Audible sampleThe Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way: Nagarjuna's Mulamadhyamakakarika
Audible Audiobook – UnabridgedNāgārjuna (Author), & 3 more
4.6 out of 5 stars 187 ratings
See all formats and editions
Kindle
from $9.99Read with Our Free App
Audiobook$0.00Free with your Audible trial
The Buddhist saint Nāgārjuna, who lived in South India in approximately the second century CE, is undoubtedly the most important, influential, and widely studied Mahāyāna Buddhist philosopher. His greatest philosophical work, the Mūlamadhyamikakārikā - read and studied by philosophers in all major Buddhist schools of Tibet, China, Japan, and Korea - is one of the most influential works in the history of Indian philosophy.
Now, in The Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way, Jay L. Garfield provides a clear translation of Nāgārjuna's seminal work, offering those with little or no prior knowledge of Buddhist philosophy a view into the profound logic of the Mūlamadhyamikakārikā. Garfield presents a superb translation of the Tibetan text of Mūlamadhyamikakārikā in its entirety and a commentary reflecting the Tibetan tradition through which Nāgārjuna's philosophical influence has largely been transmitted. Illuminating the systematic character of Nāgārjuna's reasoning, Garfield shows how Nāgārjuna develops his doctrine that all phenomena are empty of inherent existence, that is, than nothing exists substantially or independently. He offers a verse-by-verse commentary that explains Nāgārjuna's positions and arguments in the language of Western metaphysics and epistemology and connects Nāgārjuna's concerns to those of Western philosophers.
Read more
©1995 Jay L. Garfield (P)2021 Tantor
Listening Length
12 hours and 4 minutes
Product details
Listening Length 12 hours and 4 minutes
Author Nāgārjuna, Jay L. Garfield - translator
Narrator Zehra Jane Naqvi
Audible.com Release Date July 13, 2021
Publisher Tantor Audio
Program Type Audiobook
Version Unabridged
Language English
ASIN B097QBC9HD
Best Sellers Rank #16,937 in Audible Books & Originals (See Top 100 in Audible Books & Originals)
#31 in Eastern Philosophy (Audible Books & Originals)
#59 in Buddhism (Audible Books & Originals)
Customer reviews
4.6 out of 5 stars
4.6 out of 5
187 global ratings
5 star 76%
4 star 17%
3 star 3%
2 star 3%
1 star 2%
How customer reviews and ratings work
Review this product
Share your thoughts with other customers
Write a customer review
Sponsored
Top reviews
Top reviews from the United States
Potonjeri
5.0 out of 5 stars A fine place to start for a curious non-scholarReviewed in the United States on August 8, 2022
Verified Purchase
Interesting and enlighte
ning. For clarity, the novice might prefer to start with the textual interpretation before reading the verses.
HelpfulReport abuse
TOM CORBETT
3.0 out of 5 stars attachment to emptinessReviewed in the United States on January 21, 2007
Verified Purchase
i have not studied all of nagarjunas logic carefully in this book, it seems that he is arguing for the underlying emptiness of all things on the basis of his assumption of dependent or mutual arising. perhaps its a bit more complicated than this though. a cup of tea is not a cup of tea in itself. nor does the teabag have any individual or inherent identity, rather the teabag is a collection of collections without any individuality. just as my finger is a collection of cells, so a teabag is a combination of dependent things. infact he believes that everything depends on the presence or absence of something else. tea leaves depend on the presence of tanins, flavins, cells, maturation, drying, there is nothing inherently existent that could be called the individuality of the teabag. this of course defies common sense, but is reasonable. why cannot a collection be at one and the same time an individuality. ie one in many, or many as one. such an argument though would be contrary to nagarjunas thrust, which is to emphasise the existence of emptiness through dependence. ie everything that is dependent has no individual uniqueness (or soul) since all individuals are merely collections.
i am still studying nagarjuna, it seems that a statement such as "walker is not the same as walking, nor is it different from walking" can be argued any way which can. "walker is not the same as walking, if it were how could the two be told apart, nor is walker different from walking, or otherwise there would be walking without walker." it could be argued on the grounds of oneness that walker and walking are one and the same, that structure and function are inseperable. you could just as easily say that walker is the same as walking and that is why there isnt walking without walker. if nagarjuna says that legs are not the same as arms because they can be told apart he is right, because they can be told apart, but wrong because arms and legs are all part of one body and cannot be separated. so paradoxically one can say that walker and walking are not the same, but one can also say that they are the same (the same body/oneness).
it can be argued that walker is walking, walker is not walking, and as nagarjuna says walker is not the same as, nor different from walking. infact whatever you seek to prove, if you are clever enough, you can prove it. this is the nature of reason and logic. a donkey that is lead by the carrot of the person who possesses it.
i find his logic is clear (it is)infact, it is pure genius, but as with all logic one has to realise that at this moment logic is thoroughly illogical. though perhaps when he wrote it was thoroughly logical. logic being logical? logic being illogical? two sides of the same coin. if logical can be illogical why discuss something as important as emptiness using logic? this defies a common understanding of nagarjuna, unless of course he wished to impress buddhist emptiness upon the minds of the common people. or, perhaps he really did believe in the immutable logos (reason) of plato. that insoluble all pervasive notion of truth. personally i see that reason has its uses (many of them groundbreaking and earth shattering), but can often be used to say what you want, especially when it comes to philosophy.
i find the argument for emptiness grounded in dependent arising 'can' be compelling, or not compelling. its just how you approach it. in that a collection does not necessarily indicate an individuality, it could be seen as a collective, for example a sea sponge colony 'may' have no singular conscious individuality as the colony as a whole, but then a human being is a collection with a consciousness . but as i see it, dependent arising could be used as a proof against emptiness just as much as a proof for it. i believe that the buddha would have days where he took time out from such an approach, that is he would respect the agile logical display of nagarjuna, but have said "not on mondays nagarjuna" (but only if you dont mind my friend).
i dont think that the buddha was about dogmatising certain concepts and words such as emptiness, as useful as they may be. even freedom can become an obstacle to relationship and his word "liberation" can be in buddhism taken to mean many different things. it may just be that mental freedom and freedom from suffering are synonymous. emptiness is representative of water and air, but one should not forget the presence of fire, or gold (earth)(male elements)that are representative of fullness/form. to argue away form for emptiness seems unbalanced. just as to argue away emptiness for form would be unbalanced, though it may be an interesting excercise (and not too difficult). infact rising to the challenge if one looks in minute detail/huge magnification at an area of space one will find it a quantum soup, and not nearly as empty as one expected. infact buddha is implacable when he says emptiness is form for this could imply that there is no emptiness, only form. or visa-versa one could argue that all is empty.
i have also read nagarjunas, i think its called the flower garland, which was less a discussion of emptiness and logical proof for such, though his approach in the middle way comes across in this book too. no, i remember now its called the discourse of the precious flower garland.
i realise that my comments on nagarguna's mulamadhyamakakarika may seem disrespectful regarding the buddhist saint, and have no desire to show disrespect, but i do feel that all in all, though brilliant his arguments are not compelling ground for emptiness. this is because i am aware of the bias behind reason. there are other ways to illustrate emptiness. the buddhas "emptiness is form" for example is a much clearer statement of anti-logic, that i find very elegant. also the prescence of the zero in any effective numerical system requires a hypothetical emptiness.
i have no doubt that in the original tongue nagarjuna was a marvellous poet, sadly this does not come across in this translation or in "verses from the centre" a different translation of the same work. perhaps, in his poetic form his genius would have shone out as much as it does from his rational genius.
this is an interesting book to read, a fascinating insight into the mind of an early buddhist saint and an example of how one can use logic to prove anything, even that which intuitively seems almost impossible. but personally i dont feel it tells me anything, other than showing patterns of logic, which are a useful thing to aquire. i must say though that i am 'astonished' by the mans logical dexterity.
i would have found nagarjuna more interesting if he had tried to prove the existence of form and balanced this with a proof for the existence of emptiness. for in truth it is not balanced to prove the existence of emptiness without proving the existence of form. and you cannot prove the existence of emptiness without proving the existence of form, for emptiness is form. it can be argued that all is emptiness, but it can also be argued that all is form. whatever you look for is whatever you find. such is the nature of reality. seek and you will find.
infact... making things fun, and killing the buddhas word, i would say that "form is not emptiness, form is form" is just as true as "emptiness is form". this is the buddas freedom. playing with logic, one does not take reason too seriously on mondays, but... aah, on tuesdays it is profoundly important.
thank you nagarjuna for the encouragement you have given many.
love, flakey xxx.
19 people found this helpful
HelpfulReport abuse
T Wright.
5.0 out of 5 stars The Best.Reviewed in the United States on June 22, 2010
Verified Purchase
(redaction & addendum of previous review)
In reading the entire text, i found the arguements quite overwelming, however the beginning buddhist is not without help. In searching for applicatons to the examinations it can be said that madhyamaka is the synthsis of all other schools. This is a great starting place for organization. monastics usually study these topics for 20 years intensively , they relate most to the abidharma. Having said this , i would reccomend Geshe Tashi Tsering's Foundations book series, especially Relative truth , ultimate truth ( Vol 2) as the companion to this text. In learning the divisions of the two truths by the four major schools one may place the examinations of nagarjuna in thier context and avoid misintrepretation which garfield says " the danger is to mistakenly view the subtleties of emptiness as nihlism". ( paraphrase) So this would be a great guide to the study applicaton and classification of the book's chapters .. July 8, 2010
I am not a monk, nor have i been given a systematic , structured schooling in buddhist philosophy. My review is based solely upon comparison with my limited understanding of the subtleties of madhyamaka. Nagarjuna is called a master by many prominent buddhist thinkers, to note Tsong khapa. It is said that Nagarjuna is an "Arya" being. "Arya" meaning sees all subtle levels of Dukkha. ( Rather elementary) However it is said repeadedly that without ethics,concentration and then wisdom the madhaymaka is an enigma. Thats why the dalai lama explains it as such. Presupposing the student has built this foundation - Ethics, Concentration, Wisdom. Then one is ready for Madhyamaka.
Garfield gives the best version to western philosophers. I would caution though taking Garfield's view as the monastic view. Even though he gives a great explanation , thouroughly extensive and simplifies deep points in the madhyamaka, he is not able to approach it from the soterilogical point of view, as compared to that of an Arya being. in the madhyamakaavatara, which is like an introduction to Nagarjuna, chandrakirti says that he isn't even an Arya, of the 6th bhumi. Im sure Garfield would agree, that to have a thourough understanding of this text one would have to explain from that view.
This text would be greatly understanded by the most extensive commentary extant by Rje Tsong Khapa. (Ocean of reasoning) with this commentary one would get the jest of the major commentaries from Chandrakirti, Buddhapalita, and Tsong Khapa. Ocean is a great companion to this text.
With this in mind this version of Nagarjuna's seminal treatise is the best buddhist book available, aside from Lamrim Chenmo.
100% gift to the west, Thank you Garfield,Newland and everyone else for this gift to us all.
15 people found this helpful
HelpfulReport abuse
Joe McDonagh
5.0 out of 5 stars Blow your mind wide open with this masterpiece of Buddhist philosophyReviewed in the United States on July 21, 2014
Verified Purchase
Nagarjuna systematically destroys any argument against dependent origination as well as any argument for inherent existence in this dialectical classic. If these terms mean nothing to you, I will give a very brief overview.
The basic idea is that nothing in our experiential world, when examined, can be found to exist by its own volition, or from its own side. The technical term for this type of existence is 'inherent existence'. The problem is that even though no such thing can be found, we as humans innately ascribe inherent existence to various things. This innate ascription leads to suffering.
The truth is that all things come into being dependent on other things. This is what's called 'dependent origination'. Because of dependent origination, we say that all things are 'empty' of inherent existence or essence. This philosophy of emptiness (sunyata) is the foundation of this work. There is much, much more depth to this philosophy, but this isn't the place.
It's not an easy read by any means but the practical benefits of this philosophy are enormous. I recommend starting at the work with commentary because you may be intimidated by the verses on their own. It's also easy to get a little hung up on a tricky verse, but you should try to avoid that because the commentary normally clears such verses up. Another point of confusion is that this is a dialectic work, so some of the verses are his opponent's claims. Keep that in mind.
48 people found this helpful
HelpfulReport abuse
See all reviews
Top reviews from other countries
Max Bes
2.0 out of 5 stars The paper is to thinReviewed in the United Kingdom on January 11, 2021
Verified Purchase
The quality of the paper is very bad. Thin, greyish, and translucent. Not easy to read, graphically (the content is not easy either, but that is another discussion.)
Report abuse
Tao
3.0 out of 5 stars DryReviewed in the United Kingdom on May 14, 2016
Verified Purchase
Very very dry but has some pearls here and there. I couldn't get through this book. I preferred Nargajuna by Jones.
Report abuse
Mrs. K. M. Fitzgerald
5.0 out of 5 stars Clear translation and accessible commentaryReviewed in the United Kingdom on November 8, 2012
Verified Purchase
I bought this book in preparation for attending 3 days of teaching on the text by the Dalai Lama. I found the translation very clear and readable. The commentary was really helpful in understanding the historical context of the text, in terms of the ideas that Nagarjuna was responding to. It also gave me a helpful way into a complex and difficult set of ideas.
4 people found this helpfulReport abuse
Werner
5.0 out of 5 stars Eternally trueReviewed in the United Kingdom on July 21, 2013
Verified Purchase
As a study work of just for reference then this book does cover the basic philosophical epithets of Buddhist philosophy.
Report abuse
AA
3.0 out of 5 stars One of few really helpful books in English for navigating ...Reviewed in the United Kingdom on May 16, 2016
Verified Purchase
One of few really helpful books in English for navigating this highlight of the Indian Buddhist philosophical tradition. A mostly clear exposition of what is a very condensed and impenetrable text, with helpful links to Western philosophical analogies where appropriate.
One person found this helpfulReport abuse
==
Want to Read
Rate this book
1 of 5 stars2 of 5 stars3 of 5 stars4 of 5 stars5 of 5 stars
https://www.scribd.com/document/561175900/Ocean-of-Reasoning-a-Great-Commentary-on-Nagarjuna-039-s-Mulamadhyamakakarika
Ocean of Reasoning: A Great Commentary on Nagarjuna's Mulamadhyamakakarika
by
Tsongkhapa,
Jay L. Garfield (Translator),
Ngawang Samten (Translator)
4.59 · Rating details · 39 ratings · 3 reviews
Tsong khapa (14th-15th centuries) is arguably the most important and influential philosopher in Tibetan history. His Ocean of Reasoning is the most extensive and perhaps the deepest extant commentary on N=ag=arjuna's M=ulamadhyamakak=arik=a (Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way), and it can be argued that it is impossible to discuss N=ag=arjuna's work in an informed way without consulting it. It discusses alternative readings of the text and prior commentaries and provides a detailed exegesis, constituting a systematic presentation of Madhyamaka Buddhist philosophy. Despite its central importance, however, of Tsong khapa's three most important texts, only Ocean of Reasoning has until now remained untranslated, perhaps because it is both philosophically and linguistically challenging, demanding a rare combination of abilities on the part of a translator. Jay L. Garfield and Geshe Ngawang Samten bring the requisite skills to this difficult task, combining between them expertise in Western and Indian philosophy, and fluency in Tibetan, Sanskrit, and English. The resulting translation of this important text is not only a landmark contribution to the scholarship of Indian and Tibetan Buddhism, but will be invaluable to students of Tibetan Buddhism and philosophy, who will now be able to read this work alongside N=ag=arjuna's masterpiece. (less)
GET A COPYKobo
Online Stores ▾
Book Links ▾
Paperback, 632 pages
Published April 20th 2006 by Oxford University Press, USA (first published 2006)
Original Title
Ocean of Reasoning: A Great Commentary on Nagarjuna's Mulamadhyamakakarika
Edition Language
English
Review of Ocean of Reasoning: A Great Commentary on Nagarjuna's Mulamadhyamakakarika (Paperback)
COMMUNITY REVIEWS
Showing 1-30
Average rating4.59 ·
Rating details
· 39 ratings · 3 reviews
Oct 12, 2007bad rated it really liked it · review of another edition
Shelves: buddhism
analysis of phenomenon from the tibetan geluk madhyamaka school of buddhism. the analysis consists of various very well-defined reasonings pertaining to self-emptiness, existence and conceptuality, leading first to an inferential knowledge, built through meditation and contemplation into direct cognition of the true nature of reality - suchness. the reasonings are very old, but this text was composed by je tsongkhapa for instruction of gelukpa monks and the establishment of dharma around 13xx ad. and by analysis, i mean quite rigorous analysis. (less)
flagLike · comment · see review
Aug 05, 2011Scott rated it it was amazing · review of another edition
This is a 15th century commentary on a 2nd century text translated in the 21 century into English. The root text is likely one of the most complicated or esoteric philosophical ideas of the last two millenium. It's like taking your brain apart and putting it back together piece by piece. Be careful when you dip into this casual text. (less)
flagLike · comment · see review
May 16, 2011Farhan M is currently reading it · review of another edition
Trying out something obscure - a 14th century Tibetan commentary of a seminal 1st century Buddhist Philosophy text
