doctrinal system of the twofold truth of the Buddhist literature, the
6 Kalupahana asserts that N2g2rjuna's emphasis of “emptiness” was to eliminate any dogmatism
or obsession (adhilaya) and any erroneous views (dosa-prasanga, XXIV.13) (Kalupahana, 1986:86).
International Journal of Buddhist Thought & Culture
257
True or Ultimate Reality is beyond words, while, on the other hand, the
functional aspect of the True Reality is expressible. Within Mah2y2na
Buddhism, the system of the two truths has been employed to that end
to resolve the essential aspect and functional aspect of the Ultimate
Reality. The two truths are param2rtha (ultimate or superworldly) and
sa8v#ti (conventional or worldly).
N2g2rjuna divides Buddhist doctrines into the two truths: the
worldly conventional truth and the ultimate truth (Kalupahana,
1986:331-333). Concerning the two truths, in the M2dhyamika tradition,
N2g2rjuna elaborates the two truths in his Treatise on the Middle Way
(M2dhyamaka-$2stra): 1) the nature of the two truths; 2) that if one does
not know the truths, one does not know the essence of Buddha's
scriptures; 3) the purpose of teaching the two truths; 4) the faults of
misconceiving the two truths; and, 5) that because the two truths are
difficult to realize, Buddha did not teach them in the beginning.
Truths are objects that exist the way they appear. Thus, according
to the Geshe Lhundup and Jeffrey Hopkins, conventional objects are
truths only in the sense that they seem to exist the way they appear
because of an ignorant consciousness, a concealer (sa8v#ti) of suchness
(tathat2) through conceiving phenomena which exists inherently (Sopa,
1989). Hence, all objects except emptiness are conventional truths or
truths-for-a-concealer. On the other hand, the Geshe Lhundup and
Jeffrey Hopkins elaborates that emptiness is an ultimate truth because
it exists as empty of inherent existence in direct perception. It is an
ultimate truth, because among phenomena it is supreme, since through
meditating on it, obstructions are removed and it is the object of the
highest wisdom.
N2g2rjuna's rejection of the Abhidharma system7 was based on his
tenet that “all dharmas do change continuously and they all have no
7 One of main themes of Abhidharma theory is the ‘Absence of Essence (or 2tman) and
permanence of dharmas’. Vaibhasika accepted the authority of Abhidharma and asserted that all
existences are substantially established as having their own autonomous entity that is not
dependent on conceptuality. In the Abhidharma system, dharmas do not change but exist
permanently. The H6nay2nas cultivate the view of selflessness merely through brief reasoning.
In dependence on this, they finally remove the conception of true existence, together with its
seeds, through the vajra-like meditative stabilization of the H6nay2na path of meditation and
simultaneously actualize the H6nay2na enlightenment. It is denied by the Madhyamika school.
Kwangsoo Park: An Analysis of the Buddha's Paradoxical Silence
258
own-being (svabh2va).”8 It seems that N2g2rjuna followed the Buddha's
theory of codependent arising (prat6tyasamutp2da) faithfully9 and he
elaborated further on the theory of codependent arising in relation to
emptiness ($^nyat2). N2g2rjuna defined both $^nyat2 and
prat6tyasamutp2da as the ‘middle path’ (pratipat saiva madhyam2)
(Kalupahana, 1986:334-339). Even though N2g2rjuna divides the two
truths to explain the doctrine which is taught by the Buddha, the two
truths are not separable: “Without relying upon convention, the ultimate
fruit is not taught. Without understanding the ultimate fruit, freedom is
not attained” (Kalupahana, 1986:333-335). Therefore, the two truths are
not different entities but one entity within a nominal difference. The
truths are not one, but are nominally different, for they appear
differently in thought. The M2dhyamika school refutes true existence with
respect to all phenomena even down to particles. This means that
through reasoning, this school shows that things are not established as
their own mode of subsistence or are not their own reality. For
example, the final mode of a table is not the table but its emptiness is
its own reality (Sopa, 1989:279-280).
Yog2c2ra, on the other hand, developed a conception of the ‘three
natures’ (trisvabh2va), which is used to explain the three different
aspects of consciousness. According to the Yog2c2ra school, a
conventional truth is an object which can be distinguished
conventionally by a correct consciousness. Falsity, conventional truth,
and nominal truth (vyavah2rasatya) are mutually inclusive. An ultimate
truth is an object which can be realized by a primary cognition. Ś^nyat2
(Emptiness), elements of [a Superior's] qualities (dharmadh2tu),
thoroughly established [nature] (parini4panna), ultimate truth
(param2rthasatya), the limit of reality (bh^tako%i), and thusness (tathat2)