Nāgārjuna has introduced a new dimension of Buddhist philosophical thought by propounding the theory of Shunya. He composed many works to illustrate this theory. He examined most of the Buddhist and non-Buddhist philosophical concepts of his time. First of all he examined the causation theory and presented logics that seemed to refute the causation theory. So, a question comes here – how the world can be explained when the theory of causation has been refuted. To get answer to this question it is being divided in four parts so that it can be studied scientifically and easily.
A. Introduction of causation theory.
B. Way of its refutation.
C. Aim of its refutation.
D. Explanation of the world without it.
[A] Introduction of causation theory
Introduction of causation theory: - after studying Nāgārjuna’s texts, it can be stated that no profound theory of causation was developed in his time. Only causation theory found in the Patthāna-Naya was available that time. It was actually an endeavour of developing a theory of causation. That is why the Patthāna -Naya talks of 24 types of causes . Nāgārjuna says that four causes of these 24 are essential ones and no fifth essential cause is possible . These four causes are presented here-
1. Hetu Pratyaya: - Basic cause other than Alambana Pratyaya is called Hetu Pratyaya. For instance, seed for plant.
2. Ālambana Pratyaya:- The base for proper development of an effect is called Alambana Pratyaya, as earth for germination.
3. Anantara Pratyaya: - The power of the basic material because of which the effect takes place without any delay, is called Anantara Pratyaya As stoppage of seed without any disturbance, for germination.
4. Adhipati Pratyaya: - A thing in the existence of which, a new thing occurs, is called Adhipati Pratyaya.
In this way, it can be said that it is not necessary that each kind of cause must be in every effect-creating process. One another thing is this that an effect comes into existence after a cause. The cause-effect theory was gradually developed by the other thinkers, as the thinkers of the Nyāya , Grammar etc. Naiyāyikas consider that cause and effect are two different things. The Grammarians and their follower Vedāntins consider that actually there is no effect; it is only an illusion, nothing else. On the contrary, the thinkers of Sāṁkhya tradition consider that the effect lies in the cause in its subtler form. It means all of these, believe that cause and effect are two different things.
[B] Way of Refutation of causation theory
.Although, Causation theory seems scientific one, Nāgārjuna is not satisfied with this. So, he states:-
1. No form of matter can be produced from itself.
2. No form of matter can be produced from completely different form of matter.
3. No form of matter can be produced from itself and completely different one, collectively.
4. No form of matter can be produced without any basic pre-existent.
The commentators and followers of Nāgārjuna explained all these statements as under-
(1)Ācārya Buddhpālita presents two dimensions, clarifying the first statement-
1. Uselessness of production: - If a thing produces itself only, what is produced by it? Nothing. Because whatever is supposed to be produced in future is already in existence. So, it is useless to say that one thing produces it self. That is why, Ācārya Nāgārjuna refuted it.
2. Over-reaching the context: - It implies that wherever the process of production takes place, a new thing comes in existence. But, if the same thing is being produced, there will not be the production of a new thing. So, it over-reaches the context. That is why, Ācārya Nāgārjuna does not accept this.
(2)Three logics are presented by different scholars to clarify the meaning of the second consideration.
1. Ācārya Buddhpālita says that nothing can be produced out of completely different object, because this will open the scope of production of everything out of everything. It means the mustered oil would have been produced out of sand.
2. The Madhyamakavatāra says that if anything had been produced out of everything, the lamp would have been produced black darkness and the things which are to come into existence would be the cause of present thing.
3. Ācārya Candrakirti says that there is no possibility of completely different form of existence. So, nothing can be produced out of a completely different thing.
(3)Clarifying the essence of Nāgārjuna’s third statement, Ācārya Chandrakirti presents two logics:
1. All problems occurred in the above said definitely occur here also.
2. There is no ability of production in each. If both are unable to produce, how can both become able for that?
Some other logics can be given in support the third statement. If one thing can’t produce itself, how can the same produce itself, joining completely different object? Likewise, how can object join completely different object, in case completely different object does not exist? All other problems shall occur like these.
(4)Clarifying this statement, Ācārya Buddhapālita states that all productions will be possible from all things, in case things come into existence without any basic material.
One another problem shall also come here. It will have to be accepted that any product can come out of vacuum, but it does not conform to any type of experience.
It is also a notable that Nāgārjuna says that nothing can be produced without any basic material; it does not mean that he supports causation theory for the creation of the world. On the contrary, he is using this point against the use of causation theory for the creation of world because he himself considers the two layers of the reality.
[C] Aim of refutation of Causation theory
Now, a question arises here what the reason was, due to which Ācārya Nāgārjuna argued against the prevailing causation theory. Its answer can be got only by looking at his contemporary conditions. In his time, there was a big debate in different sects of Buddhism. Should the personal Nirvana be the aim of spiritual life or the endeavours for helping all the beings in getting Nirvana? Nāgārjuna accepted the second because of Karunā for the all beings which is corroborated by his works like Suhrllekha, Ratnāvali etc . But, he had to justify his stand. For this, he accepted the Anātmavāda (Theory of soullessness) as the fundamental concept of his thought. With the help of anatamvada, he interpreted all the Buddhist Principles in a new way. That is why, he centralises Nihsvabhāvavāda (theory of no essential Characteristics). After accepting Nihsbhāvavāda, he was bounded to argue against the theory of causation. That is why, he did this in the very starting of his text Madhyamaka Śāstram.
[D] Explanation of the world without Causation Theory
Even after whole the above discussion, one question remains unanswered. How can the world be explained after giving up the prevalent theory of causation? Here, it is a very notable point that although he presents powerful arguments against causation theory, yet he does not accept any existence which is not dependent upon any pre-existing material. According to his explanation, complete existence is Pratȋtyasamutpāda or shunya or Nihsvabhāva. Nāgārjuna states that the Pratityasamutpāda can neither be restricted, nor it can be created; neither can it be destroyed, nor is eternal; neither can it be said to have only one purpose and nor it can be said to have only group purposes, and neither can something enter in it, nor something can go from it. After understanding this type nature of it, all illusion disappears. So, it is full of happiness.
Now a question comes, how one can say that the existence has no starting and no end. It is because the existence is of continuously changing nature.Whatever is continuously changing cannot be said ending one, as the physical science of this day approved this, with stating that matter can neither be created, nor it can be destroyed. It only changes its forms. The same thing is stated about energy, under the low of conservation of energy.
Bibliography:-
Dighanikaya-I, II, III, (translator) Shastri, Swami Dwarikadas,Varanasi, Bhauddhabharati, 2005
Sharma, Rammurti, Bharatiya Darshan Ki Chintanadhara,Delhi, Manidvipa,2001
Majjhimanikaya,(translator)Sankrtyayana, Rahul, Shravasti, Bharatiya Bauddha Shiksha Parishad,1991
Upadyaya, Bharat Singh, Pali Sahitya ka Itihasa, Hindi Sahitya Prakashana, Prayaga, 2000
Kashyap, j., Abhidhamma philosophy, Bhartiya Vidya Prakashana, Delhi, 1996
Abhidhammatthasangaho, Vol-2, Ramsankar Tripathi & Bhadanta Revata Dhamma, Sampurnanda, Sanskrit Visvavidyalaya, Varanasi, 1992
