Emptiness and Interbeing

“For neither an existent nor a nonexistent thing

Is a condition appropriate.

If a thing is nonexistent, how could it have a condition?

If a thing is already existent, what would a condition do?”

The second turning of the Wheel of Dharma addresses emptiness. Emptiness is known within Buddhist thought as the absolute truth and as the foundation of Nagarjuna’s writings. Existence, nonexistence, and emptiness are recurring foundations in the literature and discussions we have had surrounding Buddhist teachings.

I had very much fallen into the category of misunderstanding emptiness prior to this week. I had equated emptiness with Nihilism. Nihilism emphasizes the absence of morals, values, and the meaninglessness of life. It is also a philosophy that I understand but considered rooted in a deeply pessimistic view of existence and of the world. And although my understanding of Buddhism was limited, it was difficult to reckon the two as converging. Cornel West perfectly explains the emergence of Nihilism as a philosophy, “Nihilism is a natural consequence of a culture (or civilization) ruled and regulated by categories that mask manipulation, mastery and domination of peoples and nature.” While culture does perpetuate and fuel such ways of thinking, Buddhism never seemed to align with this view of life and existence. At the least, Buddhism seemed to recognize that this way of thinking is created by the cycle of suffering we get caught within.

Through Nagarjuna’s teachings and texts it became clear that aligning Nihilism with emptiness is a huge misinterpretation. Emptiness within Buddhism is somewhat off-putting to hear when reckoned with how highly emphasized individualism is within our culture; but it is difficult to not see the wisdom within it. What we see and experience and hold as concrete is only constant in its change. These changes are happening through (what I imagine to be) a constant web of cause and effect. Nagarjuna’s complex verses were difficult to grasp, but the way we broke it down in class gave me the clearest understanding: nothing can exist independently, independent existence would be essence, and therefore we are all emptiness. Garfield also outlined three examinations of dependency in the Mahayana tradition: “all phenomena are dependent for their existence on complex networks of causes and conditions, all wholes are dependent on their parts, and all phenomena are dependent for their identities on conceptual imputation.” Our identities are attributed to how we perceive our surroundings and existence, but this is also based completely on cause and effect. Beyond this Thich Nhat Hanh is responsible for my favorite and most simple explanation of emptiness: “interbeing.”

The exploration of emptiness does dismantle our carefully developed egos, because it deems them non-existent. But it also opens us to recognize a level of “interbeing” that may help us to connect more deeply and to alleviate the isolation of suffering.

 

 

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Emptiness and Interbeing

  1. Wesley Crusher says:

    Thinking about existence / identity in terms of cause and effect makes me wonder about responsibility for those effects. If we are all connected, does that mean that individual actions are significant because all actions, no matter how small, have some sort of effect? Or does that imply that everything one does is related to the conditions that came before, thus absolving the “individual” of responsibility for actions influenced by the larger web?

    My first thought, based on rules of the Sangha about not harming living beings, is that Buddhism would be concerned about specific actions. At the same time, however, if there is no self, how can there be a “self” to take blame / responsibility for a harmful action?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *