Q. and A. on Nagarjuna and the MMK

 Q.  Nagarjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā contains various refutations of causation, change, "self-existence"/essence/svabh̄ava, and that perceptions and conceptions thereof are illusory and there is only "thusness"/tathata. For example, his tetralemma about causation comes to the conclusion that a thing could neither arise from something identical nor from something different, nor from both or neither (I will ignore the last one as I'm not sure anyone actually believes something can be derived from nothing). Therefore causation cannot actually take place. This is not only an attack on causation but also essence. The Platonist position in this framework, I suppose, would be closest to 3): the effect of a cause is both identical and different from that which is caused yet still possesses a certain self-existence/essence (we do not claim that it possesses independent existence other than the One who is beyond existence, nor do I think any spiritual system does). To Nagarjuna this position is absurd - how could an essence that belongs wholly to itself and is by nature eternal be caused and cause something posterior to it in turn, and, in the case of the eternal soul, undergo any sort of change? How do we square away the ascent of the soul from bodily existence to the Absolute if it is by nature unchangeable, especially since the intermediate - nous, the Divine Mind - is itself atemporal and the soul would have to reside there before finally rejoining the One? On a related note, if the soul once fully identified with the One then how could re-joining the One be permanent? This implies the state it had before its "fall" from the One was in some ways imperfect but the state it acquired after rejoining the One permanently is more perfect or absolutely hyper-perfect. All of these issues can be extrapolated I think from Nagarjuna's MMK, and that, given all these contradictions, it seems erroneous to think in terms of essence, change and causation as Nagarjuna claims.

Now, let me state that I don't believe Mahayana Buddhism actually escapes these conundrums. There's a not-so-subtle sophistry in their claim that while conventional reality is illusory we can still use it to arrive at "thusness", as this implies that the illusion somehow participates in "ultimate reality", meaning instead of being totally and fully illusory there are degrees of reality - this is no different from what we call ontology, in fact it mirrors the Plotinian model of reality. The conventional reality we perceive, instead of being totally illusory, is therefore but a mirror image of actual reality. Of course, at the level of the Absolute there is no causation, change, movement, difference, etc. However, if we follow Nagarjuna's logic to its actual conclusion (instead of the sophistic escape of the two truths doctrine) there would actually be no way for anything to arrive anywhere meaningful. In short, Nagarjuna's conclusions are as absurd, if not moreso, then that which he refutes. 

All this infers that Nagarjuna's conclusions must in some important ways be erroneous and that, at the very least, Mahayana Buddhists do not truly believe what the MMK states and escape from their own philosophical foundations by means of sophistry and rhetorical sleights of hand. However, it is just that: inference and not a direct confrontation with Nagarjuna's claims. The actual truth behind the MMK, contra to what Nagarjuna himself claims, would be a sort of staticness and an "absolute un-truth" that we could never hope to escape. The only other option would be a sort of ontology and it is telling Mahayana Buddhism sneakily opted for the latter. However, I find myself unsatisfied by this indirect refutation and at unease. I believe there must be some way to directly confront Nagarjuna's reasoning instead of merely pointing out the absurdity of its consequences.

(Original question abbreviated and edited.)

A.  I wouldn't worry about all this stuff.  These concerns are not necessary and are not based on valid assumptions.  Nagarjuna's/the MMK's analysis or 'logic', along with the doubts that it makes you give rise to, is based on invalid, realist/nominalist, non-idealist, and unexamined premises that limit reality and the possibilities and explanations just to the lowest phenomenal level, which has minimal reality.  These questions and supposed contradictions about causation, change, etc. could only arise if the attempt to explain causation, etc. is limited to just the lowest plane of phenomenal and supposedly material things.  Causation and phenomenal spatial and temporal change are readily understood without contradiction as the projection of the order and structure of nous onto or into the lower level of non-being, as the life of soul in time and space unwilling to take the whole of nous all at once.  There is only, as Plotinus puts it in Ennead 3.8, contemplation--stronger and weaker, fuller and less full, complete and incomplete, clearer and more obscure, but still only contemplation. The One/Good is the completely full clear contemplation; the life of the most degraded souls is the weakest most incomplete and dark contemplation.  The ascent, and also the descent, of the soul is just a change in the state of contemplation, so there is no problem of an eternal essence undergoing some sort of change analogous to a sort of physical change.  Also, it is not like the soul was a physical part of the One before its fall and then physically rejoins the One, as the language of your doubt seems to tacitly suppose.  The potential for not knowing is present within knowing, the potential for darkness is present within light, for non-being within being.  When the soul completes contemplation and fully knows and becomes the light, the not knowing and darkness and non-being is gone.  You don't have to worry about it recurring.  All this is actually kind of ineffable and only really known in contemplative ascetic experience, since all this discussion and questions and process only occurs at the lowest least real level.

Nagarjuna/the MMK is maybe just being what the Platonic dialogs call an "antilogikos" or a "sophist taking refuge in the darkness of non-being".  Perhaps, you might want to review the discussion about not becoming "misologikos" that refers to "antilogikos" people that are pleased within themselves when they turn everything up and down to make it seem that no definite conclusions are possible in the Phaedo at 89b-90d.  (Actually, it wouldn't be a bad idea to read the whole Phaedo carefully say 50 or 100 times!).  Other dialogs also deal with this problem and the kind of difficulties that the antilogikoi and sophists of the world cause.  You also may want to eventually read through all of the Enneads, even though this is a big project and you won't likely understand much of what you read for a long time, as Plotinus deals with the kinds of concerns you have.  You don't have to be able to understand everything at the discursive level before proceeding with the ascesis.  Indeed, it is impossible to do so.  And being and working as a celibate, vegan, teetotalling, etc. ascetic practicing contemplation is as necessary for coming to even a discursive level understanding of these things as racking your brains over Nagarjuna's attempts at logical contortion.

I don't know if it will be of any help or interest, but here is a link with an added introduction of the original sort of non-sectarian version of one of my pieces that perhaps you have seen in the specific Platonist form that I was asked several years ago to write for an old English language Indian magazine:   https://www.csp.indica.in/an-indo-hellenistic-understanding-of-contemplative-asceticism-eric-s-fallick/

Perhaps, it will be some consolation to you to see that there is a great deal one can do to proceed on the Path and that the essentials of doing so are clear even before necessarily resolving all the possible conceptual doubts that may arise on reading the different texts of the different systems.

Platonist Contemplative Asceticism in the Present Day

Platonist Contemplative Asceticism in the Present Day

By Eric S. Fallick

We find ourselves separated from the One, the Good and trapped in the cycle of repeated birth and death in individuated sensate existence in space-time, in genesis, in becoming, with all its attendant and intrinsic misery and pain. Under these circumstances, the only at all sane and joyful thing to do is to strive single-mindedly and exclusively, as much as possible, to attain release from the cycle of reincarnation, liberation, and re-union with the Good, to re-become the One. How is this to be done? There is only one way, that of thorough renunciation of the world and exclusive devotion to asceticism and contemplation, as incomprehensible and incredible and uncongenial as this may be to the deluded worldlings of this modern brave new world where the whole idea of true renunciation and contemplative asceticism has almost been completely lost and so few are left who really understand and are willing to follow the Path.

What does this renunciation and practice entail? There are some essential and indispensable minimum requirements. Celibacy, literally and completely and in its fullest and broadest sense, is a first requirement and dividing line from the worldly life. Essential also is vegetarianism, or, preferably, veganism. This includes not only not eating any animals or anything derived from animals, but also non-harming in all respects, including not wearing leather, not using any animal products, not killing insects, and, in general, not harming or killing any sentient beings at all, human or animal, in any way as much as possible. Also necessary is complete teetotalling or abstinence from alcohol or any other intoxicants or intoxicating non-medicinal drugs of any sort. Complete honesty in all one’s speech and dealings is, of course, necessary, as contrary as it actually runs to the way of the world. One also should not earn one’s living or gain necessary worldly survival items by any means that harms other beings physically, morally, or spiritually. Being completely devoted to spiritual practice, one should avoid attending worldly entertainments, watching television and movies, etc. One should also avoid attending worldly social events, engaging in idle worldly talk, etc. as much as possible in one’s individual circumstances. In general, the principle is to be totally and exclusively devoted to and engaged in spiritual practice and study, beyond what is minimally necessary to maintain this psycho-physical existence until we can be rid of it in final liberation, and to avoid all worldly things and activities and engagements. The individual needs to work out the exact details of what to do in each situation and in their own particular circumstances with understanding, sincerity, and discernment and in accordance with the essential principle of renunciation and the desire to be solely devoted to attaining release and re-union. An extensive or exhaustive list of individual detailed rules is unnecessary and ineffective and only leads to legalism and self-deception and obsessive-compulsiveness.

Established and continually further establishing oneself in full renunciation as the practice progresses, doing the best one can and always working for the renunciant ideal in accordance with the necessities of one’s circumstances and minimum psycho-physical survival, study and meditative reading is also an important and valuable part of the Path. The dialogues of Plato (starting with and especially the Phaedo) and the Enneads of Plotinus (and, allegorically understood, the Odyssey of Homer), supplemented by such works as the Dissertations of Maximus of Tyre, Boethius’ Consolation of Philosophy, etc. are the principal texts for reading and study, but much can also be learned from the different texts of the different systems. In general, I think that wide study of and working knowledge of the different ascetic, renunciant, monastic, contemplative, and mystical spiritual systems of the world is quite helpful and useful, especially in the circumstances of the present time. To be able to read the essential texts in the original Ancient Greek, though a non-trivial endeavor to say the least, is also helpful as translations cannot be relied upon and are always missing something.
With renunciation and knowledge, one can devote oneself to the actual practice of formal sitting in contemplation. This is the central practice and focus of the contemplative ascetic and the core and thrust of the effort towards the One and out of becoming, and is how the contemplative ascetic spends the greater part of his time apart from all the necessary activities for psycho-physical survival. I have described Platonist contemplation practice in detail in The Practice of Contemplation and given beginning instructions in Q. and A.’s, including beginning meditation instructions. It is important to have a thorough knowledge and understanding of the practice of contemplation and of the texts on contemplation.

Hopefully, a reasonably clear picture has been given of the proper renunciant and contemplative ascetic life and what it entails. It is the life that is engaged with and involved with the world and worldly activities of any and every sort only to the minimum extent absolutely necessary to maintain the psycho-physical organism (and that always done only strictly in accord with the principles of morality, honesty, and non-harming) and totally and solely and sincerely devoted exclusively in intention and concern and, as much as possible, in deed to spiritual, ascetic, and contemplative practice to attain liberation from becoming and re-union with the One/Good. Something, however, more may be said about its practical implementation in the circumstances of the present day. People, as another symptom of becoming, genesis, and the delusion associated with it, tend to see renunciation and contemplative asceticism in terms of institutions, institutionalized monasticism, rituals, initiations, titles, uniforms, merit badges, etc. This is, of course, particularly the case in terms of organized, institutional cenobitical monasticism. Eremtical monasticism has always tended less in this direction, has usually been the original less structured form from which cenobitical monasticism has eventually evolved and has often later even been associated with a rejection of institutionalized forms and an attempt to return to original ideals, but the same tendencies tend to come in in people’s perceptions here also. In traditional societies, there has usually been at least some sort of niche or place and respect for renunciants and eremitical renunciants, but this is largely gone in the modern world. Platonism, while being the purest, most austere, most rigorous, and most otherworldly of renunciant and ascetic systems, has never had an institutionalized monastic structure and never become an institutionalized religion for the many. Thus, each Platonist contemplative ascetic and renunciant has always had to work out the particular and practical circumstances and logistical arrangements of his eremitical renunciant contemplative ascetic life and practice on his own, or with whatever few fellow travelers he might in some cases be fortunate enough to find, on a sort of ad hoc basis following and in strict adherence to the renunciant principles such as outlined above with care and discernment relying on his own developed understanding in his particular time and place and circumstances. He has often or generally had to do this without any of the financial, material, logistical, moral, social, psychological, or emotional support or props of the monastic institutions, cenobitical or eremitical, and institutionalized systems. Thus, this may still be done in implementing eremitical contemplative asceticism and renunciation in the adverse and unsupported time and place and circumstances of the present day.

In the atomized, anonymous, urban modern world, if one has sufficient devotion, determination, resolve, sincerity, understanding, and discernment, it is possible to practice devotedly and fully as an eremitical renunciant and contemplative ascetic alone and incognito and without support in the midst of the city. One can try to find a job or work of right livelihood to just earn the necessary minimum subsistence level income with a minimum of distraction. One can try to find simple minimum housing to rent even if it means sharing with worldlings while not doing anything they do and doing only one’s contemplative renunciant life. One can obtain and prepare simple food in a manner requiring a minimum amount of time and attention, considering only maintenance of the body and health, not taste. One can be purely celibate surrounded by women and pornographic and sex-obsessed society and culture. One can be vegan and non-harming surrounded by inter-species cannibals and killers. One can be teetotaling with drinkers and smokers and so forth all around. One can abstain completely from entertainments, including the ubiquitous electronic entertainments, among those who know little else. And so forth--one can be solely concerned with transcending this world and with the higher supra-sensory realities among worldlings who know nothing beyond the senses and the fleeting phantoms of this world. It is, of course, very difficult to do this, especially without any kind of support at all and especially in the procrustean modern society that has no place or respect for renunciants and presents all sorts of obstacles and difficulties to and discrimination against any who don’t fit into the norms of society. It presents all sorts of logistical headaches and great emotional and psychological hardship and loneliness (as the true renunciant life always does), but it is, at present, the only feasible and spiritually effective and viable option for pursuing the true wholly dedicated Platonist contemplative ascetic way and release from becoming, and this is all that really matters. As the Ancient Greek saying goes, “noble and beautiful things are difficult”.

Again, the principle, whatever the particular details of practical implementation for a given individual in a given time and place, is to totally renounce this world and the things of the senses as much as possible outwardly and inwardly in all respects and solely and exclusively as much as possible devote oneself in every way, in intention, desire and deed, to striving for re-union with the One, the Good, and release from becoming, genesis. One must turn both the love and eye of the soul completely around from this world of the senses and becoming to the One or the Good and bring all one’s life and actions and attitudes around in accord with this to the exact opposite of that of the worldlings and the world around one. This must be done even while all the time attending to the burdensome necessities of maintaining the psycho-physical organism until we can be rid of it and even if one is without any support at all--financial, physical, logistical, moral, spiritual, emotional, social, institutional, or psychological--in the quest. There simply is no other possible way to go and the thought of just wallowing in becoming in this and future births like all the worldlings around one cannot even be entertained even for an instant.

Ⓒ 2019 Eric S. Fallick

Purification of the Unalterable Soul from "Matter"

The Platonic/Plotinian teaching is pure idealism, even if it is expressed in a vocabulary and language that we may not immediately understand as such. (Incidentally, 'matter' is a very misleading translation for the Greek hule in Plotinus. In Plotinus, it carries none of the connotations of 'matter' in the modern physical sense, but is rather the extremity or principle, so to speak, of non-being, of darkness, of nescience. I have toyed with the idea of using 'anti-stuff' as a translation for hule.) There is only knowing, experience, 'mind', 'consciousness' or, as Plotinus puts it, contemplation. All is, as Plotinus says (Ennead 3.8), contemplation. The One is complete pure knowing or contemplation beyond knowing/contemplation. Nous is already lesser, incomplete, impure, adulterated to some extent but still unified knowing/contemplation having already been mixed, so to speak, to a certain extent with nescience/darkness/non-being, which Plotinus sometimes refers to as noetic hule/'matter'. Soul is knowing/contemplation mixed to the greatest extent with nescience/darkness/non-being to the point that it appears as individuated as our souls and in space-time and sense-perception, etc. It is still, though, the same knowing/contemplation, in its reality unchanged and unalterable and indestructible, as knowing/contemplation is still only in itself purely knowing/contemplation as such and can't be anything else, but is now turned or looking in the direction of the extremity of nescience/darkness/non-being and thus no longer knows itself or complete pure knowing/contemplation. The soul, thus, needs to turn around back to, to redirect back its attention to, to regain the complete pure knowing/contemplation of and that is the One, to re-become that complete pure knowing/contemplation without any admixture of nescience/darkness/non-being. Thus, renunciation and asceticism is of the very essence of the purification process, and also is not just of instrumental value but remains of the very essence of the fuller knowing/contemplation state(s), since involvement in and pursuit of the world of diversified individuated sense data in space-time more than is absolutely necessary, which is what worldly life is, is the very fact of looking in the direction of darkness, of only knowing/contemplating in a very darkened, impure, incomplete, ignorant way--being in worldly life is by definition knowing/contemplating/seeing the darkness and non-being of sense perception. The practice of purification, on the other hand, is more and more only seeing/knowing/contemplating the Forms and Nous and then the One/Good, and thus being in the very state of Nous and eventually the One Themselves, and thus obviously involves knowing/contemplating/seeing worldly life and its things of the senses less and less. The One is, of course, always there and unchanged, but we don't know it without turning away from the sense world, which is really non-being, in both life and mind, and turning the imperishable knowing of the soul back to the One.