Traverses on Less Trodden Path of Indian Philosophy and Religion

Author(s): Yajneshwar S Shastri
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad

Page 96

Nāgārjuna is Mahāyānist
87
tried to defend it with logical rigour in M. K. and Vigrahavyāvartani. His sharp logical miod found that the Prajñāpäramitā literature, though profound, was wanting in logic, for they did not prove what they thought. Thus his main aim in M. K. is not to defend Mahāyāna sect, but to establish the doctrine of Sünyaca propounded by Prajaparamitā literature, in the light of reasoning. Thus quoting Mahāyānasūtra is not a criteria in judging Nagarjuna's affiliation to Mahāyāna or non-Maha yana, but it lies in the logical assessment of the development of the doctrine of omptiness (Sūnyata) in early Buddhism and in Nāgārjuna's works.
Again, there is a close similarlity of the general structure between M. K. and Astasähasrikā Pra jñā pāramitā. The doctrine of Sūnya, concep of Nirvana, the doctrine of Dependent Origination, the conception of personality and two kinds of truths that found logically developed form in M. K. are certainly based on Aşta and purely Mahayanistic in nature. 16 The similes which are peculiar to Mahāyāna in general and Asta in particular are used in more than 11 places in M.K. by Nāgārjuna. 17 It is also not proper to say that there are no terms peculiar to Maha yāna in M.K. In fact the term 'Śūnyatā' itself is peculiar to Mahāyāna literature because, it stands for doctrine, not for mere nothingness of the carly Buddhism. Again, the conception that everything is like dream, like illusion, thought construction, Gandharva Nagar and thus unreal, is the special feature of Prajñāpāramita Mahāyāna literature. 18 To explain the doctrine of "Śünya' Nagarjuna bas used the same terms and similes used by Aşta. 19 We can find numerous examples from M.K. to prove that Nagarjuna has developed most of his conceptions from Aşta. 0
It is true that many important, peculiarly Mahāyān ists ontological and religious terms found in Aşta are not occur in the M.K, such as Prajña, Tathata, Advaya, Dharmadhatu, Paramita, etc., even the term Bodhisativa occours only once in the M.K. But it is important to note that the choice of the authors words depends on what he is talking about and whom he is talking to Mūlamadhyamakakārika is not written to defend Mahavāna. To defend Mahāyāna, Nāgārjuna has written many other works such as Ratnávali and Suhtllekha. In M.K. Nāgārjuna is not talking to Mahāyāoists who are familiar with those peculiar Mabāyanistic terms but talking to and criticising Hinayānists who did not accept 16. Madhyamika schools in India--Peter Della Santina. Pub. Motiial Banarasi Dass,
Delhi, 1986, pp 9-19. 17. Madhyamakaśātra-V11-8, 31, 34. XIII-5, 6, XVI1-7, 14, XXIV-17, 15, XXV-14,
XXVII-22-ed. P. L. Vaidya, Mithtla Institute, Darbhanga, 1960. 18. Asta-pp. 20, 121, 230, 254, 265 etc. 19. Madhyamahasástra-Ed. P. L. Vaidya, Mithila, Darbhanga, 1960. 20. Madhyamika schools in India-Peter Della Santina pp. 9-14,