by Greg Goode
Hopkins (1995)
First, this system makes a clear distinction between conventional existence and inherent existence. This helps you know what to refute (inherent existence) and what not to refute (conventional existence). Conventional existence is not a problem. It does not cause ignorance or suffering, as we will show later. It has no essence or self-power. It also provides the tools for liberation; it includes everyday activities, the Buddhist path and the self as mere designation. This inherent/conventional distinction helps keep you on the razor’s edge of the middle way, by serving as a guide not to refute too little and not to refute too much.
Conventional existence is usually defined in Madhyamika as something pretty casual and pragmatic. It will be explained more fully below, but here is a quick example. A small vessel that we can drink with can be called a “cup.” It serves a purpose and is able to bear a name. That’s all the conventionally existent cup needs. It does not need to be a cup before being named, and it doesn’t need to have any true, real or objective “cupness.” In fact, a pre-existing, true or real “cupness” is something that we would refute in an emptiness meditation. After the meditation, what would remain is the everyday, conventional cup.
Inherent existence is the kind of existence that, according to the emptiness teachings, we feel things really have. This would be a cup that is truly present in a mind-independent way. Why would it be a cup and not a saucer? It would be a cup because of a pre-given identity or an inherent nature that makes it be a cup. The sense of this kind of existence can manifest in many ways, so there are many kinds of emptiness meditation to address this sense of existence. In the emptiness meditations, we look for the inherent existence that we suspect that things have. And we fail to find this inherent existence. This is the realization of the emptiness of things.
Because Tsongkhapa’s presentation is so clear about conventional and inherent existence, it sharply delineates a middle way between them. The middle way is to not refute too little or too much. If we fail to refute inherent existence, we refute too little, and fall into the extreme position of essentialism and clinging. If we refute conventional existence, we refute too much, and fall into the extreme position of nihilism and despondency. The middle way is to refute inherent existence only, which thereby liberates conventional existence.
The Object of Refutation
Second, in helping to clarify the inherent/conventional distinction, Tsongkhapa’s system presents a very detailed, close focus on what it calls “the object of refutation.” Sometimes called the “target” of refutation, this is defined as the inherently existent self, the inherently existent table, the inherently existent computer. It is what we look for in emptiness meditations and fail to find.
The inherently existent self seems to exist in a self-sufficient, self-powered, independent way, but it does not. According to the emptiness teachings, feeling as though the self and other things exist inherently is a kind of delusion that is the root of suffering. So it is the inherently existent self which is refuted and shown not to exist. What is not refuted is the conventional, everyday self that eats dinner, goes to a show and pays taxes.
In fact, getting clear on the difference between conventional and inherent existence is one of the most important issues in this approach to emptiness meditation. It is sometimes said that to get the distinction perfectly, and not place the border too far to one side or the other, requires one to already have realized emptiness! So there is abundant clarification on this issue in the teachings.
Agnosticism
Third, this Prasangika approach itself is silent on whether the realization of emptiness simultaneously gives rise to an experience of rigpa or the “nature of mind”. In the Tsongkhapa-influenced teachings on emptiness that we are focusing on, this matter is not discussed. This allows you to approach the teachings in either way. That is, you can utilize the meditations we present in this book in a Tsongkhapa-style or in a Nyingma/Kagyü style. You can approach the meditations Tsongkhapa-style to realize the ultimate truth of phenomena, or you can approach the meditations in the Kagyü or Nyingma style to help realize the nature of the mind. Both approaches are effective and have proven track records in helping to alleviate suffering.
This emphasis on defining inherent existence, the object of refutation, is strikingly similar to the notions challenged by the various Western non-essentialist teachings. This similarity is what prompts us to call these Western approaches “emptiness teachings” as well. Where the Madhyamikas challenge inherent existence, the Western non-essentialists challenge essence, substance, objectivity, ipseity (individual identity), the correspondence between thought and reality, and similar notions. Several prominent Western philosophies and teachings are examined in this book.
So this is our approach. We think it helps in understanding the emptiness teachings. We use it as an overall teaching matrix even when discussing the various non-Buddhist teachings. For example, we use the term “target of refutation” to indicate the particular versions of essence that these non-Buddhist teachings are refuting, even though these teachings don’t use that term.
For Buddhists, the Western philosophies and teachings can be regarded as sources for additional meditations. For non-Buddhists, you can follow Western approaches as an alternative framework. Even though our overall matrix is conditioned by the Tsongkhapa-inspired approach, we recognize that there are many other approaches which can utilize the emptiness teachings. If you happen to be more familiar with another approach, then please feel free to integrate the meditations in a way that resonates with you.
The Reduction of Suffering
In the Buddhist tradition, the cessation of suffering is the principal theme, even from the beginning. Prince Gautama ventured out of his palace one day and for the first time encountered old age, and sickness and death. He was shocked. He left home, setting out to do something about human suffering. This quest resulted in him becoming the Awakened One, the Buddha. For Buddhism, the key is that the belief in a solid, non-empty self is the root cause of suffering, and the foundation of dualisms like existence/nonexistence, self/other, good/evil.
A non-empty self can easily be threatened, needs to be defended and wishes to aggrandize itself. If we feel the self is solid and truly existent, then we also feel that other beings and objects in the world are the same way. Seeing things in this reified, solid way leads to grasping for the things we like and aversion for those we don’t like. Seeing phenomena as inherently existent, we also assume (against all evidence) that they are permanent, or at least permanent enough to be around when we need them. When we see things as permanent, we are at odds with how they change. We are surprised, shocked and perhaps even indignant when change happens. We want the stuff we like to be present, and the stuff we don’t like to never arise. We hate it when things don’t go this way. We can get indignant at reality itself for giving us a bum deal. Buddhism’s goal is to counteract this, and to end suffering for all sentient beings.
A good starting point for how emptiness can reduce suffering is to realize that suffering is an empty concept (as is happiness), and not something precisely definable. Suffering, like everything else, depends on context and our interpretation. Different paths and bodies of conventional truth will define suffering differently. But let’s at least consider one possibility. The earliest Buddhists’ Pali texts contain the word dukkha. This is frequently translated as suffering, but more literal translations include stress, anxiety or unsatisfactoriness. A popular quip about suffering captures this meaning:
Pain is unavoidable;
suffering (the objection to pain) is optional.
According to this notion of suffering, suffering consists of fighting with reality, objecting to the fact that pain arises, taking a stance that pain shouldn’t ever happen. Suffering in this sense includes the unpleasant feelings that arise when these expectations are not met.
Seeing things as empty provides a greater openness that allows for change. This softe
ns the blow of the unavoidable unpleasant events in life.
Two important points should be clarified here. One is that realizing emptiness doesn’t prevent painful life situations from happening. Everyone, even advanced practitioners and famous role models, may face disease, extraordinary physical pain, the loss of loved ones, homelessness and death. They may also face gossip, insults, infidelity, negative book reviews, and getting passed over for promotion at the monastery, laboratory or university.
But realizing emptiness profoundly affects how we experience these things. Deeply experiencing the open nature of phenomena influences how we perceive, feel and respond. Recognizing the openness, ambiguity, instability and re-definability of phenomena becomes second nature. Suffering, understood as dissatisfaction, is inevitably reduced.
Indeed, a deep realization of emptiness makes it clear how non-empty things couldn’t even function. A body that was inherently, primordially healthy would exhibit health as its nature. How could it ever get sick? And a body that was inherently stricken with disease would carry illness as part of its very being. How could it ever be cured? Only the ability to change gives things the ability to respond to conditions.
Being OK with all this graces us with tranquility, and empowers us to build a better self and a better world. One traditional method for reducing suffering and enhancing our understanding of emptiness is to see the world as an illusion.
...we cultivate the recognition of our body as an illusion, our feelings as being like a dream, our mind as being like luminous space, and all phenomena as being like fleeting clouds. ... In this way, we enhance our realization of the inseparability of appearance and emptiness.
Brunnhölzl (2004)
The Tibetan tradition contains many images and examples to help us tune into the illusory nature of reality, such as magic, mirages, dreams, rainbows and a reflection in a mirror. Jan Westerhoff (2010) gives beautiful Western examples of how these metaphors can help illuminate the empty, illusory nature of reality.
Emptiness and Non-Duality
But there is another sense of non-duality. This is the sense of non-duality understood as “free from dualistic extremes.” This entails freedom from the pairs of metaphysical dualisms such as existence/non-existence, essentialism/nihilism, substance/attribute, presence/absence and good/evil. These are dualisms because if you experience things in the world in terms of one side of the pair, you will experience things in the world in terms of the other side as well. For example, when you feel as though you truly exist, you also will fear that one day you will truly not exist. In each case, there will be craving, attachment, rigidity and resistance to life. But through the emptiness teachings, you realize how none of these dualistic pairs make sense. These dualisms drop away, and so do the rigid attachments and sufferings. Emptiness teachings are non-dual in this sense.
How Does Realizing Emptiness Help?
If the selflessness of phenomena is analyzed
And if this analysis is cultivated,
It causes the effect of attaining nirvana.
Through no other cause does one come to peace.
The Samadhiraja Sutra
For him to whom emptiness is clear
Everything becomes clear.
Nagarjuna (1995) 24:14
Traditionally, the fruits of emptiness realization are usually explained along these lines:
When you realize the emptiness of yourself, you no longer feel separate from other things or other people. The walls that seemed to define the self are seen through, and they come down. In place of the walled-in self, there is a wonderful, open, joyful, loving connection with others. This happens without a central core. It’s as though the self as a concentrated essence is transformed into an expansive, luminous web of relations.
Having realized the emptiness of yourself, you can easily transfer your realization to other people, other beings, as well. Other people become more precious too. They become free to change, free of identity and rigidities, for the exact reason that they too lack a solid core or essence. This transforms your personal relationships.
When you realize the emptiness of everything, it is direct and nonconceptual. It is not mediated by any thought, feeling or image. There isn’t even the slightest trace of subject/object differentiation. Without your realization being limited by a particular image or concept, there is nothing to which it does not apply. It applies to yourself, your chosen spiritual path and to emptiness itself. This realization cuts through the roots of belief and conceptual elaboration. And because it entails compassion, it helps pacify anger, greed, and their attendant sufferings. Life is freed up from the immobilities of existence and non-existence. It becomes light, clear and joyous, like a phantasmagoria of images that are neither fully present, nor totally absent.
In more everyday terms, one could look at it like this:
Experiencing self, other and the world as empty is to joyfully experience your place in a light, free, open-ended, interpenetrating web of relations and dependencies. Lightness and joy come from no longer craving for permanence or guaranteed safety. Life and death are freed up. Nothing seems ultimately stiff, frozen, apart, separate or unchangeable. There are no more conceptions of an inherently existing self that exists on its own yet needs to be defended, propped up, aggrandized and pleasured forever. This opens your heart to the radical contingency of all beings and things, and brings on the sweet, precious desire and commitment to see them free from suffering as well.
Experience becomes open-textured. A spider web and Indra’s Net are traditional metaphors for this texture, but there are many other metaphors as well. And this is just the point. The very openness of this texture is free from closure and finality. It is free from collapsing into a literal, ultimate determination of what experience is. In this lies great freedom. Fixed and rigid barriers dissolve. The barrier you had thought existed between you and everything else is recognized as nonexistent. You realize yourself as part of the open texture or web, but never as a separate, independent beholder of the web. You realize that you can never stand apart from the web regarding it from somewhere else. Instead, you have a deep recognition of yourself as contingent and dependent on many other things, which are dependent upon you as well. Nothing is left out, and there is an immense sweetness and joy in this realization.
Indra’s Net of dependencies is holistic because things are constituted by other things. Nothing stands apart. Things change at least a bit whenever something new enters at any point. The new element enters by becoming contextualized by things that make the net. At the same time, all the other elements of the net are recontextualized to at least a tiny extent by the new element. Nothing is experienced as standing alone, immune, granular, lump-like or disconnected from other things. You experience the freedom of things, which brings great, spontaneous, unexpected joy. You don’t expect anything to remain apart or detached.
The experience of self and the world as empty deepens over time. As the heart opens more and more, one becomes more sensitive to the many ramifications of emptiness. Your joy becomes more subtle and more pervasive. Because you no longer experience fixed and inherent barriers between self and others, joy merges more and more with a heartfelt sense of compassion.
The Madhyamika is a radically deconstructive, pragmatic philosophy designed to be used for exposing, defusing, and dismantling the reifying tendencies inherent in language and conceptual thought.... All it does is dissolve the old questions, which are seen to have been misguided from the start, leaving behind nothing other than a dramatic awareness of the living present – an epiphany of one’s entire form of life. No form of conceptual diffusion remains, and no questions begging for answers that reinforce a deep-seated resistance to acceptance that this life, as it is now lived, is the only arbiter of truth and reality...
Huntington (2007)
Inferential Realization
When we first learn the emptiness meditations, our realization is inferential. It is conceptual. It happens throu
gh the medium of concepts and imagery. It is like coming to the conclusion of a logical proof. We’ve learned how the meditations examine things. We’ve learned how the meditations are structured, and how they exhaust all the logical possibilities for where inherent existence could possibly hide. So when we get to the conclusion of the meditation, it is like coming to the end of an inferential chain.
Let’s take an example. Let’s say that we want to investigate the emptiness of causality. Finding the emptiness of causality consists of looking everywhere possible for inherent causality, and finding its absence instead of its presence. This specific absence of inherent causality is the emptiness of causality.
We can use the “Diamond Slivers” meditation to structure our search. The Diamond Slivers meditation looks for causality by dividing the field of possibilities up into four:
1) The cause is identical to the effect.
2) The cause is different from the effect.
3) The cause is both identical to and different from the effect.
4) The cause is neither identical to nor different from the effect.
These four possibilities cover all the logical bases.
We will run through the Diamond Slivers in a more detailed way below. But for now, we will look at how the Diamond Slivers can produce an inferential realization. During the meditation, you go through each of the four possibilities.
1) “Ah! The cause is not there, in the effect.”
2) “The cause is not anywhere outside of (or different from) the effect.”
3) “The cause is not both.”
4) “The cause is not neither.”
When you realize that the cause is not in any of the four possibilities, while feeling confident that the meditation covers all the logical bases, you are forced by the power of inference to realize that the cause is nowhere to be found.
Aha! The cause is not anywhere!
This is the realization of the emptiness of causality. Even though this realization is conceptual, it is nevertheless helpful and freeing. You can meditate on it again and again, strengthening the realization. Some people who realize the emptiness of causality feel lighter and more expansive around the question of free will and determinism. It may become less of an issue. And at the same time, realizing the emptiness of causality has not removed our ability to observe everyday regularities, such as that we eat when we are hungry.
