Filed in Mahayana, Tibetan

Nagarjuna's Verses from the Center

Stephen Batchelor

Wisdom Collection

To access the content within the Wisdom Collection,
join Tricycle as a Supporting or Sustaining Member

Nagrjuna recevies the teachings from the nagasAlthough Nagarjuna is arguably the most important figure in Buddhism after the Buddha himself, very little is known about him. All that can be said with any certainty is that he lived at some time around the second century C.E. in India and is the author of a Sanskrit work of 448 verses, divided into twenty-seven chapters entitled: Verses from the Center (Mulamadhyamakakarika). The first known account of Nagarjuna’s life was composed from Indian sources by Kumarajiva, the Central Asian scholar who translated Verses from the Center from Sanskrit into Chinese in 409 C.E.

According to Kumarajiva, Nagarjuna was born at the foot of an Arjuna tree to a brahmin family in South India. He excelled in the traditional religious and secular subjects studied by the Indian priestly caste and by the age of twenty was renowned for his learning. But the sensual side of his character was unfulfilled. He and three friends learned from a sorcerer the art of making themselves invisible. They entered the private quarters in the royal palace and seduced the women. When the king learned of this, he ordered his soldiers to occupy the palace. By aiming their swords above the footprints left by the invisible men, the soldiers were able to kill Nagarjuna’s three companions. Nagarjuna was spared only by standing close to the king.

The brush with death impressed on the young man how craving leads to anguish. He escaped from the palace and fled to the mountains, where he became a monk and studied the teachings of the Buddha. Within three months he gained mastery of the early canonical texts but found they did not adequately answer his deepest questions. He then met an old monk who introduced him to the doctrines of Mahayana Buddhism.

The Mahayana (“Great Vehicle”) was, at the time of Nagarjuna, a newly emerging movement of thought and practice whose advocates criticized the spiritual detachment and social isolation of those monks who claimed to represent the early Buddhist tradition. Such people, they claimed, placed too great an emphasis on the attainment of their own liberation and ignored the plight of the world. The Mahayanists took as their ideal the bodhisattva: one who seeks awakening not merely for his or her own sake but in order to be able to liberate others from suffering. Followers of this movement believed that such ideas were not new but had been expounded by the historical Buddha. The discourses in which Gautama taught Mahayana doctrines had, however, only been preserved in non-human realms. Now, they maintained, the time was ripe for their dissemination on earth.

Nagarjuna was sufficiently inspired by the vision of these teachings that he left his mountain retreat and wandered through India in search of other Mahayana discourses. In the course of his travels, he refined his dialectical skills against Buddhists and non-Buddhists alike. He defeated those who challenged him in debate and became so convinced of his superior understanding that he finally declared: “I have no master.” He founded an order based on his own understanding and then devised a rule for his disciples to follow. It was at this point that a naga, an intelligent subaquatic serpent, had compassion for him and guided him to the bed of a lake where the Mahayana Wisdom Discourses entrusted to the nagas by the Buddha were stored.

The Wisdom Discourses (Prajnaparamita Sutras) are a series of inspirational dialogues between the Buddha and his leading disciples, which explore at length the metaphysical implications of emptiness. Through studying these texts Nagarjuna was convinced of the centrality of emptiness in the process of awakening. On returning to India from the naga realms, he then composed Verses from the Center and other commentaries on the Wisdom Discourses, thus accelerating the spread of Mahayana Buddhism.

Nagarjuna’s renown was such that he was invited by a king to participate in a contest of magical powers with a brahmin scholar. The brahmin created a lake, seated himself on a giant lotus flower in the center of it and mocked Nagarjuna for being stranded on solid ground like an ox. In response, Nagarjuna conjured up a white elephant that crushed the lotus seat and tossed the brahmin back onto dry land. The brahmin admitted defeat but made a wish that Nagarjuna were dead. Nagarjuna locked himself inside a room. The next day a worried disciple broke down the door. A cicada flew out. The room was empty.

Kumarajiva’s biography appears to weave two entirely different versions of Nagarjuna’s life into a single narrative. The first version depicts Nagarjuna as a passionate trickster figure with an exceptional critical intelligence, who is unwilling to compromise his own search for truth by settling for the dogmas of either Brahmanism or Buddhism. His intention to found his own order and rule rings true because it is hard to see what sectarian interests would have been served by adding this detail later.

Image: Nagarjuna: Philosopher and Alchemist, Robert Beer, gouache, 1988.

Share with a Friend

Email to a Friend

Already a member? Log in to share this content.

You must be a Tricycle Community member to use this feature.

1. Join as a Basic Member

Signing up to Tricycle newsletters will enroll you as a free Tricycle Basic Member.You can opt out of our emails at any time from your account screen.

2. Enter Your Message Details

Enter multiple email addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
jpjohnsonret's picture

This morning I sat. Now I go downstairs.

melcher's picture

It is refreshing to see discussion and debate that doesn't lead to acrimony, something which is VERY rare in Internet discussions. I found myself, out of habit, constantly expecting the sharp comeback, the ruffled feathers, the accusations and calling of names that is the norm. Congratulations on a very tricky path adroitly navigated! Here's to illumination of the truth rather than reinforcement of the self!

ITSJUSTALILA's picture

Study and compare Batchelor, Kalapahana & Garfield's translations of Nagarguna's masterpiece verse by verse and in the end we will have greater clarity about emptiness and the middle way.

sallyotter's picture

"Emptiness is experienced as the letting go of fixed ideas about oneself and the world:" Wow, I have been struggling with the concept of emptiness for years. That one line makes so much sense to me. Thanks.

aldrisang's picture

Another way to view Emptiness is to simply combine the aspects of Impermanence (Instability or Constant Change) and Not-Self (Inter-Dependence or Inter-Being) of all phenomena. The original teaching of the Buddha was that all phenomena whatsoever are 'empty of self', but the Mahayana expansion upon that theme is more a combination of these two. It may be easier to first concentrate on the fact that all compounded things are impermanent; nothing lasts. After thoroughly perceiving that all things whatsoever must pass, then move on to the non-abiding of any 'self', that all things arise due to conditions and are interdependent with everything else around them. The understanding of emptiness is difficult without a solid foundational understanding of both of these concepts.

The full and penetrative realization of emptiness is Nirvana, because emptiness (Buddha Nature) is already what all of 'this' is. The mind is only bound up in false views and suffering because it does not know its own true nature, which it shares with all phenomena.

aldrisang's picture

I very much enjoyed this article, thank you!
If more people would focus on Emptiness, there would be fewer obstructions on the path to liberation.

celticpassage's picture

If you could focus on emptiness, it wouldn't be emptiness.
There is no path. How then can there be fewer obstructions?

aldrisang's picture

It is toward the reality of emptiness to focus, not upon the concept. This is why we observe the arising and passing of phenomena; this is why we meditate. Go beyond thinking, especially if you think you're good at thinking. The real hindrance is never looking, always remaining bound up in the ceaseless chatter and desire-fulfillment of the mind. Train the mind, hold it in check and do not let it wander, and then watch. Just watch!

celticpassage's picture

I think it is toward the absence of pedantic preaching that one should strive

aldrisang's picture

Aversion arises within the clinging mind, neither self nor other. We have to recognize that the habitual tendencies of the mind, its likes and dislikes, are not who/what we really are. Only then can we set them down, rather than acting upon them and generating further unwholesome results. Mindfulness is our greatest treasure. With mindfulness established, we can reflect upon our sensations and restrain the mind from acting with unwholesome intent. Having restraint in this way gives rise to tranquility and can lead to insight, by showing that all thoughts and feelings arise and pass on their own due to conditions (and are not who/what we are).

~~

If you believe yourself to be separate from the 'preaching', this is like kicking a fire hydrant and believing the pain arises independently. Kicking the hydrant and then not learning from the pain, over and over, is insanity. We constantly nurture the conditions for our own suffering, failing to penetrate the Four Noble Truths and the empty nature of all phenomena (including all that we think of as our self). You don't have to be very smart to understand, but you do have to at least try.

mralexander99's picture

Come now gentlemen your love is all I crave...let us not live in a circus....as we are heading to our grave!

Dominic Gomez's picture

And death itself is empty (meaningless outside the context of the ongoing cycle of existence) as well as impermanent.

Dominic Gomez's picture

As Gertrude Stein writes, "There is no there there." There is neither path nor obstructions to the past (save for memories). What's done is done. It has no relevance to your present and future. It is empty, nil. But there is definitely a path towards your future. And indeed there will be more and greater obstructions to it. Maintain your faith, hope and courage, fellow bodhisattva, and you will soon arrive at something even greater than the past or the present.

celticpassage's picture

The mind of the past is ungraspable;
the mind of the future is ungraspable;
the mind of the present is ungraspable. -Diamond Sutra

Dominic Gomez's picture

And yet it is the same "mind" (i.e. your life). -Dominic Gomez

celticpassage's picture

Perhaps it is the same mind, perhaps not. The analogies of a candle flame and stepping into the same river twice suggest it is not.
What I was saying is that there is no path and there are no obstacles. However, that doesn't prevent us from seeing a path and obstacles (to a putative goal).

Dominic Gomez's picture

Surface conditions may change (smooth flowing to rapids) but it is still the river. Your life changes even moment by moment but you are still celticpassage.

celticpassage's picture

I think not.
That's the whole point behind no-self.
Something may persist we can't say what, but it certainly isn't me.
Nevertheless, the specific point was about obstacles on 'the path'

Dominic Gomez's picture

"No self" means your present condition in this life is not permanent. It's not who and what you really are. Your eternal self is Buddha, and you are currently standing in a river that's constantly swishing and changing around your ankles.

celticpassage's picture

I disagree.

Of course my present condition in this life isn't permanent, that is unremarkable.

It isn't the same person stepping into the same river twice, and the candle flame analogy is meant to highlight that there is no underlying self just as it isn't the same flame. If the purpose of the analogy were to illustrate obvious surface changes, the analogy would be pointless.

I also don't think Buddhism teaches that there's an eternal self.
Perhaps you can direct me to the relevant Buddhist teaching which clearly states this?

However, I do think that Buddhism teaches that there is no path, and nowhere to go. There is no past, present, or future (as per the Diamond Sutra above).

Dominic Gomez's picture

We're a bit off topic, but the Lotus Sutra teaches the eternity and universality of the enlightened self, aka Buddha. But your present condition (your temporal self) isn't permanent because it IS empty, i.e. inconsequential if taken as being isolated from surrounding phenomena. But we do not live in a vacuum. As conditioned by other people, places and things, this smaller self of yours DOES have substance, or meaning. Be kinder to your self, celticpassage. :-)

aldrisang's picture

I think 'eternal self' can be very easily misconstrued, don't you DG? It can reinforce ideas of duality, or that any amount of this 'substance' is actually what we are. If this were so, we'd never be able to grow from a fertilized egg into an adult. Any ideas of self or other need to drop from the mind. We could say that Buddha Nature or Emptiness is that which is constant (eternal), but Buddha Nature has no 'self' or 'other', no birth or death.

Oh and eternal self is another way of putting the soul in other religions. That certainly doesn't help!

The idea that everything we are has always existed, and always will, is a good one and does help one detach... if that's the idea. It's just the words 'eternal self' that are full of potential for being misunderstood. Even 'true self' can lead to some of the same problems, there still being the possibility of self/other duality. A lot of times phrases such as True Nature or Original Face are used, pointing directly to Emptiness.

celticpassage's picture

Well, actually, that sounds more like your paraphrase and not what is actually said.

Perhaps you can point out where it states those things in the lotus sutra, and preferably where the same thing is taught in at least one other source such as another sutra or supporting statements from recognized Buddhist scholars: We wouldn't want to consider only a restricted range of view.

aldrisang's picture

[celticpassage:] "However, I do think that Buddhism teaches that there is no path"...
How is that? Where does Buddhism teach this? It is likely you took this out of context, and definitely have misunderstood. The Noble Eightfold Path is the Buddha's teaching, the very foundation of all forms of Buddhism. It may be an abstraction, a 'tool' or 'method' used to liberate the mind, but if you cling to the view that there is no Path, you have no way of achieving that liberation. This path may be nothing but a method, but it brings about the necessary change. That is its purpose, why the Buddha taught it. He didn't teach the Path as being some aspect of reality, but rather as the most direct Way to bring the mind into accord with reality (Emptiness) itself. The Noble Eightfold Path is the teaching of an enlightened mind for worldlings to go beyond the world.

aldrisang's picture

Keep on keepin' on DG. =) I love how a simple statement about how I liked the article turned into all of this discussion. Isn't it grand?

Another metaphor would be to say that we are a river that has formed within the vast ocean, neither separate from that ocean nor an unchanging or permanent 'thing' or 'being'. This so-called river is never other than the ocean (what we are is not other than the Ocean of Dharma/Emptiness/Buddha-Nature). Mind arises due to conditions, but those conditions are not necessarily conducive to clear knowing of reality as it is, and so mind discriminates between self and other and sees its 'self' as something separate and/or permanent. Craving (for or for-not) arises based on ignorance and so gives rise to suffering.

Don't worry about people who say there is no path or no suffering (or no obstructions); not that you seem worried! The Buddha taught us to recognize suffering and to walk the path, overcoming obstructions. That's where effective change takes place. We begin by taking refuge, by realizing that our worldly ways are not the 'way' to wisdom and that the mind must be tamed. The path is no more than an effective course of change from 'clinging' to 'letting go', powered by our personal effort and by karma (skillful intentions overcome the defilements). Obstructions are only that which stand in the way of this change, and include not seeing the Noble Eightfold Path as a 'corrective course' leading to the Other Shore. Or a medicine to cure our ills.

[Some of us don't want to take the medicine, but would rather debate what the medicine really 'means' and how it works until we're blue in the face. Better to take the medicine as prescribed (walk the Path to change delusion into wisdom), and then see if we still feel like debating! We will have begun seeing things as they are and letting go; the method will make sense to us because it will have had an effect upon our lives. This is why the Buddha warned us with the story of a man shot with an arrow who refuses to accept treatment until he knows every single detail to his satisfaction... he'll die before he knows it all! The same with us if we only intellectually debate the teachings instead of following them... *doing* the practice. Our own inclinations invariably lead us further and further into self-centeredness. Until we can admit that we need help, we can not even truly take refuge in the Buddha, his teachings, and those who have transmitted those teachings (which is really the first step, the prerequisite, to following the Path in earnest). It's just like Alcoholics Anonymous, but we are Deluded Cravers Anonymous... we have to admit that we have a problem first!]

Dominic Gomez's picture

"Keep on keepin' on": It's called turning the wheel of the Law. ;-) And the sutras are simply a compilation of Shakyamuni's many discussions with reglar folks like you and me.

aldrisang's picture

It's been a refreshing talk. =) The sutras/suttas are great if you can understand the archaic turn of phrase. There are also modern teachers, such as Ajahn Chah from the Thai Forest Tradition, that speak in a more 'regular folk' way. Thich Nhat Hanh is another. Really the message can be put in any number of ways, and practice takes on different forms, but the 'essence' is always the same because it's pointing toward the same Reality. It's very fortunate that the Dharma is always right here, in every moment and every experience, so that we can see for ourselves.