalese Dharmasangha
* {{Librivox author |id=4413}}
* Byoma Kusuma Nepalese Dharmasangha (archived)
* *
* online Tibetan and English version translated by Stephen Batchelor (archived)
* LibriVox recording
* online Tibetan and English version translated by Stephen Batchelor


{{Indian Philosophy}} {{Indian Philosophy}}
Line 244: Line 275:
{{Buddhism topics}} {{Buddhism topics}}


{{Authority control|LCCN=n/81/97126}} {{Authority control}}


{{Persondata
| NAME = Nagarjuna
| ALTERNATIVE NAMES =
| SHORT DESCRIPTION = Indian philosopher
| DATE OF BIRTH = c. 150
| PLACE OF BIRTH = SouthIndia
| DATE OF DEATH = c. 250
| PLACE OF DEATH = India
}}
] ]
] ]
] ]
] ]
] ]
] ]
] ]
] ]
] ]
] ]
]
] ]
] ]
] ]
] ]
]
] ]
] ]
]
]
]
] ]
]
] ]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]

Latest revision as of 17:53, 20 December 2024

3rd-century Indian Buddhist philosopher For other uses, see Nagarjuna (disambiguation).

Nāgārjuna
नागार्जुन
Painting of Nāgārjuna
Bornc. 150 CE
South India
Diedc. 250 CE
India
Occupation(s)Buddhist teacher, monk and philosopher
Notable workMūlamadhyamakakārikā
EraAncient philosophy
RegionEastern philosophy
School
Notable ideas

Nāgārjuna (Sanskrit: नागार्जुन, Nāgārjuna; c. 150 – c. 250 CE) was an Indian monk and Mahāyāna Buddhist philosopher of the Madhyamaka (Centrism, Middle Way) school. He is widely considered one of the most important Buddhist philosophers.

Nāgārjuna is widely considered to be the founder of the Madhyamaka school of Buddhist philosophy and a defender of the Mahāyāna movement. His Mūlamadhyamakakārikā (Root Verses on Madhyamaka, MMK) is the most important text on the Madhyamaka philosophy of emptiness. The MMK inspired a large number of commentaries in Sanskrit, Chinese, Tibetan, Korean and Japanese and continues to be studied today.

History

A map of the Satavahana Kingdom, showing the location of Amaravathi (where Nāgārjuna may have lived and worked according to Walser) and Vidarbha (the birthplace of Nāgārjuna according to Kumārajīva)

Background

India in the first and second centuries CE was politically divided into various states, including the Kushan Empire and the Satavahana Kingdom. At this point in Buddhist history, the Buddhist community was already divided into various Buddhist schools and had spread throughout India.

At this time, there was already a small and nascent Mahāyāna movement. Mahāyāna ideas were held by a minority of Buddhists in India at the time. As Joseph Walser writes, "Mahāyāna before the fifth century was largely invisible and probably existed only as a minority and largely unrecognized movement within the fold of nikāya Buddhism." By the second century, early Mahāyāna Sūtras such as the Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā were already circulating among certain Mahāyāna circles.

Life

Very little is reliably known of the life of Nāgārjuna and modern historians do not agree on a specific date (1st to 3rd century CE) or place (multiple places in India suggested) for him. The earliest surviving accounts were written in Chinese and Tibetan centuries after his death and are mostly hagiographical accounts that are historically unverifiable.

Some scholars such as Joseph Walser argue that Nāgārjuna was an advisor to a king of the Sātavāhana dynasty which ruled the Deccan Plateau in the second century. This is supported by most of the traditional hagiographical sources as well. Archaeological evidence at Amarāvatī indicates that if this is true, the king may have been Yajña Śrī Śātakarṇi (c. second half of the 2nd century). On the basis of this association, Nāgārjuna is conventionally placed at around 150–250 CE.

A model of the Amaravati Stupa

Walser thinks that it is most likely that when Nāgārjuna wrote the Ratnavali, he lived in a mixed monastery (with Mahāyānists and non-Mahāyānists) in which Mahāyānists were the minority. The most likely sectarian affiliation of the monastery according to Walser was Purvasailya, Aparasailya, or Caityaka (which were Mahāsāṃghika sub-schools).

He also argues that "it is plausible that he wrote the Ratnavali within a thirty-year period at the end of the second century in the Andhra region around Dhanyakataka (modern-day Amaravati)."

Traditional hagiography

According to Walser, "the earliest extant legends about Nāgārjuna are compiled into Kumārajīva’s biography of Nāgārjuna, which he translated into Chinese in about 405 CE." According to this biography, Nāgārjuna was born into a Brahmin family and later became a Buddhist. The traditional religious hagiographies place Nāgārjuna in various regions of India (Kumārajīva and Candrakirti place him in Vidarbha region of South India, Xuanzang in south Kosala)

Traditional religious hagiographies credit Nāgārjuna with being associated with the teaching of the Prajñāpāramitā sūtras as well as with having revealed these scriptures to the world after they had remained hidden for some time. The sources differ on where this happened and how Nāgārjuna retrieved the sutras. Some sources say he retrieved the sutras from the land of the nāgas.

A Tibetan depiction of Nagarjuna; the snakes are depicted as protectors around Nagarjuna's head and the nagas rising out of the water are offering Buddhist sutras.
Nicholas Roerich "Nagarjuna Conqueror of the Serpent" (1925)

Nāgārjuna himself is often depicted in composite form comprising human and nāga characteristics. Nāgas are snake-like supernatural beings of great magical power that feature in Hindu, Buddhist and Jain mythology. Nāgas are found throughout Indian religious culture, and typically signify intelligent serpents or dragons that are responsible for rain, lakes, and other bodies of water. In Buddhism, a naga can be a symbol of a realised arhat or wise person.

Traditional sources also claim that Nāgārjuna practised ayurvedic alchemy (rasayāna). Kumārajīva's biography for example, has Nāgārjuna making an elixir of invisibility, and Bus-ton, Taranatha and Xuanzang all state that he could turn rocks into gold.

Tibetan hagiographies also state that Nāgārjuna studied at Nālanda University. However, according to Walser, this university was not a strong monastic center until about 425. Also, as Walser notes, "Xuanzang and Yijing both spent considerable time at Nālanda and studied Nāgārjuna’s texts there. It is strange that they would have spent so much time there and yet chose not to report any local tales of a man whose works played such an important part in the curriculum."

Some sources (Bu-ston and the other Tibetan historians) claim that in his later years, Nāgārjuna lived on the mountain of Śrīparvata near the city that would later be called Nāgārjunakoṇḍa ("Hill of Nāgārjuna"). The ruins of Nāgārjunakoṇḍa are located in Guntur district, Andhra Pradesh. The Caitika and Bahuśrutīya nikāyas are known to have had monasteries in Nāgārjunakoṇḍa. The archaeological finds at Nāgārjunakoṇḍa have not resulted in any evidence that the site was associated with Nagarjuna. The name "Nāgārjunakoṇḍa" dates from the medieval period, and the 3rd-4th century inscriptions found at the site make it clear that it was known as "Vijayapuri" in the ancient period.

Other Nāgārjunas

There are a multitude of texts attributed to "Nāgārjuna", many of these texts date from much later periods. This has caused much confusion for the traditional Buddhist biographers and doxographers. Modern scholars are divided on how to classify these later texts and how many later writers called "Nāgārjuna" existed (the name remains popular today in Andhra Pradesh).

Some scholars have posited that there was a separate Aryuvedic writer called Nāgārjuna who wrote numerous treatises on Rasayana. Also, there is a later Tantric Buddhist author by the same name who may have been a scholar at Nālandā University and wrote on Buddhist tantra. According to Donald S. Lopez Jr., he originally belonged to a Brahmin family from eastern India and later became Buddhist.

There is also a Jain figure of the same name who was said to have travelled to the Himalayas. Walser thinks that it is possible that stories related to this figure influenced Buddhist legends as well.

Works

Part of a series on
Buddhist philosophy
Traditions
Themes
Pre-modern philosophers
Modern philosophers

icon Religion portal

Philosophy portal

There exist a number of influential texts attributed to Nāgārjuna; however, as there are many pseudepigrapha attributed to him, lively controversy exists over which are his authentic works.

Mūlamadhyamakakārikā

Main article: Mūlamadhyamakakārikā

The Mūlamadhyamakakārikā is Nāgārjuna's best-known work. It is "not only a grand commentary on the Buddha's discourse to Kaccayana, the only discourse cited by name, but also a detailed and careful analysis of most of the important discourses included in the Nikayas and the Agamas, especially those of the Atthakavagga of the Sutta-nipata.

Utilizing the Buddha's theory of "dependent arising" (pratitya-samutpada), Nagarjuna demonstrated the futility of metaphysical speculations. His method of dealing with such metaphysics is referred to as "middle way" (madhyama pratipad). It is the middle way that avoided the substantialism of the Sarvastivadins as well as the nominalism of the Sautrantikas.

In the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā, "ll experienced phenomena are empty (sunya). This did not mean that they are not experienced and, therefore, non-existent; only that they are devoid of a permanent and eternal substance (svabhava) because, like a dream, they are mere projections of human consciousness. Since these imaginary fictions are experienced, they are not mere names (prajnapti)."

Major attributed works

According to David Seyfort Ruegg, the Madhyamakasastrastuti attributed to Candrakirti (c. 600 – c. 650) refers to eight texts by Nagarjuna:

the (Madhyamaka)karikas, the Yuktisastika, the Sunyatasaptati, the Vigrahavyavartani, the Vidala (i.e. Vaidalyasutra/Vaidalyaprakarana), the Ratnavali, the Sutrasamuccaya, and Samstutis (Hymns). This list covers not only much less than the grand total of works ascribed to Nagarjuna in the Chinese and Tibetan collections, but it does not even include all such works that Candrakirti has himself cited in his writings.

According to one view, that of Christian Lindtner, the works definitely written by Nāgārjuna are:

  • Mūlamadhyamaka-kārikā (Fundamental Verses of the Middle Way, MMK), available in three Sanskrit manuscripts and numerous translations.
  • Śūnyatāsaptati (Seventy Verses on Emptiness), accompanied by a prose commentary ascribed to Nagarjuna himself.
  • Vigrahavyāvartanī (The End of Disputes).
  • Vaidalyaprakaraṇa (Pulverizing the Categories), a prose work critiquing the categories used by Indian Nyaya philosophy.
  • Vyavahārasiddhi (Proof of Convention).
  • Yuktiṣāṣṭika (Sixty Verses on Reasoning).
  • Catuḥstava (Four Hymns): Lokātīta-stava (Hymn to transcendence), Niraupamya-stava (to the Peerless), Acintya-stava (to the Inconceivable), and Paramārtha-stava (to Ultimate Truth).
  • Ratnāvalī (Precious Garland), subtitled (rajaparikatha), a discourse addressed to an Indian king (possibly a Satavahana monarch).
  • Pratītyasamutpādahṝdayakārika (Verses on the heart of Dependent Arising), along with a short commentary (Vyākhyāna).
  • Sūtrasamuccaya, an anthology of various sutra passages.
  • Bodhicittavivaraṇa (Exposition of the awakening mind).
  • Suhṛllekha (Letter to a Good Friend).
  • Bodhisaṃbhāraśāstra (Requisites of awakening), a work the path of the Bodhisattva and paramitas, it is quoted by Candrakirti in his commentary on Aryadeva's four hundred. Now only extant in Chinese translation (Taisho 1660).

Other scholars have challenged and argued against some of the above works being Nagarjuna's. David F. Burton notes that Christian Lindtner is "rather liberal" with his list of works and that other scholars have called some of these into question. He notes how Paul Williams argued convincingly that the Bodhicittavivaraṇa must be a later text. In his study, Burton relies on the texts that he considers "least controversial": Mūlamadhyamaka-kārikā, Vigrahavyāvartanī, Śūnyatāsaptati, Yuktiṣāṣṭika, Catuḥstava, Vaidalyaprakaraṇa and Ratnāvalī.

Similarly, Jan Westerhoff notes how there is uncertainty about the attribution of Nagarjuna's works (and about his life in general). He relies on six works: MMK, Vigrahavyāvartanī, Śūnyatāsaptati, Yuktiṣāṣṭika, Vaidalyaprakaraṇa and Ratnāvalī, all of which "expound a single, coherent philosophical system," and are attributed to Nagarjuna by a variety of Indian and Tibetan sources.

The Tibetan historian Buston considers the first six to be the main treatises of Nāgārjuna (this is called the "yukti corpus", rigs chogs), while according to Tāranātha only the first five are the works of Nāgārjuna. TRV Murti considers Ratnāvalī, Pratītyasamutpādahṝdaya and Sūtrasamuccaya to be works of Nāgārjuna as the first two are quoted profusely by Chandrakirti and the third by Shantideva.

Other attributed works

In addition to works mentioned above, numerous other works are attributed to Nāgārjuna, many of which are dubious attributions and later works. There is an ongoing, lively controversy over which of those works are authentic. Christian Lindtner divides the various attributed works as "1) correctly attributed, 2) wrongly attributed to him, and 3) those which may or may not be genuine."

Lindtner further divides the third category of dubious or questionable texts into those which are "perhaps authentic" and those who are unlikely to be authentic.

Those which he sees as perhaps being authentic include:

  • Mahāyānavimsika, it is cited as Nagarjuna's work in the Tattvasamgraha as well as by Atisha, Lindtner sees the style and content as compatible with the yukti corpus. Survives in Sanskrit.
  • Bodhicittotpādavidhi, a short text that describes the sevenfold write for a bodhisattva,
  • Dvadasakāranayastotra, a madhyamaka text only extant in Tibetan,
  • (Madhyamaka-)Bhavasamkrānti, a verse from this is attributed to Nagarjuna by Bhavaviveka.
  • Nirālamba-stava,
  • Sālistambakārikā, only exists in Tibetan, it is a versification of the Śālistamba Sūtra
  • Stutytitastava, only exists in Tibetan
  • Danaparikatha, only exists in Tibetan, a praise of giving (dana)
  • Cittavajrastava,
  • Mulasarvāstivadisrāmanerakārikā, 50 karikas on the Vinaya of the Mulasarvastivadins
  • Dasabhumikavibhāsā, only exists in Chinese, a commentary on the Dashabhumikasutra
  • Lokapariksā,
  • Yogasataka, a medical text
  • Prajñadanda
  • Rasavaisesikasutra, a rasayana (biochemical) text
  • Bhāvanākrama, contains various verses similar to the Lankavatara, it is cited in the Tattvasamgraha as by Nagarjuna
  • Rasratnakar deals with the formation of mercury compounds.

Ruegg notes various works of uncertain authorship which have been attributed to Nagarjuna, including the Dharmadhatustava (Hymn to the Dharmadhatu, which shows later influences), Mahayanavimsika, Salistambakarikas, the Bhavasamkranti, and the Dasabhumtkavibhāsā. Furthermore, Ruegg writes that "three collections of stanzas on the virtues of intelligence and moral conduct ascribed to Nagarjuna are extant in Tibetan translation": Prajñasatakaprakarana, Nitisastra-Jantuposanabindu and Niti-sastra-Prajñadanda.

Attributions which are likely to be false

Meanwhile, those texts that Lindtner considers as questionable and likely inauthentic are:

Aksarasataka, Akutobhaya (Mulamadhyamakavrtti), Aryabhattaraka-Manjusriparamarthastuti, Kayatrayastotra, Narakoddharastava, Niruttarastava, Vandanastava, Dharmasamgraha, Dharmadhatugarbhavivarana, Ekaslokasastra, Isvarakartrtvanirakrtih (A refutation of God/Isvara), Sattvaradhanastava, Upayahrdaya, Astadasasunyatasastra, Dharmadhatustava, Yogaratnamala.

Meanwhile, Lindtner's list of outright wrong attributions is:

Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa (Dà zhìdù lùn), Abudhabodhakaprakarana, Guhyasamajatantratika, Dvadasadvaraka, Prajñaparamitastotra, and Svabhavatrayapravesasiddhi.

Notably, the Dà zhìdù lùn (Taisho 1509, "Commentary on the great prajñaparamita") which has been influential in Chinese Buddhism, has been questioned as a genuine work of Nāgārjuna by various scholars including Lamotte. This work is also only attested in a Chinese translation by Kumārajīva and is unknown in the Tibetan and Indian traditions.

Other works are extant only in Chinese, one of these is the Shih-erh-men-lun or 'Twelve-topic treatise' (*Dvadasanikaya or *Dvadasamukha-sastra); one of the three basic treatises of the Sanlun school (East Asian Madhyamaka).

Several works considered important in esoteric Buddhism are attributed to Nāgārjuna and his disciples by traditional historians like Tāranātha from 17th century Tibet. These historians try to account for chronological difficulties with various theories, such as seeing later writings as mystical revelations. For a useful summary of this tradition, see Wedemeyer 2007. Lindtner sees the author of some of these tantric works as being a tantric Nagarjuna who lives much later, sometimes called "Nagarjuna II".

Philosophy

Golden statue of Nāgārjuna at Kagyu Samye Ling Monastery, Scotland

Sunyata

Main article: Śūnyatā

Nāgārjuna's major thematic focus is the concept of śūnyatā (translated into English as "emptiness") which brings together other key Buddhist doctrines, particularly anātman "not-self" and pratītyasamutpāda "dependent origination", to refute the metaphysics of some of his contemporaries. For Nāgārjuna, as for the Buddha in the early texts, it is not merely sentient beings that are "selfless" or non-substantial; all phenomena (dhammas) are without any svabhāva, literally "own-being", "self-nature", or "inherent existence" and thus without any underlying essence. They are empty of being independently existent; thus the heterodox theories of svabhāva circulating at the time were refuted on the basis of the doctrines of early Buddhism. This is so because all things arise always dependently: not by their own power, but by depending on conditions leading to their becoming —coming into existence—, as opposed to being.

Nāgārjuna means by real any entity which has a nature of its own (svabhāva), which is not produced by causes (akrtaka), which is not dependent on anything else (paratra nirapeksha).

Chapter 24 verse 14 of the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā provides one of Nāgārjuna's most famous quotations on emptiness and co-arising:

sarvaṃ ca yujyate tasya śūnyatā yasya yujyate
sarvaṃ na yujyate tasya śūnyaṃ yasya na yujyate

All is possible when emptiness is possible.
Nothing is possible when emptiness is impossible.

As part of his analysis of the emptiness of phenomena in the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā, Nāgārjuna critiques svabhāva in several different concepts. He discusses the problems of positing any sort of inherent essence to causation, movement, change and personal identity. Nāgārjuna makes use of the Indian logical tool of the tetralemma to attack any essentialist conceptions. Nāgārjuna's logical analysis is based on four basic propositions:

All things (dharma) exist: affirmation of being, negation of non-being
All things (dharma) do not exist: affirmation of non-being, negation of being
All things (dharma) both exist and do not exist: both affirmation and negation
All things (dharma) neither exist nor do not exist: neither affirmation nor negation

To say that all things are 'empty' is to deny any kind of ontological foundation; therefore Nāgārjuna's view is often seen as a kind of ontological anti-foundationalism or a metaphysical anti-realism.

Understanding the nature of the emptiness of phenomena is simply a means to an end, which is nirvana. Thus Nāgārjuna's philosophical project is ultimately a soteriological one meant to correct our everyday cognitive processes which mistakenly posits svabhāva on the flow of experience.

Some scholars such as Fyodor Shcherbatskoy and T.R.V. Murti held that Nāgārjuna was the inventor of the Shunyata doctrine; however, more recent work by scholars such as Choong Mun-keat, Yin Shun and Dhammajothi Thero has argued that Nāgārjuna was not an innovator by putting forth this theory, but that, in the words of Shi Huifeng, "the connection between emptiness and dependent origination is not an innovation or creation of Nāgārjuna".

Two truths

Main article: Two truths doctrine

Nāgārjuna was also instrumental in the development of the two truths doctrine, which claims that there are two levels of truth in Buddhist teaching, the ultimate truth (paramārtha satya) and the conventional or superficial truth (saṃvṛtisatya). The ultimate truth to Nāgārjuna is the truth that everything is empty of essence, this includes emptiness itself ('the emptiness of emptiness'). While some (Murti, 1955) have interpreted this by positing Nāgārjuna as a neo-Kantian and thus making ultimate truth a metaphysical noumenon or an "ineffable ultimate that transcends the capacities of discursive reason", others such as Mark Siderits and Jay L. Garfield have argued that Nāgārjuna's view is that "the ultimate truth is that there is no ultimate truth" (Siderits) and that Nāgārjuna is a "semantic anti-dualist" who posits that there are only conventional truths. Hence according to Garfield:

Suppose that we take a conventional entity, such as a table. We analyze it to demonstrate its emptiness, finding that there is no table apart from its parts . So we conclude that it is empty. But now let us analyze that emptiness . What do we find? Nothing at all but the table's lack of inherent existence. . To see the table as empty is to see the table as conventional, as dependent.

In articulating this notion in the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā, Nāgārjuna drew on an early source in the Kaccānagotta Sutta, which distinguishes definitive meaning (nītārtha) from interpretable meaning (neyārtha):

By and large, Kaccayana, this world is supported by a polarity, that of existence and non-existence. But when one reads the origination of the world as it actually is with right discernment, "non-existence" with reference to the world does not occur to one. When one reads the cessation of the world as it actually is with right discernment, "existence" with reference to the world does not occur to one.

By and large, Kaccayana, this world is in bondage to attachments, clingings (sustenances), and biases. But one such as this does not get involved with or cling to these attachments, clingings, fixations of awareness, biases, or obsessions; nor is he resolved on "my self". He has no uncertainty or doubt that just stress, when arising, is arising; stress, when passing away, is passing away. In this, his knowledge is independent of others. It's to this extent, Kaccayana, that there is right view.

"Everything exists": That is one extreme. "Everything doesn't exist": That is a second extreme. Avoiding these two extremes, the Tathagata teaches the Dhamma via the middle...

The version linked to is the one found in the nikayas, and is slightly different from the one found in the Samyuktagama. Both contain the concept of teaching via the middle between the extremes of existence and non-existence. Nagarjuna does not make reference to "everything" when he quotes the agamic text in his Mūlamadhyamakakārikā.

Causality

See also: Causality

Jay L. Garfield describes that Nāgārjuna approached causality from the Four Noble Truths and dependent origination. Nāgārjuna distinguished two dependent origination views in a causal process, that which causes effects and that which causes conditions. This is predicated in the two truth doctrine, as conventional truth and ultimate truth held together, in which both are empty in existence. The distinction between effects and conditions is controversial. In Nāgārjuna's approach, cause means an event or state that has power to bring an effect. Conditions, refer to proliferating causes that bring a further event, state or process; without a metaphysical commitment to an occult connection between explaining and explanans. He argues nonexistent causes and various existing conditions. The argument draws from unreal causal power. Things conventional exist and are ultimately nonexistent to rest in the Middle Way in both causal existence and nonexistence as casual emptiness within the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā doctrine. Although seeming strange to Westerners, this is seen as an attack on a reified view of causality.

Relativity

See also: Relativism

Nāgārjuna also taught the idea of relativity; in the Ratnāvalī, he gives the example that shortness exists only in relation to the idea of length. The determination of a thing or object is only possible in relation to other things or objects, especially by way of contrast. He held that the relationship between the ideas of "short" and "long" is not due to intrinsic nature (svabhāva). This idea is also found in the Pali Nikāyas and Chinese Āgamas, in which the idea of relativity is expressed similarly: "That which is the element of light ... is seen to exist on account of darkness; that which is the element of good is seen to exist on account of bad; that which is the element of space is seen to exist on account of form."

Comparative philosophy

Hinduism

Nāgārjuna was fully acquainted with the classical Hindu philosophies of Samkhya and even the Vaiseshika. Nāgārjuna assumes a knowledge of the definitions of the sixteen categories as given in the Nyaya Sutras, the chief text of the Hindu Nyaya school, and wrote a treatise on the pramanas where he reduced the syllogism of five members into one of three. In the Vigrahavyavartani Kārika and Vaidalya Prakarana Nāgārjuna criticized the nyaya theory of pramanas (means of knowledge)

Mahāyāna Buddhism

Nāgārjuna was conversant with many of the Śrāvaka philosophies and with the Mahāyāna tradition; however, determining Nāgārjuna's affiliation with a specific nikāya is difficult, considering much of this material has been lost. If the most commonly accepted attribution of texts (that of Christian Lindtner) holds, then he was clearly a Māhayānist, but his philosophy holds assiduously to the Śrāvaka Tripiṭaka, and while he does make explicit references to Mahāyāna texts, he is always careful to stay within the parameters set out by the Śrāvaka canon.

Nāgārjuna may have arrived at his positions from a desire to achieve a consistent exegesis of the Buddha's doctrine as recorded in the āgamas. In the eyes of Nāgārjuna, the Buddha was not merely a forerunner, but the very founder of the Madhyamaka system. David Kalupahana sees Nāgārjuna as a successor to Moggaliputta-Tissa in being a champion of the middle-way and a reviver of the original philosophical ideals of the Buddha.

Pyrrhonism and its influence

See also: Similarities between Pyrrhonism and Buddhism

Because of the high degree of similarity between Nāgārjuna's philosophy and Pyrrhonism, particularly the surviving works of Sextus Empiricus, According to Thomas McEvilley this is because Nagarjuna was likely influenced by Greek Pyrrhonist texts imported into India. Pyrrho of Elis (c. 360 – c. 270 BCE), the founder of this school of sceptical philosophy, was himself influenced by Indian philosophy. Pyrrho travelled to India with Alexander the Great's army and studied with the gymnosophists. According to Christopher I. Beckwith, Pyrrho's teachings are based on Buddhism, because the Greek terms adiaphora, astathmēta and anepikrita in the Aristocles Passage resemble the Buddhist three marks of existence. According to him, the key innovative tenets of Pyrrho's scepticism were only found in Indian philosophy at the time and not in Greece. However, other scholars, such as Stephen Batchelor and Charles Goodman question Beckwith's conclusions about the degree of Buddhist influence on Pyrrho.

See also

References

Citations

  1. ^ Kalupahana 1994, p. 160.
  2. Walser (2005) p. 1-3.
  3. ^ Garfield, Jay L. (1995), The Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  4. Walser (2005) p. 3.
  5. Garfield (1995), p. 87.
  6. Walser (2005), p. 43.
  7. Mäll, Linnart. Studies in the Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā and other essays. 2005. p. 96
  8. ^ Walser (2005), p. 60.
  9. ^ Walser (2005), p. 61.
  10. ^ Walser (2005), p. 66.
  11. Walser (2005), p. 87.
  12. "Notes on the Nagarjunikonda Inscriptions", Dutt, Nalinaksha. The Indian Historical Quarterly 7:3 1931.09 pp. 633–53 "..Tibetan tradition which says that Nāgārjuna was born of a brahmin family of Amaravati."
  13. Geri Hockfield Malandra, Unfolding A Mandala: The Buddhist Cave Temples at Ellora, SUNY Press, 1993, p. 17
  14. Shōhei Ichimura, Buddhist Critical Spirituality: Prajñā and Śūnyatā, Motilal Banarsidass Publishers (2001), p. 67
  15. Bkra-śis-rnam-rgyal (Dwags-po Paṇ-chen), Takpo Tashi Namgyal, Mahamudra: The Quintessence of Mind and Meditation, Motilal Banarsidass Publishers (1993), p. 443
  16. Buddhist Text & Research Society (1895). Journal. Vol. 3–5. p. 16.
  17. Transaction - Indian Institute of World Culture, Issue 73, Indian Institute of World Culture, 1987, p. 5
  18. Walser (2005), pp. 69, 74.
  19. Walser (2005), p. 74.
  20. Berger, Douglas. "Nagarjuna (c. 150—c. 250)". Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved 2 May 2017.
  21. Walser (2005), pp. 75-76.
  22. Walser (2005), p. 78
  23. ^ Hirakawa, Akira. Groner, Paul. A History of Indian Buddhism: From Śākyamuni to Early Mahāyāna. 2007. p. 242
  24. Walser (2005), p. 72.
  25. K. Krishna Murthy (1977). Nāgārjunakoṇḍā: A Cultural Study. Concept Publishing Company. p. 1. OCLC 4541213.
  26. ^ Walser (2005), p. 69.
  27. Hsing Yun, Xingyun, Tom Manzo, Shujan Cheng Infinite Compassion, Endless Wisdom: The Practice of the Bodhisattva Path Buddha's Light Publishing Hacienda Heights California
  28. Lopez, Donald S. Jr. (28 May 2019). Seeing the Sacred in Samsara: An Illustrated Guide to the Eighty-Four Mahasiddhas. Shambhala Publications. p. 75. ISBN 978-0-8348-4212-0.
  29. See SN 12.15 Kaccayanagotta Sutta: To Kaccayana Gotta (on Right View) Archived 29 March 2013 at the Wayback Machine
  30. Kalupahana 1994, p. 161.
  31. ^ Kalupahana 1992, p. 120.
  32. Ruegg, David Seyfort, ''The Literature of the Madhyamaka School of Philosophy in India,'' Otto Harrassowitz Verlag, 1981, p. 8.
  33. Lindtner, C. (1982). Nagarjuniana: studies in the writings and philosophy of Nāgārjuna, Copenhagen: Akademisk forlag, p. 11.
  34. Ruegg, David Seyfort, ''The Literature of the Madhyamaka School of Philosophy in India,'' Otto Harrassowitz Verlag, 1981, p. 9.
  35. Fernando Tola & Carmen Dragonetti, Nagarjuna's Catustava, Journal of Indian Philosophy 13 (1):1-54 (1985)
  36. Ruegg, David Seyfort, ''The Literature of the Madhyamaka School of Philosophy in India,'' Otto Harrassowitz Verlag, 1981, p. 24.
  37. Ruegg, David Seyfort, ''The Literature of the Madhyamaka School of Philosophy in India,'' Otto Harrassowitz Verlag, 1981, p. 29.
  38. ^ Burton, David F. (2015). Emptiness Appraised: A Critical Study of Nagarjuna's Philosophy, pp. 13-14. Routledge.
  39. Westerhoff (2009), pp. 5-6.
  40. TRV Murti, Central philosophy of Buddhism, pp. 89–91
  41. Lindtner 1982, p. 10.
  42. Lindtner 1982, pp. 12-14.
  43. Ruegg, David Seyfort, ''The Literature of the Madhyamaka School of Philosophy in India,'' Otto Harrassowitz Verlag, 1981, pp. 28-46.
  44. Ruegg, David Seyfort, ''The Literature of the Madhyamaka School of Philosophy in India,'' Otto Harrassowitz Verlag, 1981, p. 27.
  45. Lindtner 1982, pp. 14-17.
  46. Lindtner 1982, pp. 11-12.
  47. Ruegg, David Seyfort, ''The Literature of the Madhyamaka School of Philosophy in India,'' Otto Harrassowitz Verlag, 1981, p. 32.
  48. Ruegg, David Seyfort, ''The Literature of the Madhyamaka School of Philosophy in India,'' Otto Harrassowitz Verlag, 1981, p. 28.
  49. Lindtner 1982, p. 11.
  50. S.Radhakrishnan, Indian philosophy Volume 1, p. 607
  51. Siderits, Mark; Katsura, Shoryu (2013). Nagarjuna's Middle Way: Mulamadhyamakakarika (Classics of Indian Buddhism). Wisdom Publications. pp. 175–76. ISBN 978-1-61429-050-6.
  52. Dumoulin, Heinrich (1998) Zen Buddhism: a history, India and China, Macmillan Publishing, 43
  53. Westerhoff, Jan. Nagarjuna's Madhyamaka: A Philosophical Introduction.
  54. Siderits, Mark. Nagarjuna as anti-realist, Journal of Indian Philosophy December 1988, Volume 16, Issue 4, pp 311-325.
  55. Yìn Shùn, An Investigation into Emptiness (Kōng zhī Tànjìu 空之探究) (1985)
  56. Choong, The Notion of Emptiness in Early Buddhism (1999)
  57. Medawachchiye Dhammajothi Thero, The Concept of Emptiness in Pali Literature
  58. Shi huifeng: “Dependent Origination = Emptiness”—Nāgārjuna’s Innovation?
  59. Garfield, Jay. Empty Words: Buddhist Philosophy and Cross-cultural Interpretation, p. 91.
  60. ^ Siderits, Mark, On the Soteriological Significance of Emptiness, Contemporary Buddhism, Vol. 4, No. 1, 2003.
  61. Garfield, J. L. (2002). Empty words, pp. 38–39
  62. Kalupahana 1986.
  63. Thanissaro Bhikkhu (1997). SN 12.15 Kaccayanagotta Sutta: To Kaccayana Gotta (on Right View)
  64. A.K. Warder, A Course in Indian Philosophy. Motilal Banarsidass Publ., 1998, pp. 55–56
  65. For the full text of both versions with analysis see pp. 192–95 of Choong Mun-keat, The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism: A comparative study based on the Sutranga portion of the Pali Samyutta-Nikaya and the Chinese Samyuktagama; Harrassowitz Verlag, Weisbaden, 2000.
  66. Kalupahana 1986, p. 232.
  67. Garfield, Jay L (April 1994). "Dependent Arising and the Emptiness of Emptiness: Why Did Nāgārjuna Start with Causation?". Philosophy East and West. 44 (2): 219–50. doi:10.2307/1399593. JSTOR 1399593. S2CID 51932733.
  68. Kalupahana 1975, 96-97: "In the Nikayas the quote is found at SN 2.150.".
  69. TRV Murti, The central philosophy of Buddhism, p. 92
  70. Christian Lindtner, Master of Wisdom. Dharma Publishing 1997, p. 324.
  71. David Kalupahana, Mulamadhyamakakarika of Nāgārjuna: The Philosophy of the Middle Way. Motilal Banarsidass, 2005, pp. 2, 5.
  72. Adrian Kuzminski, Pyrrhonism: How the Ancient Greeks Reinvented Buddhism 2008
  73. Thomas McEvilley, The Shape of Ancient Thought 2002 pp 499-505
  74. Beckwith 2015, p. 28.
  75. Beckwith 2015, p. 221.
  76. Stephen Batchelor "Greek Buddha: Pyrrho's encounter with early Buddhism in central Asia", Contemporary Buddhism, 2016, pp 195-215
  77. Charles Goodman, "Neither Scythian nor Greek: A Response to Beckwith's Greek Buddha and Kuzminski's "Early Buddhism Reconsidered"", Philosophy East and West, University of Hawai'i Press Volume 68, Number 3, July 2018 pp. 984-1006

Sources

  • Beckwith, Christopher I. (2015). Greek Buddha: Pyrrho's Encounter with Early Buddhism in Central Asia (PDF). Princeton University Press. ISBN 9781400866328.
  • Garfield, Jay L. (1995), The Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Garfield, Jay L. and Graham Priest (2003), “Nāgārjuna and the Limits of Thought”, Philosophy East and West 53 (January 2003): 1-21.
  • Jones, Richard H. (2014), Nagarjuna: Buddhism's Most Important Philosopher, 2nd ed. New York: Jackson Square Books.
  • Kalupahana, David J. (1975), Causality: The Central Philosophy of Buddhism, The University Press of Hawaii, ISBN 9780824802981
  • Kalupahana, David J. (1986), The Philosophy of the Middle Way, Albany: SUNY Press, ISBN 9780887061486
  • Kalupahana, David J. (1992), The Principles of Buddhist Psychology, Delhi: Sri Satguru Publications
  • Kalupahana, David J. (1994), A history of Buddhist philosophy, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers Private Limited, ISBN 9780824814021
  • Lamotte, E., Le Traite de la Grande Vertu de Sagesse, Vol I (1944), Vol II (1949), Vol III (1970), Vol IV (1976), Institut Orientaliste: Louvain-la-Neuve.
  • Lindtner, Christian (1982). Nagarjuniana: Studies in the Writings and Philosophy of Nāgārjuna Akademisk forlag.
  • Mabbett, Ian, (1998), “The problem of the historical Nagarjuna revisited”, Journal of the American Oriental Society, 118(3): 332–46.
  • Murti, T. R. V. (1955), The Central Philosophy of Buddhism. George Allen and Unwin, London. 2nd edition: 1960.
  • Murty, K. Satchidananda (1971), Nagarjuna. National Book Trust, New Delhi. 2nd edition: 1978.
  • Ramanan, K. Venkata (1966), Nāgārjuna's Philosophy. Charles E. Tuttle, Vermont and Tokyo. Reprint: Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi. 1978.
  • Ruegg, D. Seyfort (1981), The literature of the Madhyamaka school of philosophy in India (A History of Indian literature), Harrassowitz, ISBN 978-3-447-02204-0.
  • Sastri, H. Chatterjee, ed. (1977), The Philosophy of Nāgārjuna as contained in the Ratnāvalī. Part I . Saraswat Library, Calcutta.
  • Streng, Frederick J. (1967), Emptiness: A Study in Religious Meaning. Nashville: Abingdon Press.
  • Tuck, Andrew P. (1990), Comparative Philosophy and the Philosophy of Scholarship: on the Western Interpretation of Nāgārjuna, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Walser, Joseph (2002), Nagarjuna And The Ratnavali: New Ways To Date An Old Philosopher, Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 25 (1-2), 209-262
  • Walser, Joseph (2005), Nāgārjuna in Context: Mahāyāna Buddhism and Early Indian Culture. New York: Columbia University Press.
  • Westerhoff, Jan (2010), The Dispeller of Disputes: Nāgārjuna's Vigrahavyāvartanī. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Westerhoff, Jan (2009), Nāgārjuna's Madhyamaka. A Philosophical Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Wedemeyer, Christian K. (2007), Āryadeva's Lamp that Integrates the Practices: The Gradual Path of Vajrayāna Buddhism according to the Esoteric Community Noble Tradition. New York: AIBS/Columbia University Press.

External links

Indian philosophy
Topics
Ancient
Āstika
Nāstika
Medieval
Modern
Texts
Philosophers
Concepts
Bodhisattvas
Major
Chinese
Vajrayana
Other
   Topics in Buddhism   
Foundations
The Buddha
Bodhisattvas
Disciples
Key concepts
Cosmology
Branches
Practices
Nirvana
Monasticism
Major figures
Texts
Countries
History
Philosophy
Culture
Miscellaneous
Comparison
Lists
Categories: