Is Embracing Emptiness in Buddhism a Pathway to Nihilism?

The Buddhist tradition rejects the idea of “The Self” as a unique and permanent subject. The concept of Anatman means that “I” is only a momently reflection of the five randomly aligned realities in time and space which create a superficial sense of identity (The Five Aggregates).[1]

When through wisdom one perceives,

“All dhammas are without self.”’

Then one is detached as to misery.

This is the path of purity.( Dhammapada v 279)[2]

The Dhammapada implies that the “cosmic order” is one without an Atman negating this Hindu notion of substance. When one realizes that there no “individuality of soul or spirit” only then can one detach themselves from the suffering of life (Duhkha). Practically speaking, there is no individuality of “myself” that would  makes one accountable for their deeds as for example in the Christian tradition. This perception of no substance radically changes the perception of human existence.

When through wisdom one perceives,

“All Samkharas are transient.”’

Then one is detached as to misery.

This is the path of purity (Dhammapada v 277)[3]

Furthermore, all formations should be seen as impermanent. This confirms that an individual is different in every moment and therefore doesn’t exist at all in the sense of Atman. One should not consider anything as permanent including themselves because of the everchanging nature of formations. This thought has vast implications on the Buddhist perception of mind and body. In both Hinduism and Buddhism body is perceived as an obstacle to true knowledge and therefore enlightenment.[4] This closely resembles the Platonic idea of “Soma Sema” which had major influence on the perception of body by western thinkers.[5] Buddhism, however, does not only condemn the body itself. In contrast to Hinduism and the western tradition, it requires detachment from world’s substance itself and contradicts any meaning of actions or physical things calling for a complete detachment.

Insofar as the underbrush is not cut away,

Even to the smallest bit, of a man for women,

Insofar is he one having [his] mind tethered,

Like a suckling calf to its mother (Dhammapada v 284)

One should detach themselves from all things because attachment brings dependence and suffering.

That man of entangled mind,

Inebriated by sons and cattle,

Death carries away

Like a great flood, a sleeping village (Dhammapada v 287)

Any form of property or relationship with another human is perceived as transient and  deceptive. The impermanent nature of things described earlier makes any kind of attachment predestined to cause suffering (Duhkha). I imagine this dynamic as a person drowning in a flooded river. If they try to hold on to a tree in the middle of a flood, they will get hit by anything that is being carried by the stream. In the same way because nothing in the world is permanent including ourselves it would be foolish to get attached to anything as it is inherently bound to cause us suffering in the future.

From this principle the tradition that formulated was called “Four Noble Truths”. These are four steps of an argument describing the need to detach oneself from the world. First, the experience of life by our mind and body consists of “Dukkha”, which is translated as suffering, inconvenience, dissatisfaction, or discomfort. Second,  “Dukkha” ultimately comes from “Tanha” which translates to craving, thirst or attachment. Attachment causes frustration and disappointment and keeps one in the cycle of rebirth where “Dukkha” is present. Third, by coming to the state of “Nirvana” one detaches themselves and moves beyond the cycle or rebirth therefore beyond “Dukkha” and becomes enlightened. Fourth, there is a specific way to achieve “Nirvana” this process is called the Noble Eightfold Path.[6] The Noble Eightfold Path consists of right view, right resolve, right speech, right conduct, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right samadhi (meditation).[7]

Just this path, there is no other,

For purity of vision.

Do ye go along this [path];

This is what will bewilder Mara. (Dhammapada v. 274)

By following the Noble Eightfold Path one can avoid “Mara”, which is the force of illusion and deceive. This substance has many forms in Buddhism. Mara is generally seen as the force trying to make one fall into deceive, attach themselves and therefore be condemned to live with Dukkha. To defend oneself from “Mara” and escape “Dukkha” one must accept the idea of “Anatman” and renounce the Five Aggregates. These are “Rupa” – material forms, meaning all the burden that comes with physical existence. Vedana – feeling consisting of sensory experience. Sanna – identification the interpretive nature of mind which makes us categorize and label reality which usually isn’t precise. Sankharas – constructing activities including will and other mental processes such as mood or emotions. Finally, vinnana -  the discriminative consciousness which explains the tendency of our mind to make sense of the nonsensical and putting life into context which is often misleading and contributes to our overall delusion.[8]

Although the western public sees the tradition of one full of compassion and tolerance Buddhism is often (mis)interpreted as a form of nihilism by western thinkers. There are two main reasons for this. Firstly, it is because of the apophatic theology present in Buddhism (Anatman) which sees the divine in non-existence and the way to knowledge in negation. Secondly it is because of the third of The Four Noble Truths thus that the end of Dukkha can be reached by cessation of desire.[9]

The western tradition sees that God “is” and religion gives us a way to live a good life by a positive restrained approach to life. This is why Buddhism negative approach to life is so foreign to many and is often seen as nihilistic. Hegel interprets Nirvana as nothingness and thus sees the Noble Eightfold Path as a way “to will nothing, to want nothing, and to do nothing.”[10] It is important to note that Hegel is often criticized for drawing from biased sources (Jesuits) and imposing his own constructed ideas about religion on this tradition which led him to this conclusion.[11] Afterall Hegel sees Buddhism as a form of “Natural Religion” which is the lowest form of religion.[12] Roger-Pol Droit in his work The Cult of Nothingness: The Philosophers and the Buddha (2003) completely dissmises Hegel’s argument noting that his perception is highly influenced by his notion of Christionaity. Nevertheless, even within the Buddhist tradition scholars have accused Buddhism of being nihilist. For example, scholar-monk Candrakirti is making the case that concept of “Sunyata” – emptiness – leads the tradition towards an ultimate nihilist message.[13]

The Buddhist tradition is so diverse that the concerns for nihilistic tendencies within this philosophy seem to be sound in some traditions while completely rejected by others. While some traditions confirm Hegel’s understanding that the divine in Buddhism is non-existence, others see the tradition positively even arguing that nirvana could be equated with Brahman (the absolute in Hinduism). Nirvana in this view is a substance that cannot be physically or mentally worshiped and can therefore only be adored by non-adoration.[14]

Although I recognize that there are arguments against portraying Buddhism as an inherently nihilistic tradition, my cultural background strongly inclines me to find the arguments for the nihilistic nature of this philosophy very convincing. It is simply difficult for me to believe that I could subscribe to this set of believes and not live a nihilistic life.

Bibliography

[1] Peter Harvey, An Introduction to Buddhist Ethics: Foundations, Values and Issues, Introduction to Religion (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511800801. page 31

[2] John Ross Carter and Mahinda Palihawadana, eds., The Dhammapada, Oxford World’s Classics (New York: Oxford University Press, 2000).

[3] Carter and Palihawadana.

[4] Adam Buben, Philosophies of the World “Session 3.”

[5] Gaye Strathearn, “SŌma SĒma: The Influence of ‘The Body Is a Tomb’ in Early Christi an Debates and the New Testament,” Faculty Publications, January 1, 2010, https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/facpub/3513.

[6] Harvey, An Introduction to Buddhist Ethics. Page 31

[7] Adam Buben, Philosophies of the World “Session 5.”

[8] Harvey, An Introduction to Buddhist Ethics. Page 31

[9] Mario D’Amato and Robert T Moore, “The Specter of Nihilism: On Hegel on Buddhism,” 2011. Page 35

[10] Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, Lectures on the Philosophy of Religion (Newcomb Livraria Press, 1984). page 254

[11] D’Amato and Moore, “The Specter of Nihilism: On Hegel on Buddhism.” Page 24

[12] Hegel, Lectures on the Philosophy of Religion. 207

[13] D’Amato and Moore, “The Specter of Nihilism: On Hegel on Buddhism.” Page 42

[14] V. V. Gokhale, “Masters of Buddhism Adore the Brahman through Non-Adoration,” Indo-Iranian Journal 5, no. 4 (1962): 271–75, https://doi.org/10.1163/000000062791616101. page 272