Thus the finite being, neither existing primarily in itself, nor acting solely by itself, cannot return completely upon itself, but always needs some external complements.
—Vladimir Solovyov, Russia and the Universal Church, Part III, Chapter I.
Central to Mahayana Buddhism is the belief that all phenomena are empty. This means, among other things, that no phenomenon self-subsists. All phenomena are contingent and change over time. Because of this, what we impute to phenomena might be adequate, conventional declarations of their essence, but such imputations do not actually present the phenomena themselves. Their concrete forms will differ over time; our attempt to define and regulate phenomena do not meet their historical reality, and so, in this way, what we declare to be, actually is not, although there should not be taken to mean there is no phenomena which present themselves to us. Phenomena are given form by other phenomena; they do not contain within themselves the source of their own existence. None are known to produce themselves. Nothing comes out of nothing. Every phenomena comes from at least one other phenomenon, and come to their own, to be themselves, only in relation to other phenomena. This is what it means to say that all phenomena are empty – they do not have an eternal, unchanging, independent self-existence. For any phenomenon we examine, we find out that this is true. Not only does analyzing the relationship of all phenomena with each other provide for us an insight into their contingent nature, but, upon further reflection, show the contingent foundation of all creation. What might at first seem to be a nihilistic is not. There is no denial of the experience phenomena. Buddhism denies all forms of nihilism, and sees nihilism to be one of the grave errors. What is denied is a false predication to those phenomena, where one confuses one’s imputation as the precise, eternal definition of their essence.
At one time, many Western scholars confused Buddhism with nihilism. Since this was the first major representation of Buddhism in the West, this misunderstanding continued to persist, despite how easily it could be, and has been, repudiated by Buddhist doctrine. Part of the problem was that the West was not used to the methodology and terminology employed by Buddhists. An improper hermeneutic allowed for eisigesis, reading Western nihilism into Buddhism instead of reading Buddhism within its own context. Of course, one must be sure, it wasn’t only Westerners who believed Buddhism to be nihilistic: their Hindu opponents consistently made that claim as well.
Buddhism offers a comprehensive picture of the world based upon the relative, non-absolute qualities of phenomena. When they say a phenomenon does not exist, they mean it does not have an independent, uncaused, self-contained existence. To truly exist would require that existence to be essential and non-accidental to the phenomenon; if something is not inherently existent, it does not possess real existence. For a phenomenon to truly exist, and therefore, not be empty, it cannot have the possibility of non-existence. As we observe the phenomena around us, we notice they come and cease to be. As they arise, we see that they were once not, and as they cease to be, it becomes quite clear they are not self-subsistent. In both activities, we are shown that the possibility of their non-existence is a part of the phenomena itself. Being brought into being or losing it is a change which takes place. And this change can be found on many different levels. Obvious, gross phenomena coming to be and then ceasing to be is of one kind; but what happens on the macrocosm is still happening in the microcosm. Anything that is subject to change must be subject to the law of contingent existence. Indeed, change, in a way, must be said to create something new out of some older, now no-longer existent, phenomenon (even if that new phenomenon is quite similar to the old one).
What has been said is just as true in relation to our interior life as it is the world around us. We must realize that it is true even when talking about the self. When we examine our self, we find that we not posses an inherent, or independent, existence. We did not always exist. The person we are today is different from the person we were yesterday. Our personality is constantly changing. Our life is an ongoing process. Our life keeps on changing and showing new twists and turns that we could not have predicted. Our conception of the self, and who we think we are, and where we think our life is going, changes through all we do and experience. While our life is leading towards a final end, whatever it is, it is an end that we cannot see. But we know that it will be reached. By understanding that our personality, our very own self, is subject to change, to becoming different from what we are right now, we can see that we do not possess that independent, inherent existence which our ego would like us to have. Like all other phenomena we can observe, we are dependent upon what is happening around us, and who and what we are, who and what we become, is determined by factors outside of ourselves.
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In