Negative Dialectics in Nāgārjuna's Thought as a Critique of Substantialist Ontology in Contemporary Western Philosophy
Abstract
This research examines the negative dialectic method in Nāgārjuna's thought as a philosophical approach to dismantling the ontological assumption of permanent existence (svabhāva), which is dominant in the Western philosophical tradition and tends to be essentialist and individualistic. This study was conducted as a response to the existential and social crises that arise from dualistic and non-relational ways of understanding reality. Using a qualitative approach, this study analyzes Nāgārjuna's key texts, namely the Mūlamādhyamakakārikā and Vigrahavyāvartani, through close reading techniques and critical discourse analysis to reveal the structure of the arguments and the philosophical assumptions embedded within them. The results show that Nāgārjuna's negative dialectic consistently rejects intrinsic existence and demonstrates that all phenomena are interdependent. This understanding gives rise to a compassion-based ethical perspective (karuṇā) as a logical implication of emptiness (śūnyatā), encouraging the formation of a more relational and empathetic consciousness. The implications of this research lie in its contribution to the development of a global ethic based on interdependence, which can be applied in social policy, education, and environmental conservation. This research asserts that emptiness is not nihilism but rather a philosophical foundation for building collective solidarity. The originality of this research lies in its attempt to connect Nāgārjuna's classical thought with contemporary challenges in a cross-cultural manner. This approach expands the role of negative dialectics as a tool for critiquing and transforming social consciousness towards a more inclusive and compassionate ethics and politics.
References
Beck, U., & Levy, D. (2013). Cosmopolitanized Nations: Re-imagining Collectivity in World Risk Society. Theory, Culture & Society, 30(2), 3–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276412457223
Beckwith, C. I. (2015). Greek Buddha: Pyrrho’s Encounter with Early Buddhism in Central Asia. Princeton: University Press.
Bilimoria, P., Mohanty, J. N., Rayner, A., Powers, J., Phillips, S., King, R., & Chapple, C. K. (2017). History of Indian Philosophy. New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315666792
Blunden, A. (2012). Non-linear Processes and the dialectic.
Brincat, S. (2020). The Cosmology of Mādhyamaka Buddhism and Its World of Deep Relationalism. In In Theology and World Politics (pp. 105–128). Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37602-4_5
Brincat, S. (2021). Ancient Indian Dialectics, in Probings and Re-probings: Essays in Marxian Reawakening. Delhi: Aakar Books.
Brincat, S. (2024). Dialectics in Mādhyamaka Buddhism and What It Can Teach International Relations.
Brummett, B. (2018). Techniques of close reading. London: Sage Publications.
Clark, J. (2008). On Being None With Nature: Nagarjuna and the Ecology of Emptiness. Capitalism Nature Socialism, 19(4), 6–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/10455750802559582
Coseru, C. (2015). Perceiving reality: Consciousness, intentionality, and cognition in Buddhist philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dastur, F. (2024). Reframing Reality: Nāgārjuna’s Philosophy of Emptiness and Its Ethical Implications. Smaratungga: Jurnal Of Education And Buddhist Studies, 4(2), 117–128.
Divino, F. (2025). Language and Consciousness in Early Buddhist Thought: On the Early Reflections on the Theme of Language and the Perception of Reality in the Pāli Canon. Philosophies, 10(2), 31. https://doi.org/10.3390/philosophies10020031
Dodgson, J. E. (2017). About Research: Qualitative Methodologies. Journal of Human Lactation, 33(2), 355–358. https://doi.org/10.1177/0890334417698693
Fairclough, N., & Fairclough, I. (2015). Textual analysis. In Routledge handbook of interpretive political science (pp. 186–198). London: Routledge.
Fernández, G. (2008). Nagarjuna and the dialectic of conditioned origin. Pensamiento, 64(242), 865–887.
Gangadean, A. K. (1979). Formal Ontology and the Dialectical Transformation of Consciousness. Philosophy East and West, 29(1), 21. https://doi.org/10.2307/1398896
Garfield, J. L. (1995). The fundamental wisdom of the middle way: Nagarjuna’s Mulamadhyamakakarika. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Garfield, J. L. (2001). Empty words: Buddhist philosophy and cross-cultural interpretation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Garfield, J. L. (2013). Dependent arising and the emptiness of emptiness: why did nācārjuna start with causation? In Metaphysics (pp. 145–176). London: Routledge.
Garfield, J. L. (2014). Engaging Buddhism: Why it matters to philosophy. Oxford University Press.
Garfield, J. L. (2022). Buddhist ethics: A philosophical exploration. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gleig, A. (2019). American dharma: Buddhism beyond modernity. London: Yale University Press.
Gullette, A. (2020). Nagarjuna’s Negative Dialectic And the Significance of Emptiness.
Hanh, T. N. (2008). The heart of Buddha’s teaching. New York: Random House.
Hashi, H. (2015). Phenomenology and Buddhist Philosophy on Embodied Cognition. Dialogue and Universalism, 19(3), 179–197.
Ho, C. (2010). Nāgārjuna’s Critique of Language. Asian Philosophy, 20(2), 159–174. https://doi.org/10.1080/09552367.2010.484952
Kalupahana, D. J. (1969). The Philosophy of the Buddha. New York: Capricorn Books.
Kalupahana, D. J. (1986). Nagarjuna: The philosophy of the middle way. New York: State University of New York Press.
Kumara, J. D. A. (2024). Kant and Nāgārjuna: A hermeneutic inquiry into transcendental aesthetics. Journal of Multidisciplinary and Translational Research, 9(11), 59–67.
Loy, D. (2019). Ecodharma: Buddhist teachings for the ecological crisis. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Macor, J. C. (2024). Not Even Absent: Dependent Origination, Emptiness, and the Two Truths in the Thought of Nāgārjuna. Journal of Indian Philosophy, 52(3), 161–179. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10781-024-09563-x
McEvilley, T. (2012). The shape of ancient thought: Comparative studies in Greek and Indian philosophies. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Mey, G. (2022). Qualitative Methodology. Jerman: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26248-8_22-1
Mohammed, A. A. (2024). Interculturality In Eastern And Western Philosophy Of Science. Ethiopian Journal Of Governance And Development, 3(1), 25–43.
Mukhopadhyay, A. (2019). Quantum Reality and the Theory of Śūnya. In Quantum Reality and Theory of Śūnya (pp. 47–89). Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-1957-0_5
Murti, T. R. V. (2013). The central philosophy of Buddhism: a study of the Madhyamika system. London: Routledge.
Nāgārjuna. (1995). Mūlamadhyamakākarikā: The fundamental wisdom of the middle way (T. & C. (JL Garfield, Ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
Nāgārjuna. (2005). The Dialectical Method of Nāgārjuna: Vigrahavyāvartani (A. K. Trans. K. Bhattacharya, E.H. Johnston, Ed.). Delhi: Motilal Barnarsidass.
Nehring, D., & Frawley, A. (2020). Mindfulness as a self-help fad. In The Routledge International Handbook of Global Therapeutic Cultures. London: Routledge.
Ollman, B. (2003). Dance of the dialectic: Steps in Marx’s method. Chicago: University of Illinois Press.
Payne, R. K. (2016). Mindfulness and the moral imperative for the self to improve the self. In Handbook of mindfulness: Culture, context, and social engagement. Cham: Springer.
Puhakka, K. (2003). Awakening from the spell of reality: Lessons from Nagarjuna. In Encountering Buddhism: Western psychology and Buddhist teachings. New York: State University of New York Press.
Robinson, R. H. (1957). Some Logical Aspects of Nagarjuna’s System. Philosophy East and West, 6(4), 291. https://doi.org/10.2307/1397476
Shiyan, I., Shiyan, O., Bidell, T. R., Brandão, A., Procter, H., Mascolo, M. F., … Shevelukhin, S. (2024). Can Dialectical Thinking be an Antidote to Dogma?: A Conversation among Authors. In The Routledge International Handbook of Dialectical Thinking (pp. 497–505). London: Routledge.
Siderits, M. (2017). Buddhism as philosophy: An introduction. London: Routledge.
Stcherbatsky, T. (1965). The Conception of Buddhist Nirvana. Hague: Mouton & Co.
Tillemans, T. J. F. (2009). How Do Mādhyamikas Think?: Notes on Jay Garfield, Graham Priest, and Paraconsistency. In Pointing at the Moon (pp. 83–97). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195381559.003.0007
Tubali, S. (2023). Nāgārjuna, Śaṅkara, Krishnamurti: Negation as a Spiritual Exercise. In The Transformative Philosophical Dialogue: From Classical Dialogues to Jiddu Krishnamurti’s Method. Cham: Springer.
Van Dijk, T. A. (2015). Critical Discourse Analysis. In The Handbook of Discourse Analysis (pp. 466–485). New Jersey: Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118584194.ch22
Varela, F. J., Thompson, E., & Rosch, E. (2017). The embodied mind, revised edition: Cognitive science and human experience. Cambridge: MIT press.
Wagner, H.-G. (2025). Bridging Worlds: Exploring the Ethical Synergy Between Buddhism and Science. Subhasita: Journal of Buddhist and Religious Studies, 2(2), 107–120. https://doi.org/10.53417/subhasita.142
Wall, J. D., Stahl, B. C., & Salam, A. F. (2015). Critical Discourse Analysis as a Review Methodology: An Empirical Example. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 37(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.03711
Walser, J. (2015). Nāgārjuna. In The Buddhist World. London: Routledge.
Westerhoff, J. (2009). Nagarjuna’s Madhyamaka: A philosophical introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Westerhoff, J. (2010). The dispeller of disputes: Nāgārjuna’s Vigrahavyāvartanī. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Westerhoff, J. (2019). Nāgārjuna and the Philosophy of Language. Journal of Indian Philosophy, 47(4), 779–793. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10781-017-9341-3
Williams, P. (2000). Studies in the Philosophy of the Bodhicaryāvatāra: Altruism and Reality. New Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers.
Copyright (c) 2025 Shannon Brincat
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
