Nagarjuna
Nothing has a fixed, independent nature of its own – everything exists only in relation to other things, and even this emptiness is not a thing.
Placement
Madhyamaka: all things are empty (shunyata) of inherent existence – even emptiness itself.
Key ideas
- Shunyata (emptiness)
- Two truths
- Tetralemma
Influence
Influenced by 1
Siddhartha Gautama (Buddha)
influenced by
Nagarjuna’s Root Verses on the Middle Way open by praising the Buddha for teaching dependent origination, which Nagarjuna reads as the emptiness of intrinsic nature. Nagarjuna, Mulamadhyamakakarika, tr. J. L. Garfield, The Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way (1995); SEP “Nagarjuna”
Evidence: AI draft
Siddhartha Gautama (Buddha) › c. 480–400 BCE · conventionally dated 563–483 BCE
Influenced 14
Vasubandhu
influenced
Vasubandhu’s Yogacara reinterprets the Mahayana emptiness taught by Nagarjuna through the doctrine of three natures; whether Vasubandhu drew on Nagarjuna’s own works is uncertain. Vasubandhu, Trisvabhavanirdesa; SEP “Vasubandhu”
Evidence: AI draft
Vasubandhu › c. 350–430
Chandrakirti
influenced ✓
Chandrakirti commented on Nagarjuna’s Root Verses in Clear Words (Prasannapada) and defended their method of reductio (prasanga) against Bhavaviveka. Candrakirti, Prasannapada; C. W. Huntington, The Emptiness of Emptiness (1989)
Evidence: also in Wikidata · Wikidata
Chandrakirti › c. 600–650
Huineng
influenced
The Platform Sutra ascribed to Huineng counts Nagarjuna among the Indian patriarchs and teaches the middle way by pairing opposites so that neither side is clung to. Platform Sutra (Dunhuang version), tr. P. Yampolsky, The Platform Sutra of the Sixth Patriarch (1967)
Evidence: AI draft
Huineng › traditionally 638–713
Fazang
influenced
Fazang commented on the Twelve Gate Treatise ascribed to Nagarjuna and, in his five-teaching scheme, ranked emptiness teaching as elementary Mahayana below Huayan’s perfect teaching. Fazang, Shiermen lun zongzhi yiji; Huayan wujiao zhang; F. H. Cook, Hua-yen Buddhism: The Jewel Net of Indra (1977)
Evidence: AI draft
Fazang › 643–712
Dōgen
influenced
In the fascicle ‘Buddha-nature’ (Busshō) of the Shōbōgenzō Dōgen discusses Nagarjuna, fourteenth Indian ancestor of the Zen lineage, whose body appeared as the round moon of Buddha-nature. Dōgen, Shōbōgenzō, Busshō; SEP “Japanese Zen Buddhist Philosophy”
Evidence: AI draft
Dōgen › 1200–1253
Karl Jaspers
influenced
Jaspers devoted a chapter of The Great Philosophers (1957) to Nagarjuna, alongside Laozi among the metaphysicians whose thinking springs from the origin. K. Jaspers, Die großen Philosophen I (1957), “Aus dem Ursprung denkende Metaphysiker”
Evidence: AI draft
Karl Jaspers › 1883–1969
Show all (14)Show fewer
Zhiyi
influenced
From Nagarjuna’s verse equating dependent arising with emptiness, provisional designation and the middle way Zhiyi developed the threefold truth (Mohe zhiguan, 594). Zhiyi, Mohe zhiguan (594); Nagarjuna, Mulamadhyamakakarika, Chinese tr. Kumarajiva (Zhonglun); SEP “Tiantai Buddhism”
Evidence: AI draft
Zhiyi › 538–597
Wonhyo
influenced
In his commentary on the Awakening of Faith Wonhyo held that Nagarjuna’s Madhyamaka negates without affirming, Yogacara affirms without negating, and the Awakening of Faith does both. Wonhyo, Daeseung gisillon so; Daeseung gisillon byeolgi; A. C. Muller (ed.), Wonhyo: Selected Works (Collected Works of Korean Buddhism 1, 2012)
Evidence: AI draft
Wonhyo › 617–686
Shantideva
influenced
The wisdom chapter of Shantideva’s Guide to the Bodhisattva’s Way of Life (Bodhicaryavatara) defends Nagarjuna’s Madhyamaka against Yogacara and other schools. Santideva, Bodhicaryavatara, tr. K. Crosby & A. Skilton (1995)
Evidence: AI draft
Shantideva › c. 685–763
Shantarakshita
influenced
Shantarakshita’s Ornament of the Middle Way argues with Nagarjuna that nothing has intrinsic nature, since nothing is truly one or many, while accepting Yogacara conventionally. Santaraksita, Madhyamakalamkara, tr. J. Blumenthal, The Ornament of the Middle Way (2004); SEP “Śāntarakṣita”
Evidence: AI draft
Shantarakshita › c. 725–788
Kūkai
influenced
Kūkai counted Nagarjuna as third patriarch of esoteric Buddhism, who by legend received it in an iron stupa in South India (Record of the Transmission, 821). Kūkai, Himitsu mandara kyō fuhōden (821); R. Abé, The Weaving of Mantra: Kūkai and the Construction of Esoteric Buddhist Discourse (1999)
Evidence: AI draft
Kūkai › 774–835
Atisha
influenced
Atisha placed Nagarjuna’s Madhyamaka view of emptiness at the summit of the path and taught it in Tibet, in the reading of Chandrakirti. Atisha, Bodhipathapradipa, tr. R. Sherburne, A Lamp for the Path and Commentary (1983); Satyadvayavatara, tr. C. Lindtner (1981)
Evidence: AI draft
Atisha › c. 982–1054
Shinran
influenced
Shinran honoured Nagarjuna as first of seven Pure Land masters and took from the ‘Chapter on Easy Practice’ ascribed to him the easy path of calling Amida’s name. Shinran, Kyōgyōshinshō, Shōshinge; D. Hirota et al. (tr.), The Collected Works of Shinran (1997)
Evidence: AI draft
Shinran › 1173–1263
Tsongkhapa
influenced
Tsongkhapa commented on Nagarjuna’s Root Verses in Ocean of Reasoning and insisted that emptiness negates intrinsic nature, not the conventional existence of things. Tsongkhapa, Ocean of Reasoning, tr. Geshe Ngawang Samten & J. L. Garfield (2006)
Evidence: AI draft
Tsongkhapa › 1357–1419
Criticism
Criticized by 1
Adi Shankara
criticised by
Shankara dismissed the Madhyamaka doctrine that everything is empty as contradicted by every means of knowledge and not worth detailed refutation (Brahmasutrabhashya II.2.31). Śaṅkara, Brahmasūtrabhāṣya II.2.31
Evidence: AI draft
Adi Shankara › c. 700–750 · conventionally dated 788–820
Criticizes 1
Akshapada Gautama
criticised disputed
Nagarjuna asked what establishes the Nyaya means of knowledge themselves (Vigrahavyavartani 31–51); whether he knew the Nyaya-sutra in its present form is disputed. Nāgārjuna, Vigrahavyāvartanī 31–51, tr. J. Westerhoff, The Dispeller of Disputes, 2010; F. Tola & C. Dragonetti, Nāgārjuna’s Refutation of Logic, 1995
Evidence: AI draft
Akshapada Gautama › c. 120–190
Works
A dialectical refutation of all intrinsic existence – emptiness as the middle way.
Position
Nagarjuna radicalised the Buddha’s teaching of dependent origination. If everything arises in dependence on other things, then nothing has svabhava – intrinsic, independent existence. All things are therefore “empty” (shunyata). Emptiness is not nothingness but the very fact of dependence, and emptiness itself is empty too. With sharp dialectical arguments he showed that every attempt to establish things as truly existing – causes, motion, a self – collapses into contradiction. He distinguished conventional from ultimate truth and taught that nirvana and samsara are not ultimately different. His thought is foundational for Tibetan, Chinese and Japanese Buddhism, Zen included.
Life & context
Nagarjuna was an Indian Buddhist monk and philosopher who probably lived in the second century CE in southern India. Many legends grew up around his name, and later tradition attributed numerous works to him. He is revered as the founder of the Madhyamaka, the “school of the middle”, and in Tibetan and East Asian Buddhism as a “second Buddha”.
Further main works
- The Dispeller of Disputes (Vigrahavyāvartanī, c. 200 CE)
- Precious Garland (Ratnāvalī, c. 200 CE)
Appears in
- Journey ‘Asia and Europe in Dialogue’ · Stop 3 of 11
- Journey ‘Paths of Indian Thought’ · Stop 5 of 9
As of November 2026 · Sources · Improve this page · How Agora is made