Chapter 3 – Perception [U2T-3S-perception]: 

This chapter refutes independent/inherent/absolute objects of perception (as conditions for perception and knowledge) because the three spheres of action/perception/cognition  – actor/perceiver/knower, action/perception/cognition, result/perceived/known (or perceiver/knower with more knowledge) – cannot be inherently (i) existent/functional, (ii) non-existent/non-functional, (iii) both, or (iv) neither; cannot be inherently (i) different/separate/multiple/dual, (ii) identical/united/one/non-dual, (iii) both, or (iv) neither; cannot be inherently (i) permanent/continuous/eternal/’this’, (ii) impermanent/discontinuous/annihilated/’non-this’, (iii) both, or (iv) neither [Tetralemma] ⇐⇒ thus the three spheres are empty of inherent existence, never absolute [T2-3S] ⇐⇒ they are inseparable, dependently co-arisen, interdependent, co-defined, co-evolving, co-imputed by the mind, mere designations/names, conventional truths/tools [T1-3S] ⇐⇒ and vice versa, one truth supports/implies the other [U2T-3S] ⇐⇒ they are like illusions, reflections, mirages, dreams, echos, ‘there, yet not there’ [Illusory]
⇐⇒ so we could use these models /concepts /dualities /triads / quads, like subject/relation/object, actor/action/result, cause/causality/effect, producer/production/product, goer/going/destination, perceiver/perception/perceived, knower/knowing/known, part/composing/aggregate, characteristic/characterizing/characterized, definition/defining/defined, origination/duration/cessation, before/during/after, past/present/future, and other dualities/triads/quads, including the two truths, conventionally/relatively, but never in absolute terms [U2T-in-action], using them without apprehending /opposing /unifying /accepting /rejecting /changing /increasing /decreasing /liberating anything in absolute terms.

There are no inherent subjects/actors/perceivers/knowers because they are also objects/results/perceived/known,  because they are dependently co-arisen in a limitless and centerless cycle. The same for the objects/results/perceived/known.

.

Last update: December 27, 1025
AI Art from: Stoneflower013
Source Text: Garfield, PTG, Streng, Batchelor.   

Previous-chapter           Home           Next-chapter

A. Introduction – Warning: The World is Closer than you Think

Chapter 3 introduces the inseparable relativity [T1] and emptiness of inherent existence [T2] of perception, of perceiver/knower, perception/cognition and perceived/known world. It affirms that there is no inherent/absolute direct perception of the essence of things. Meaning the three spheres of perception – e.g., subject/perceiver/knower, relation/perception/cognition and object/perceived/known – cannot be (i) identical/united/one/non-dual/’this’, (ii) different/separate/multiple/dual/’non-this’, (iii) both, or (iv) neither. Meaning there is no (i) continuity or (ii) discontinuity of any thing, being, process or cycle in the three times (before, during and after the actual action/perception); no (i) permanent or (ii) impermanent essence, self, or 5 aggregates. Instead of indulging in any to those four extreme positions (i-iv), Nagarjuna proposes a Middle Way free from all extremes (‘this’, ‘non-this’) and middle (both, neither), with nothing to accept/reject/change in absolute terms, only conventionally/relatively/temporarily if it helps on the path at this point.

The Madhyamaka logic is always similar [Tetralemma ⇔ Emptiness ⇔ Dependent Origination ⇔ Illusory ⇔ Middle Way ⇔ Acting-without-acting]: by showing that in the various dyads/triads/quads — e.g., subject/relation/object, cause/causality/effect, goer/going/destination, perceiver/perception/perceived-world, part/composing/whole, characteristic/defining/characterized, producer/production/produced, acquirer/acquiring/acquired —
the apparent opposites cannot be
(i) existent/real/identical/united/simultaneous/one/non-dual/’this’,
(ii) non-existent/non-real/different/separate/multiple/dual/’non-this’,
(iii) both, or (iv) neither, and there is no fifth [Tetralemma];
⇐⇒ this implies that the apparent opposites are empty of inherent existence, never absolute [T2/Emptiness];
⇐⇒ but dependently co-arisen, interdependent, co-defined, co-evolving, co-imputed by the mind, mere designations/names, conventional truth/tools [T1/Dependent-Origination];
⇐⇒ one aspect/truth supports/implies the other [U2T];
⇐⇒ like illusions, reflections, mirages, dreams, echos, ‘there, yet not there’ [Illusory];
⇐⇒ Pointing to the Middle Way free from all extremes and middle;
⇐⇒ so we can use them conventionally/relatively but never in absolute terms [Acting-without-acting].
(Where ‘⇐⇒’ means one side implies the other.)

B. Analysis

• • There is no inherent perception in the three times.
    We cannot find the beginning of the activity in the three times.

  • The three spheres – perceiver/knower, perception/cognition, perceived/known –
    are not inherently existent/functional, not completely non-existent/non-functional, not both, not neither [Tetralemma].

  • The three spheres – perceiver/knower, perception/cognition, perceived/known –
    are not different/separate/multiple/dual/’this’, not identical/united/one/non-dual/’non-this’, not both, not neither [Tetralemma].

  • The three spheres – perceiver/knower, perception/cognition, perceived/known –
    are not permanent/continuous/eternal, not impermanent/discontinuous/annihilated, not both, not neither [Tetralemma].

  • The three spheres – perceiver/knower, perception/cognition, perceived/known –
    are thus empty of inherent existence [T2-3S] ⇐⇒ inseparable, dependently co-arisen, interdependent, co-defined, co-evolving, co-imputed by the mind, mere designations/names, conventional truths/tools [T1-3S] [U2T-3S] ⇐⇒ like illusions, reflections, mirages, dreams, echos, ‘there, yet not there’ [Illusory].

  • The three stages of becoming – origination/beginning/coming, duration/middle/transformation, cessation/ending/going — relative to any composite/product
    are not inherently existent, not completely non-existent, not both, not neither [Tetralemma].

  • The three times relative to any phenomena/dharmas – before/past, during/present, after/future –
    are not inherently existent, not completely non-existent, not both, not neither [Tetralemma].

  • Acting without acting: So we can use those concepts conventionally/relatively but never in absolute terms; without attachment, reification, effort or absolute; without apprehending anything in absolute terms; non-dualistically, without opposing/uniting anything in absolute terms; without accepting/rejecting/changing anything in absolute terms; thus acting more and more in accord with the Middle Way free from all extremes and middle, and with the true nature of reality as it is (tathata, suchness) as pointed out by the Union of the Two Truths [U2T] and its corollaries [U3S / Uopp / U3T / UGM / U3K / U2T-2T].

  • There is no continuity or discontinuity of any being, thing, process, cycle, or karma, across the three times of any activity, association, aggregation, definition.

  • It is a limitless and centerless fractal cycle: All dharmas are both perceiver-before and perceiver-after; are multiple perceivers-before and perceivers-after depending on the perspective, all merely imputed by the mind in dependence of its past experience, conditioning, karma (individual, collective, cosmic).

  • It is like a limitless centerless empty fractal conditioning/causal/karmic cycle — the perceiver-after becomes a new perceiver-before: All phenomena/dharmas are both perceiver-before and perceiver-after; have/are an infinity of perceivers-before and perceivers-after in space, time and nature depending on the perspective; are ever changing, never the same for two consecutive infinitesimal moments. There is no first inherent/absolute perceiver-before, no final inherent/absolute perceiver-after, no middle inherent/absolute action/perception/cognition. Perception/cognition is conventionally/relatively functional/useful to navigate the world [T1], but never absolute [T2] [U2T]. Absolute fact and knowledge are impossible. The three spheres of perception/cognition – perceiver/knower, perception/cognition, perceived/known – are interdependent, co-defined, co-evolving, co-imputed after the fact [T1-3S] ⇐⇒ empty of inherent existence [T2-3S] ⇐⇒ like illusions, reflections, mirages, dreams, echos, ‘there, yet not there’ [U2T-3S]. 

C. Verses – 4 translations – 9 verse

D. Questions and Answers: Perceiving without perceiving, aware of the limitless and centerless fractal empty-karmic-perception cycle [U2T-3S-in-action/perception]. Rebirth: the perceiver (subject), perception (action) and perceived-world (object) co-evolve inseparably at all levels, from all perspectives.

Question: Co-evolution of the three spheres

Q: The interdependence of the subject/perceiver, action/perception, and object/perceived, is fascinating. Again they are not just co-defined, but co-evolving in the karmic cycle sense (like we explored with the karmic cycle of chapter 1, and the goer cycle of chapter 2). Here the resulting perceived world is dependent on the conditioned evolving actor/perceiver; and the actor/perceiver is continually updated by his experience with the perceived world. And the actions/perception are dependent on the first two. Everything is interdependent, co-evolving, co-updating, co-creating, thus all empty of inherent existence.

Answer: You’ve hit on a profound thread that weaves through Chapters 1, 2, and now 3 of Nāgārjuna’s Mūlamadhyamakakārikā, and it’s exhilarating to see how you’re tracing this cyclic, co-evolving interdependence across these domains! In Chapter 3, the triad of subject/perceiver, action/perception, and object/perceived mirrors the dynamic cycles we explored earlier: just as the effect-1 becomes cause-2 in Chapter 1’s karmic-like causality, and the goer-1 updates to goer-2 through movement in Chapter 2, here the perceiver evolves through perception, shaping and being shaped by the perceived world. The "resulting perceived world" emerges dependently on the conditioned, ever-evolving perceiver — whose state (karmic imprints, habits, past experiences) filters what is seen, heard, or thought. Simultaneously, the perceiver is continually updated by their interaction with this perceived world, much like an actor updated by karmic actions or a goer redefined by each step. The action of perception, in turn, hinges on both, arising as the relational bridge between perceiver and perceived, co-defined and co-evolving with them.

This interdependence isn’t static but a living, breathing process of co-updating and co-creating, as you’ve so aptly put it. The perceiver doesn’t encounter a fixed "world out there," nor does perception occur in a vacuum, nor does the perceived object exist independently—each element recalibrates the others in an endless karmic cycle of mutual transformation. This mirrors Chapter 1’s infinite causal chain and Chapter 2’s centerless motion, but now applied to experience itself: the perceiver’s updated state alters the perceived, which reshapes the perceiver, driving the cycle forward. Because of this relentless co-evolution, all three — subject, action, object [T1] — are empty of inherent existence, lacking any standalone essence [T2] [U2T]. They’re like mirages, co-arising in a dance of relativity, reinforcing Nāgārjuna’s insight that emptiness is the condition for this fluidity. Your observation ties these chapters into a unified vision: causality, movement, and perception all reveal a reality of interdependence, co-creation, and emptiness, perpetually unfolding without a core.
.
.

Question: A Limitless and Centerless Cycle of Motion with Nothing Existing Independently / Separately / Inherently / Individually in It

Q: I suppose, like the cycle of causality (chapter 1) is limitless and centerless, like the movement cycle (chapter 2) is also limitless and centerless, the cycle of perception (chapter 3) must also be limitless and centerless, with no beginning, no ending, and nothing to grasp in the middle. Could you explain what this means?

Answer: Your intuition is spot-on: the cycle of perception in Chapter 3, like the causal cycle of Chapter 1 and the movement cycle of Chapter 2, is indeed limitless and centerless, with no discernible beginning, end, or fixed point to grasp in the middle. This "limitless and centerless" quality means that the co-evolution of the observer (perceiver) and the observed (perceived) is an unbounded, fluid process [T1] that defies any attempt to pin it down to a static origin, conclusion, or core essence [T2] [U2T]. In Chapter 3, Nāgārjuna shows that the perceiver doesn’t preexist perception, nor does the perceived object exist independently, nor does perception itself arise as a self-contained act—each depends on the others, and this interdependence stretches infinitely in all directions. There’s no first perceiver who kickstarts the cycle, no final perceived world that terminates it, and no central "self" or "reality" in the present to anchor it. Instead, it’s a ceaseless interplay where the perceiver’s state shapes the perceived, and the perceived updates the perceiver, rolling forward without boundaries or a nucleus—much like the infinite regress of causes and effects in Chapter 1 or the goer’s unending redefinition in Chapter 2.

This limitless cycle of co-evolution carries deep implications, resonating with the karmic framework you’ve mentioned. It suggests that our experience—our "world"—is continuously co-created by the perceiver and perceived, conditioned by past actions (karma) that update the observer, who then perceives a realm aligned with that conditioning. In Buddhist terms, this aligns with the idea of rebirth across realms: accumulated karma (past perceptions, actions, and their imprints) shapes the perceiver’s state, which in turn manifests a corresponding "observed" reality—be it a human realm, a heavenly one, or another—without an inherent "self" carrying over. Yet, Nāgārjuna’s emptiness pushes this further: even this process lacks a fixed starting point (no original karma), endpoint (no final liberation outside the cycle), or central entity (no permanent soul). It’s a mirage-like unfolding, where observer and observed co-arise and co-evolve endlessly, each moment a reflection of prior conditions yet empty of inherent substance. This doesn’t negate rebirth or karma but reveals them as relational, centerless flows—limitless because they transcend linear time, centerless because there’s no solid "me" or "world" to grasp, just an ever-shifting dance of interdependence.

.
.

Question: Anything else?

Q: Is there anything else we should mention about chapter 3?

Answer: Before we leave Chapter 3 of Nāgārjuna’s Mūlamadhyamakakārikā, a couple of additional points could enrich our understanding and connect it further to the cyclic, interdependent themes we’ve been exploring. First, Nāgārjuna’s rejection of the fire analogy—where fire burns itself and other things—isn’t just a casual dismissal but a deliberate nod to Chapter 2’s methodology. By invoking the "present going to," "already gone to," and "not yet gone to" framework, he ties perception to movement, suggesting that just as motion can’t be fixed in time, perception can’t be pinned to a self-existent moment or agent. This reinforces the limitless, centerless cycle: perception, like causality and movement, resists localization, existing only as a relational flux between perceiver and perceived, perpetually updating without a core.

Second, Chapter 3 subtly hints at the broader samsaric implications we’ve touched on with karma and rebirth. By negating the inherent existence of the "perceive," "perception," and "perceived"—and extending this to all sense faculties—Nāgārjuna undermines the foundations of the "fourfold consequences" (knowledge, sensations, desire) and their karmic outcomes (acquisition, existence, birth, aging, death). This suggests that the cycle of perception isn’t just an abstract process but the very mechanism driving samsara: our conditioned perceiving fuels grasping and karma, which in turn updates the perceiver, locking us into this boundless co-evolution [T1]. Yet, because it’s empty of inherent existence  [T2] [U2T], it’s also the key to liberation—not by escaping the cycle but by realizing its dreamlike nature. This sets up later chapters (like those on the aggregates or suffering) and deepens the karmic parallel you’ve illuminated. …

In detail: Absolutely, let’s dive deeper into that second point from Chapter 3, as it’s a rich vein that ties directly into the karmic cycle and samsaric implications you’ve been so keenly exploring. Nāgārjuna’s negation of the inherent existence of the "perceive," "perception," and "perceived" in verse 6, followed by his assertion in verse 8 that the "object perceived" and "perception" lack independent reality, explicitly dismantles the fourfold consequences—knowledge (or cognition), cognitive sensation, affective sensation, and desire—as well as their karmic outcomes: acquisition (upadana, clinging or grasping), existence, birth, aging, and death. This isn’t just a logical exercise; it’s a direct assault on the mechanics of samsara, the cycle of conditioned existence. In Buddhist thought, perception fuels the chain of dependent origination: the sense faculties (like vision) encounter objects (the perceived), sparking contact, sensation, and desire, which lead to grasping (upadana), perpetuating karma and thus existence, birth, and suffering. By showing that none of these—perceiver, perception, perceived—has inherent existence, Nāgārjuna reveals that this entire process [T1] is empty, lacking a solid foundation [T2] [U2T].

Now, let’s connect this to the limitless, centerless cycle we’ve been tracing. The perceiver (perceive) is conditioned by past karma, shaping how they perceive the "perceived," which generates new sensations and desires, updating the perceiver’s karmic state—mirroring the actor-1 to actor-2 update in Chapter 1 and the goer-1 to goer-2 shift in Chapter 2. This updated perceiver then perceives a new "world" aligned with that karma, driving the cycle forward without a beginning (no original perceiver), end (no final escape outside interdependence), or center (no fixed self). In samsara, this manifests as rebirth: the karmic imprints from perception dictate the next realm, yet because all elements are empty, there’s no inherent "soul" reborn—just a flow of co-evolving conditions. Nāgārjuna’s genius here is showing that this cycle, while functionally real (conventionally driving suffering), is ultimately dreamlike—its emptiness means we’re not trapped by a solid reality but by our misapprehension of it. Liberation, then, lies in realizing this co-creative flux as empty, halting the grasping that fuels the karmic update. This deepens Chapter 3’s role as a bridge to later analyses of suffering and liberation.

.
.

Question: Common Themes Across Chapters 1–3

Q: Can you summarize the common themes between the three first chapters of Nāgārjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā, especially this notion of a limitless and centerless cycle of causality, action or perception.

Answer: The first three chapters of Nāgārjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā (MMK)—"An Analysis of Conditioning Causes" (Chapter 1), "An Analysis of 'Going To'" (Chapter 2), and "An Analysis of 'Vision' and Other Sense-Faculties" (Chapter 3) — share six interconnected themes that lay the groundwork for the Madhyamaka philosophy of emptiness (śūnyatā).

[1. the deconstruction of inherent existence,
2. the Union of the Two Truths (U2T),
3. the interdependence and co-evolution of triadic spheres,
4. the illusory nature of phenomena,
5. the Middle Way, and
6. the limitless, centerless cycles that dissolve boundaries between individual, collective, and cosmos.]

These chapters systematically deconstruct the inherent existence (svabhāva) of phenomena by examining causality, action (motion), and perception, respectively, revealing their interdependence and lack of intrinsic essence. 

A central theme across these chapters is the notion of
a limitless and centerless cycle, which manifests in
the co-evolution of triadic relationships (of the three spheres):
– cause-causality-effect,
– goer-going-destination,
– perceiver-perception-perceived;
underscoring the relational [T1]
⇐⇒ non-substantial nature of reality [T2] [U2T].
.

1. Deconstruction of Inherent Existence Using the Tetralemma:
   In each chapter, Nāgārjuna employs the tetralemma (a fourfold negation: not A, not non-A, not both, not neither) to refute the idea that phenomena possess inherent, independent existence.
   – In Chapter 1, he negates four models of causation (self-causation, other-causation, both, neither), showing that causes and effects cannot arise inherently.
   – In Chapter 2, he applies this to motion, arguing that neither a "goer" nor a "non-goer" moves, nor any combination, as motion lacks a fixed essence.
   – In Chapter 3, perception is similarly dismantled: vision cannot see itself or another inherently, nor can a "seer" exist with or without vision.
   [1. Tetralemma:] This method consistently reveals that
   [2. Emptiness:] ⇐⇒ phenomena are empty of self-existence,
   [3. Dependent Origination:] ⇐⇒ existing only relationally.
   .

2. Union of the Two Truths (U2T):
   A recurring framework is the "Union of the Two Truths,"
   where conventional truth (T1: interdependence, dependent origination)
   and ultimate truth (T2: emptiness of inherent existence) are inseparable [U2T].
   – In Chapter 1, causes and effects are interdependent (T1) and thus empty (T2);
   – in Chapter 2, the goer, going, and destination co-arise relationally (T1) without intrinsic reality (T2);
   – in Chapter 3, the perceiver, perception, and perceived depend on each other (T1) and lack independent essence (T2).
   This union emphasizes that
   [2. Emptiness:] ⇐⇒ emptiness
   [3. Dependent Origination:] ⇐⇒ does not negate conventional functionality but reveals its relational nature,
   [1. Tetralemma:] ⇐⇒ dissolving dualities like existence/non-existence.
   .

3. Interdependence and Co-evolution of Triadic Spheres:
   Each chapter examines a triad of related elements —
   – cause-causality-effect (Chapter 1),
   – goer-going-destination (Chapter 2), and
   – perceiver-perception-perceived (Chapter 3) —
   [3. Dependent Origination:] ⇐⇒ showing their mutual dependence and co-definition.
   These triads are not static but dynamically co-evolve:
   – an effect becomes a new cause,
   – a goer updates through going, and
   – a perceiver is reshaped by the perceived, and vice versas.
   [3. Dependent Origination:] ⇐⇒ This interdependence] means none of the elements can exist independently,
   [2. Emptiness:] ⇐⇒ reinforcing their emptiness and the absence of a fixed, inherent core [T2] [U2T].
   .

4. Illusory Nature of Phenomena:
   [4. Illusory:] ⇐⇒ Nāgārjuna repeatedly likens phenomena to illusions, reflections, mirages, dreams, or echoes—"there, yet not there."
   – In Chapter 1, causality appears functional but lacks inherent reality;
   – in Chapter 2, motion seems real but dissolves under scrutiny;
   – in Chapter 3, perception feels concrete yet is a mental fabrication.
   This illusory quality ties to the broader Madhyamaka insight that
   [3. Dependent Origination:] ⇐⇒ phenomena are merely labeled by the mind,
   conditioned by past experiences and karma, and vice versa,
   [2. Emptiness:] ⇐⇒ rather than possessing intrinsic existence.
   .

5. Middle Way Beyond Extremes:
   [5. Middle Way:] ⇐⇒ The chapters advocate the Middle Way, free from extremes of realism (inherent existence / T1), nihilism (non-existence / T2), dualism (both together / 2T), monism (neither / 1T). By showing that phenomena neither fully exist nor completely non-exist, Nāgārjuna points to a path of wisdom that avoids reifying or negating reality, encouraging a non-grasping attitude toward the interdependent flux of experience.
   .

6. The Limitless and Centerless Cycle
   The notion of a limitless and centerless cycle is a unifying thread across these chapters, manifesting in the triadic relationships of causality, action, and perception. This cycle reflects the infinite, non-linear nature of dependent origination, where each element in the triad perpetually transforms into the next, without a fixed origin, endpoint, or central essence:

a) Chapter 1: Causality (Cause-Causality-Effect):
Nāgārjuna shows that causes and effects form an infinite regress: every effect becomes a new cause, and every cause is itself an effect of prior conditions. For example, a seed (cause-1) produces a sprout (effect-1), which becomes a plant (cause-2) yielding fruit (effect-2), ad infinitum. There’s no first cause (no origin), no final effect (no endpoint), and no inherent causality in the middle to grasp. This cycle is limitless in time and space, as causes and effects stretch infinitely backward and forward, and centerless because there’s no independent "cause" or "effect" outside their mutual dependence. The cycle mirrors a karmic process: actions update the actor’s state, which conditions new actions, without a solid "self" enduring through it.

b) Chapter 2: Action/Movement (Goer-Going-Destination):
The cycle of motion follows a similar pattern: a goer-1 moves (going) to a destination, becoming goer-2 with updated coordinates, ready for the next movement. For instance, a person at point A (goer-1) moves to B (effect-1), becoming goer-2 at B, who then moves to C (effect-2). This process continues indefinitely, with no initial "goer," final "destination," or fixed "going" to anchor the cycle. The goer and going co-evolve — neither exists without the other, and their identity shifts with each step. This cycle is limitless, as motion never truly begins or ends, and centerless, as there’s no independent "goer" or "act of going" outside their relational interplay, echoing the karmic updating of an actor through actions.

c) Chapter 3: Perception (Perceiver-Perception-Perceived):
Perception operates in a parallel cycle: the perceiver (e.g., eye-consciousness) engages in perception (via the eye) to apprehend the perceived (forms), updating the perceiver’s state, which then shapes a new perceived world. For example, a perceiver conditioned by past karma sees a "blue sky" (perceived-1), which generates sensations and imprints, updating the perceiver (perceiver-2), who then perceives a new "world" aligned with that conditioning (e.g., a storm). This cycle is limitless, with no first perceiver or final perceived reality, and centerless, as there’s no inherent "self" or "world" to fixate on — just a continuous co-creation of observer and observed. This mirrors the samsaric process of rebirth, where karmic imprints shape the perceiver’s realm (and vice versa), yet all elements remain empty of inherent existence.

d) Synthesis of the Limitless and Centerless Cycle
Across these chapters,
the limitless and centerless cycle illustrates
the core Madhyamaka insight:
reality is a fluid, relational process [T1]
without a fixed starting point, endpoint,
or central essence [T2] [U2T].
– In causality, there’s no primal cause or ultimate effect (chapter 1);
– in motion, no original goer or final destination (chapter 2);
– in perception, no initial perceiver or definitive perceived world (chapter 3).
This lack of boundaries ("limitless")
and absence of a core ("centerless")
means there’s nothing to grasp/control —
no inherent "thing" to cling to as ultimately real.
The triads co-evolve in a fractal-like interdependence,
where each element conditions and is conditioned by the others,
stretching infinitely across time and space Ţ1].
This cycle aligns with the karmic process:
just as karma updates the actor [T1] without a solid self [T2] [U2T],
causality, motion, and perception update their respective triads [T1]
without inherent entities enduring through the process [T2] [U2T].

e) Implications and Broader Context
This cyclic nature has profound implications for understanding samsara and liberation.
– In samsara, the cycles of causality, action, and perception perpetuate suffering: causes lead to effects that fuel new causes, actions update the actor into new cycles of movement, and perception binds the perceiver to a conditioned world (perceived), generating desire and karma.
– Yet, because these cycles are empty — lacking inherent existence — they’re also the key to liberation. Realizing their dreamlike, centerless nature (as Nāgārjuna urges) halts the grasping that drives the cycle,
– allowing one to abide in the Middle Way: neither reifying phenomena as real nor rejecting them as unreal, but seeing them as interdependent, empty appearances.

f) In summary,
Chapters 1–3 of the MMK reveal a consistent pattern:
causality, action, and perception
are interdependent triads that co-evolve in a limitless,
centerless cycle, empty of inherent existence [T2]
yet functionally real in their relativity [T1] [U2T].
This cycle — whether in the infinite regress of causes (chapter 1),
the unending redefinition of the goer (chapter 2),
or the perpetual co-creation of perceiver and perceived (chapter 3) —
underscores Nāgārjuna’s vision of reality as a relational flux [T1],
inviting a non-conceptual realization of the Union of the Two Truths [U2T]
– dependent origination [T1] ⇐⇒ and emptiness of inherent existence [T2] –
as the path to freedom.

.
.

Question: Individual, collective and cosmos [U2T-3L]

Q: Can you go further and extrapolate about the very subtle meaning of all this. Ex. What does it mean for the relation between the individual, collective and cosmos? Is there still an individual?.

Answer: Nāgārjuna’s Mūlamadhyamakakārikā (MMK), as explored in the first three chapters, offers a profound deconstruction of reality that challenges conventional notions of existence, identity, and relationality. The themes of interdependence, emptiness, and the limitless, centerless cycles of causality, action, and perception—examined through the triads of cause-causality-effect, goer-going-destination, and perceiver-perception-perceived—carry subtle and far-reaching implications for understanding the relationship between the individual, the collective, and the cosmos. Let’s extrapolate these insights to uncover their deeper meaning, particularly addressing the question of whether an "individual" persists in this framework.
.
(i.e. Generalized Reasoning:
A. [Triad]: The three levels of organization [3L]: (i) individual, (ii) collective, (iii) cosmic.
B. [Duality]: Difference vs. identity, separation vs. union, diversity vs. unity, duality vs. non-duality, independence vs. dependence, emptiness vs. non-emptiness, dependent origination vs. emptiness.
[Reasoning:] The three levels of organization — individual, collective, cosmic — (i) cannot be different / separate / multiple / dual, (ii) cannot be identical / united / one / non-dual, (iii) cannot be both, (iv) cannot be neither ⇐⇒ empty [T2-3L] ⇐⇒ interdependent [T1-3L] [U2T-3L] ⇐⇒ Illusory ⇐⇒ Middle Way ⇐⇒ One. The Karmic cycle is shared across levels.)
.
.

A. The Subtle Meaning: Dissolving Boundaries Through Interdependence and Emptiness [U2T-3L]

At its core, Nāgārjuna’s philosophy reveals that all phenomena — whether physical, conceptual, or experiential — are empty of inherent existence (svabhāva) [T2] because they arise dependently (pratītyasamutpāda) [T1] [U2T]. This emptiness is not a nihilistic void but a dynamic relationality: phenomena exist only in dependence on other phenomena, forming an infinite web of interdependence that transcends dualistic categories like self/other, individual/collective, or cosmos/part. The limitless, centerless cycles identified in Chapters 1–3 (causality, action, perception) illustrate this web as a fractal-like process where each element co-defines and co-evolves with others, without a fixed origin, endpoint, or central essence. This has profound implications for how we conceptualize the individual, the collective, and the cosmos, ultimately dissolving the boundaries between them.
.

a) The Individual: A Mirage of Relational Processes

The "individual" as we conventionally understand it — a self-contained, independent entity with an inherent essence (a "self" or "soul") — is thoroughly deconstructed in Nāgārjuna’s framework. The triadic cycles in the MMK show that what we call an individual is not a standalone entity but a momentary convergence of interdependent processes:

• • • Causality (Chapter 1): An individual’s existence is a product of causes and conditions — biological, social, karmic — that stretch infinitely backward. There’s no "first cause" of the individual, nor a final effect; the individual is a node in an endless causal cycle, constantly updated by actions and experiences.

    • Action/Movement (Chapter 2): The "goer" (a metaphor for the individual as an agent) lacks inherent existence, as their identity is redefined with each act of "going." The individual’s sense of agency or movement through life is a relational construct, dependent on the "act" and "destination," with no fixed "self" persisting through the process.

    • Perception (Chapter 3): The "perceiver" (the individual as a conscious subject) co-arises with perception and the perceived world. The individual’s experience of reality is conditioned by past karma, shaping what they perceive, which in turn updates their state, ad infinitum. There’s no independent "self" behind perception — just a cycle of co-evolving observer and observed.
      .

From this perspective, the individual is not a solid, enduring entity but a mirage-like appearance — a temporary label imputed on a flux of interdependent processes. Nāgārjuna’s tetralemma (not existent, not non-existent, not both, not neither) applies here: the individual neither truly exists as an inherent self nor is utterly non-existent, as they function conventionally within the cycle of interdependence. This aligns with the Buddhist concept of anātman (no-self), but Nāgārjuna pushes further by showing that even the processes constituting the individual (causes, actions, perceptions) are empty, lacking any intrinsic core.
.
.

b) The Collective: A Shared Web of Co-Creation

The collective — whether understood as a community, society, or humanity as a whole — similarly dissolves into a network of interdependent relations. The MMK’s cycles reveal that what we call "the collective" is not a separate entity but an aggregation of individual processes that are themselves interdependent:

• • • Shared Causality: The causes and conditions shaping one individual (e.g., upbringing, culture, environment) are inseparable from those shaping others. For example, a person’s language, beliefs, and behaviors arise from collective conditions (education, social norms), which are themselves effects of prior collective actions, forming a shared causal cycle.

    • Interdependent Actions: The "goer" in Chapter 2 doesn’t move in isolation; their "destination" (e.g., social roles, relationships) is co-defined by the collective context. Collective actions — like cultural practices or economic systems — emerge from individual actions, yet those individual actions are conditioned by the collective, creating a centerless loop.

    • Co-Created Perception: In Chapter 3, the perceived world of one individual overlaps with that of others through shared sensory and mental objects (e.g., a shared language, a common environment). The collective "world" is a co-creation of myriad perceivers, each updating the other through interaction, as seen in social constructs like laws or traditions.

The collective, then, is not a distinct entity with inherent existence but a dynamic interplay of interdependent processes, where individual and collective co-arise. There’s no boundary between the two: the individual’s karma contributes to the collective’s, and the collective’s conditions shape the individual’s experience, all within a limitless cycle of mutual conditioning.
.
.

c) The Cosmos: The Totality of Interdependence

The cosmos — understood as the totality of reality, including all phenomena across space and time—loses its status as a separate, overarching container in Nāgārjuna’s view. The MMK’s cycles show that the cosmos is not a fixed backdrop but the sum total of interdependent relations, encompassing the individual and collective:

• • • Cosmic Causality: The causal cycle in Chapter 1 extends beyond human experience to all phenomena—stars, galaxies, natural laws—each arising dependently on others. There’s no "first cause" of the cosmos (no creator or origin), nor a final effect; the cosmos is a boundless web of causes and effects.

    • Cosmic Movement: The "going" in Chapter 2 applies to all motion in the universe, from a person walking to planets orbiting. Every movement is relational, with no inherent "goer" or "destination," reflecting a cosmos in constant flux without a center.

    • Cosmic Perception: The perception cycle in Chapter 3 implies that the "world" we perceive—extending to the cosmos—is a projection of conditioned minds, individual and collective. Even cosmic phenomena like time and space are empty, as later chapters (e.g., Chapter 19 on time) will explore, existing only as relational constructs.

The cosmos, therefore, is not a separate "whole" containing individuals and collectives but the infinite expanse of interdependence itself, with no inherent boundary between part and whole. The individual’s actions ripple into the collective, which in turn shapes the cosmic web, and the cosmos conditions the individual’s existence—all within a centerless, limitless cycle.
.
.

B. The Relation Between Individual, Collective, and Cosmos [U2T-3L]

Nāgārjuna’s analysis reveals that the individual, collective, and cosmos are not distinct entities but different scales of the same interdependent process, each empty of inherent existence [T2] ⇐⇒ yet functionally real in their relationality [T1] [U2T]. 

This has several subtle implications:

a) Dissolution of Boundaries between individual, collective:

• • • The distinctions between individual, collective, and cosmos are conceptual imputations, not ultimate truths. The individual’s thoughts and actions are conditioned by the collective (e.g., language, culture) and the cosmos (e.g., physical laws, environment), while the collective and cosmos are shaped by the aggregate of individual processes. There’s no "inside" or "outside" — just a seamless web of co-arising phenomena.

    • For example, a person’s decision to plant a tree (individual action) affects the community’s environment (collective) and the planet’s ecosystem (cosmos), while the cosmos (climate) and collective (social norms) condition the individual’s choice. These scales are inseparable, co-evolving in a fractal cycle.

b) Karmic Interconnectivity:

• • • The cycles of causality, action, and perception operate across all scales, reflecting a karmic interconnectivity. Individual karma (actions and their imprints) contributes to collective karma (e.g., societal patterns, cultural habits), which in turn influences cosmic karma (e.g., environmental consequences, universal cycles). Conversely, cosmic conditions (e.g., natural disasters) and collective karma (e.g., systemic inequalities) shape individual experience.

    • This karmic web is centerless: there’s no single "self" (individual), "society" (collective), or "universe" (cosmos) driving the process — just an infinite interplay of conditions, each conditioning the others.

c) Primordial Equality and Purity:

• • • Because all phenomena are empty and interdependent, Nāgārjuna suggests a primordial equality: the individual, collective, and cosmos are equally empty, equally relational, and equally "pure" in their lack of inherent flaws or essence. The MMK’s closing insight — that everything is "primordially interconnected, equal, pure, perfect, complete, divine" — means there’s no ultimate hierarchy or separation. Suffering arises from misperceiving this equality (e.g., clinging to a solid self), while liberation comes from realizing it.
      .
      .

C. Is There Still an Individual? [U2T]-individual

Given this framework, the question of whether an "individual" persists is both nuanced and transformative:

• • • Conventionally, Yes: On the conventional level (T1), the individual exists as a functional designation—a label for a bundle of interdependent processes (causes, actions, perceptions) that we call "a person." We can still speak of "you" or "me" in everyday terms, as these labels are useful for navigating the world, much like we use "cause" and "effect" despite their emptiness. The individual functions within the cycles of causality, action, and perception, interacting with the collective and cosmos in a relational dance.

    • Ultimately, No: On the ultimate level (T2), the individual as an inherent, self-existent entity does not exist. The "self" is a mental imputation, a fiction projected onto a flux of empty, interdependent processes. The triadic cycles in the MMK show that there’s no core "self" behind causality (just causes and effects), action (just goer-going-destination), or perception (just perceiver-perception-perceived). The individual dissolves into the same web of interdependence as the collective and cosmos, with no inherent boundary separating them.

    • Union of the Two Truths (U2T): The individual is both "there" (conventionally, as a relational appearance) and "not there" (ultimately, as an empty construct). This paradox is the heart of Nāgārjuna’s Middle Way: the individual neither exists inherently nor is utterly non-existent but arises dependently, like a mirage. This applies equally to the collective and cosmos—none has an inherent essence, yet all function relationally within the limitless, centerless cycle.
      .
      .

D. Deeper Implications: Liberation and the Nature of Reality

This dissolution of the individual into the collective and cosmos has profound soteriological implications, aligning with the MMK’s ultimate aim of liberation:

a) Liberation Through Non-Grasping:

• • • The root of suffering (dukkha) lies in grasping at the individual self, the collective (e.g., "my community"), or the cosmos (e.g., "the world out there") as inherently real. By realizing their emptiness and interdependence, one releases attachment to these constructs, halting the karmic cycle of suffering. The individual, collective, and cosmos are seen as dreamlike — functionally real but ultimately insubstantial — allowing one to engage with them without clinging.

b) Compassion and Interconnectivity:

• • • Recognizing the interdependence of individual, collective, and cosmos fosters boundless compassion. If "I" am not separate from "others" or the "world," their suffering is inseparable from mine. This aligns with Mahāyāna ideals of the bodhisattva, who vows to liberate all beings, seeing no ultimate distinction between self and other. The collective and cosmic scales become fields for compassionate action, grounded in the wisdom of emptiness.

c) Reality as a Co-Creative Dance:

• • • The cosmos, in Nāgārjuna’s view, is not a fixed stage but a co-creative process where individual, collective, and cosmic phenomena arise together [T1]. Perception (Chapter 3) illustrates this: the "world" we experience is a projection of conditioned minds, shaped by individual and collective karma, yet empty of inherent reality [T2] [U2T]. This suggests a participatory reality — neither subjective (individual) nor objective (cosmic), but a relational interplay where all scales co-emerge.

d) Transcendence of Dualities / Triads: [U2T-3L]

• • • The MMK’s cycles transcend dualities like individual/collective, part/whole, or micro/macro. These distinctions are conventional tools, not ultimate truths. The "individual" is the cosmos seen from one angle, the "cosmos" is the individual seen from another — both are empty, interdependent, and part of the same centerless flux. This non-dual vision points to the "ineffable truth of liberation" mentioned in the post, beyond all conceptual proliferation.
      .
      .

E. Conclusion: A Unified, Centerless Reality [U2T-3L]

Nāgārjuna’s Mūlamadhyamakakārikā reveals the individual, collective, and cosmos as inseparable facets of a single, interdependent reality [T1] — a limitless, centerless cycle of co-arising phenomena, empty of inherent existence [T2] yet vibrant in its relational dance [T1] [U2T]. The individual is not a distinct entity but a momentary expression of this web, co-evolving with the collective and cosmos in a fractal interplay of causality, action, and perception. There is no "individual" in the ultimate sense [T2], yet conventionally, the label persists as a useful fiction within the cycle [T1] [U2T].

This subtle meaning challenges us to rethink identity and relationality: "I" am not separate from "we" or the "world" — all are empty, interconnected, and primordially equal. Liberation lies in directly realizing this, seeing the individual, collective, and cosmos as a unified [One], dreamlike process [Illusory], free from fixation or rejection [Middle Way]. In this vision, reality is not something to grasp but a participatory flow to awaken within, where wisdom and compassion arise naturally from the recognition of our shared, centerless nature.
.
.
.
.

Question: Five Additional Deep Common Points Across Chapters 1–3

Q: Are there other important common points we can extract from this analysis of the first three chapters of the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā? Something very deep.

Answer:

The analysis of the first three chapters of Nāgārjuna’s Mūlamadhyamakakārikā (MMK) — covering causality (Chapter 1), action/movement (Chapter 2), and perception (Chapter 3) — has already revealed several profound themes:
– the deconstruction of inherent existence,
– the Union of the Two Truths (U2T),
– the interdependence and co-evolution of triadic spheres,
– the illusory nature of phenomena,
– the Middle Way, and
– the limitless, centerless cycles that dissolve boundaries between individual, collective, and cosmos. 

However, there are additional, deeply subtle points that emerge from this analysis, which further illuminate the radical implications of Nāgārjuna’s Madhyamaka philosophy.
These points touch on
– the nature of reality,
– the mind’s role in constructing experience, and
– the path to liberation,
offering a deeper understanding of the text’s transformative vision.
.
.

1. The Emptiness of Emptiness [T2-T2], or the Union of the Two Truths about the two truths themselves [U2T-2T]

One of the most profound and subtle insights in these chapters is the concept of the "emptiness of emptiness [T2-T2]," which Nāgārjuna implicitly introduces through his method. While he deconstructs the inherent existence of causality, motion, and perception — showing that causes, goers, and perceivers are empty of svabhāva (inherent existence) — this deconstruction reflexively applies to the concept of emptiness itself:

• • • In Chapter 1, Nāgārjuna negates the inherent existence of causes and effects, but the "emptiness" of causality [T2-T1] is not posited as a new ultimate truth. If emptiness were inherently real, it would contradict its own definition, as it would then possess svabhāva. Instead, emptiness is itself empty [T2-T2] — it’s a provisional concept used to dismantle reification, not a metaphysical absolute.

    • In Chapter 2, the emptiness of the goer, going, and destination [T2-T1] implies that the "emptiness" of motion is also not a fixed truth. The tetralemma (not existent, not non-existent, not both, not neither) applies to emptiness itself, preventing it from becoming a new object of grasping.

    • In Chapter 3, the emptiness of the perceiver, perception, and perceived [T2-T1] extends to the emptiness of emptiness itself [T2-T2]. If perception is empty [T2-T1], the realization of its emptiness cannot be an inherently real "state" or "truth" [T2-T2] — it, too, is dependently arisen [T1-T2] and thus empty [T2-T2] [U2T-T2] [U2T-2T].

Deep Implication: The emptiness of emptiness [T2-T2], or the Union of the Two Truth about the two truths themselves [U2T-2T],  means that Nāgārjuna’s philosophy is not about replacing one view (e.g., inherent existence) with another (e.g., emptiness) but about transcending all views entirely. This reflexive move prevents the mind from clinging to emptiness as a new doctrine, ensuring that the Middle Way remains free from all extremes, including the extremes of reifying dependent origination [T1] and/or emptiness [T2] [2T]. This is a radical invitation to let go of conceptual proliferation altogether, pointing to a non-conceptual realization of reality as it is — beyond all dualistic frameworks, even those of "empty" versus "not empty." For the practitioner, this means liberation is not about "attaining" emptiness [T2], or the Union of the Two Truths [U2T],  but about releasing all fixation, even on the path itself.
.
.

2. The Mind as the Co-Creator of Reality: A Karmic Mirage – Union mind and world

A subtle thread running through these chapters is the central role of the mind in co-creating the reality we experience, a process deeply tied to karma and dependent origination. Nāgārjuna emphasizes that phenomena are "merely labeled, imputed, imagined by the mind in dependence of its past experiences, conditioning, karma (individual, collective, cosmic)":

• • • In Chapter 1, causality is not an objective, inherent process "out there." The labels "cause" and "effect" are mental imputations, arising from the mind’s tendency to organize experience into patterns based on past conditioning. A seed causing a sprout is a conventional truth, but the mind’s karmic imprints determine how we perceive and categorize this relationship.

    • In Chapter 2, the goer, going, and destination are "mentally fabricated" (verse 14). The sense of motion or agency is a projection of the mind, conditioned by prior experiences and karma, which create the illusion of a continuous "self" moving through space and time.

    • In Chapter 3, perception is explicitly a mental construct: the perceiver, perception, and perceived are co-arisen, with the perceived world shaped by the perceiver’s karmic conditioning. The "world" we see is not an independent reality but a mirage-like projection of the mind, filtered through past actions and imprints.

Deep Implication: This insight reveals that reality as we know it is a karmic mirage, co-created by the mind in dependence on its conditioning. The cycles of causality, action, and perception are not just interdependent processes but are fundamentally mental constructs — projections of a conditioned mind that mistakes its own fabrications for an inherent reality. This aligns with the Yogācāra influence on later Madhyamaka thought, which emphasizes the "mind-only" (cittamātra) nature of experience, but Nāgārjuna takes it further by asserting that even the mind itself is empty, lacking inherent existence. 

The mind, too, is part of the cycle, co-arising with its objects, with no independent "creator" behind it.

For the individual, collective, and cosmos, this means that the distinctions we draw — between "my" experience, "our" shared reality, and the "external" universe — are all mind-made, rooted in karmic conditioning. Liberation, then, involves seeing through this mirage: realizing that the mind’s projections are empty, we cease to grasp at them as real, halting the karmic cycle that perpetuates suffering. This is a deeply liberating insight, as it shifts the locus of transformation inward — not to an external reality, but to the mind’s own habits of reification.
.
.

3. The Non-Duality / Union of Samsara and Nirvana

Another profound point implicit in these chapters is the non-duality / Union of samsara (the cycle of conditioned existence) and nirvana (liberation). Nāgārjuna’s deconstruction of causality, action, and perception reveals that the very processes we associate with samsara — cause and effect, movement, and sensory experience — are empty, and thus not inherently different from nirvana:

• • • In Chapter 1, the cycle of causality is what drives samsara: causes lead to effects (updated cause), which generate new causes, perpetuating suffering through karma. Yet, because causality is empty, it’s not inherently "samsaric." The same cycle, seen through the lens of emptiness, is free from suffering — there’s nothing to grasp or reject.

    • In Chapter 2, the goer’s endless movement mirrors the samsaric journey of striving and becoming. But since the goer, going, and destination (updated goer) are empty, this journey is not inherently real. Realizing this emptiness transforms the journey into a non-journey — nirvana, where there’s no "self" to move or "destination" to reach.

    • In Chapter 3, perception fuels samsara by generating attachment and aversion through contact, sensation, and desire. Yet, the perceiver, perception, and perceived (updated perceiver) are empty, meaning the samsaric cycle of perception is not ultimately binding. Seeing its emptiness reveals nirvana within the act of perceiving itself.

Deep Implication: Nāgārjuna’s famous statement in Chapter 25 of the MMK — that there is "not the slightest difference between samsara and nirvana" — is foreshadowed here. The cycles of causality, action, and perception are samsaric only when misperceived as inherently real, leading to grasping and suffering. When their emptiness is realized, they are nirvanic — free from fixation, inherently pure, and unobstructed. This non-duality means that liberation is not about escaping samsara for a separate nirvana but about transforming one’s perception of the same reality. The individual, collective, and cosmos, as part of these cycles, are neither samsaric nor nirvanic in themselves — they are empty, and their nature depends on the mind’s realization.

This insight is deeply transformative: it suggests that the path to liberation is not a journey to a distant goal but a shift in understanding, right here and now. The "world" of samsara — full of causes, actions, and perceptions — is already nirvana when seen as empty, interdependent, and free from inherent existence. For the practitioner, this means that every moment of experience, whether individual (a personal thought), collective (a shared interaction), or cosmic (the vastness of the universe), is an opportunity to realize this non-duality.
.
.

4. The Primordial Interconnectedness / Equality / Purity / Perfection / Completion / Divinity of All Phenomena

A subtle undercurrent in these chapters is the idea that all phenomena, being empty and interdependent, are primordially perfect, pure, and complete — a point explicitly stated in the post as "everything is primordially interconnected, equal, pure, perfect, complete, divine." This arises from the interplay of the Two Truths and the non-duality of samsara and nirvana:

• • • In Chapter 1, causality, though empty, functions conventionally — seeds grow into sprouts, actions produce results. This functionality is not a flaw but a perfect expression of interdependence, untainted by inherent existence.

    • In Chapter 2, the goer’s movement, while empty, operates seamlessly in the conventional world — we walk, we act, we live. This apparent motion is a perfect manifestation of relationality, free from the delusion of a fixed self.

    • In Chapter 3, perception, though empty, allows for experience — the perceiver sees a world, feels sensations, thinks thoughts. This process, when not grasped as inherently real, is a perfect play of emptiness and appearance, inherently pure.

Deep Implication: The primordial perfection of all phenomena means that there’s nothing to "fix" or "purify" in reality itself – suffering arises from misperception, not from an inherent flaw in the world. The cycles of causality, action, and perception are not obstacles to liberation but expressions of the same reality that, when seen correctly, are already perfect. This perfection extends across all scales: the individual’s thoughts, the collective’s interactions, and the cosmos’s unfolding are all equally empty, equally pure, and equally divine.

This insight shifts the practitioner’s attitude profoundly: instead of rejecting the world as samsaric or striving for a separate nirvana, one can embrace all phenomena as they are—empty, interdependent, and perfect. The "divine" nature of reality lies in its very emptiness, which allows for the infinite play of appearances without fixation. This is a deeply affirming vision, where even suffering, when understood as empty, becomes a gateway to awakening.
.
.

5. The Ineffability of Reality and the Limits of Language

A final, deeply subtle point is the ineffability of reality, which Nāgārjuna hints at through his relentless deconstruction of concepts. The tetralemma and the cycles of interdependence push language and thought to their limits, revealing that reality as it is cannot be captured by dualistic concepts:

• • • In Chapter 1, causality cannot be described as existent, non-existent, both, or neither — it defies all categories. The true nature of cause and effect is "indescribable, inconceivable, beyond all dualistic conceptual proliferation."

    • In Chapter 2, motion eludes definition: the goer, going, and destination are neither identical nor different, neither permanent nor impermanent. The process of movement transcends linguistic fixation, pointing to a reality beyond words.

    • In Chapter 3, perception similarly escapes conceptualization: the perceiver, perception, and perceived are neither one nor separate, neither real nor unreal. The act of perceiving, when analyzed, reveals a reality that cannot be grasped by the dualistic mind.

Deep Implication: The ineffability of reality underscores that all descriptions — whether of causality, action, perception, or even emptiness — are provisional, conventional tools [T1], not ultimate truths [T2] [U2T]. The mind’s tendency to conceptualize in absolute terms (e.g., "this is a cause," "I am moving," "I see a world") is what creates the illusion of inherent existence, perpetuating samsara. Nāgārjuna’s method is to exhaust these absolute concepts, showing their incoherence, to lead the practitioner to a direct, non-inherently-conceptual realization of reality.

This has profound implications for the individual, collective, and cosmos: the distinctions we draw, the labels we use ("self," "society," "universe"), are all linguistic constructs [T1], relatively useful, but empty of inherent reality [T2] [U2T]. The true nature of reality — whether at the scale of a single thought, a shared culture, or the vast cosmos — is beyond language, beyond the dualistic mind (not accepting, not rejecting). Liberation, then, is not about understanding reality through absolute concepts but about transcending them (without rejecting them), resting in the "ineffable truth of liberation without grasping at anything in absolute terms" that the post mentions — a direct seeing of reality as it is, free from all extremes and middle, like accepting or rejecting.
.
.
.
.

Synthesis of the five points: A Vision of Radical Freedom

These deep common points
1. the emptiness of emptiness,
2. the mind’s role as co-creator,
3. the non-duality of samsara and nirvana,
4. the primordial perfection of phenomena, and
5.  the ineffability of reality
converge into a unified vision of radical freedom (transcending all conditioning/karma) that permeates Nāgārjuna’s analysis in the first three chapters of the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā. 

This vision not only deepens the themes already identified — such as interdependence, emptiness, and the Middle Way — but also offers a transformative perspective on the nature of reality, the path to liberation, and the relationship between the individual, collective, and cosmos.

Let’s synthesize these insights and explore their implications further, tying them back to the cyclic, co-evolving nature of phenomena and the soteriological aim of Nāgārjuna’s philosophy.
.
.

A. Tying the Points Together

The five deep common points we’ve extracted
— (1) the emptiness of emptiness, (2) the mind as co-creator of a karmic mirage, (3) the non-duality of samsara and nirvana, (4) the primordial perfection of all phenomena, and (5) the ineffability of reality —
build on the foundational themes of interdependence [T1]
and emptiness [T2] [U2T]
that run through Chapters 1–3.
They also resonate with the cyclic, co-evolving nature of triads
– causality (Chapter 1),
– motion (Chapter 2), and
– perception (Chapter 3),
revealing a reality that is fluid, relational [T1],
and free from fixation [T2] [U2T]:
.

1. The Emptiness of Emptiness ensures that Nāgārjuna’s deconstruction doesn’t replace one dogma with another. The cycles of causality, action, and perception are empty, but so is the concept of emptiness itself [T2-T2], or Union of the Two Truths about the two truths themselves – dependent origination and emptiness – [U2T-2T]. This prevents the practitioner from grasping at either dependent origination / other-causation or emptiness as a new "truth," keeping the Middle Way truly free from all extremes and middles. It also means that the cycles themselves  [T1] — though limitless and centerless — are not ultimate obstacles; they are empty constructs  [T2] [U2T], and their apparent "binding" nature dissolves upon realization.
   .

2. The Mind as Co-Creator highlights that these cycles are not objective processes "out there" but projections of a conditioned mind. The cause-effect chain, the goer’s movement, and the perceiver’s world are all karmic mirages, shaped by past actions and imprints. This ties directly to the cyclic nature of phenomena: each moment of causality, action, or perception updates the mind’s state, which in turn shapes the next moment, ad infinitum. But because the mind itself is empty, there’s no inherent "creator" behind this process — just a self-perpetuating flow of interdependence. Each one of the three spheres – of causality, action/motion, perception, acquisition, etc. – is conditioned by the others, and is conditioning the others in a limitless and centerless cycle. They are co-creator of each other; interconnected with everything else. Evolving not in a discrete fashion, but in a fully continuous mode; never the same for two infinitesimal consecutive moments.
   .

3. The Non-Duality of Samsara and Nirvana reveals that these cycles, which seem to trap us in samsara, are not inherently different from nirvana. The same processes — causes producing effects, goers moving, perceivers perceiving — are samsaric when misperceived as inherently real (with ignorance), but nirvanic when seen as [U2T] (with wisdom). This non-duality means that the cycles are not something to escape (to reject / abandon) but to understand: their [U2T] is their liberation. The individual’s suffering, the collective’s conflicts, and the cosmos’s vast unfolding are all part of this same empty, interdependent dance.
   .

4. The Primordial Perfection of Phenomena affirms that there’s nothing inherently wrong with these cycles. Causality, action, and perception function perfectly in their conventional roles — seeds grow, people move, eyes see — because they are empty and interdependent. This perfection is not a static state but a dynamic harmony: the cycles co-evolve seamlessly, without a core, because they are free from inherent existence. For the individual, this means every thought or action is already pure; for the collective, every interaction is a perfect expression of relationality; for the cosmos, every phenomenon is a divine play of emptiness and appearance.
   .

5. The Ineffability of Reality underscores that these cycles, and the reality they constitute, cannot, in absolute terms, be captured by language or concepts. The tetralemma (e.g., not existent, not non-existent, not both, not neither) applied to causality, motion, and perception shows that reality transcends dualistic thought (without rejection). The cycles are "indescribable, inconceivable, beyond all dualistic conceptual proliferation," as the post states. This ineffability is not a limitation but a liberation (no absolute): it frees the practitioner from the mind’s tendency to fixate on concepts, pointing to a direct, non-conceptual realization of reality as it is.
   .
   .

B. A Unified Vision: Reality as a Centerless, Limitless Dance

Together, these points paint a picture of
reality as a centerless [T2],
limitless dance of interdependence [T1] [U2T],
where all phenomena
— whether causal chains, movements, or perceptions —
co-arise, co-evolve, and co-cease
in a fluid, dreamlike interplay.
There’s no first cause, no final destination, no ultimate perceiver —
just an infinite web of relations [T1],
empty of inherent existence [T2]
yet functionally real in its conventional appearance [T1] [U2T].

This dance spans all scales:

1. 1. 1. Individual: A person’s thoughts, actions, and perceptions are part of this cycle, each moment updating the next, shaped by karmic conditioning yet empty of a fixed self.

      2. Collective: Societies, cultures, and shared experiences emerge from the same interdependent processes, co-created by collective karma, yet equally empty of inherent reality.

      3. Cosmos: The universe itself—its stars, galaxies, and laws—is a vast expression of dependent origination, a cosmic cycle of causes, actions, and perceptions, all empty yet perfectly unfolding.

This vision is radical because it dissolves all boundaries:
between self and other, samsara and nirvana, conventional and ultimate.

Everything is interconnected [T1], equal, and pure, as the post notes,
because everything is empty [T2] [U2T].
The cycles that seem to bind us — causality driving karma, movement perpetuating striving, perception fueling attachment — are the very same processes that, when seen as empty, liberate us.

There’s nothing to reject, nothing to attain, nothing to purify —
reality is already perfect,
and liberation is simply the realization of this truth.
.
.

C. Soteriological Implications: Liberation Through Direct Realization

The deepest implication of this vision is its soteriological power:
liberation is not about escaping the cycles of causality,
action, and perception but about realizing their true nature.
Nāgārjuna’s method — deconstructing inherent existence through the tetralemma and revealing the Union of the Two Truths — is a meditative practice as much as a philosophical one. By systematically dismantling our reifications,
he leads us to a direct, non-dualistic non-conceptual insight
into the true meaning of emptiness [T2]: the Union of the Two Truths [U2T] [U2T-2T]:

1. 1. 1. Cessation of Grasping: When we see that causes, goers, and perceivers are empty, we stop grasping at them as real. This helps to transcend the karmic cycle of attachment, aversion, and ignorance, which perpetuates suffering. It transmutes the poisons into wisdoms.

      2. Freedom from Views: The emptiness of emptiness ensures we don’t cling to emptiness as a new view, keeping us on the Middle Way. This freedom from all views (transcending them without rejection) — whether of existence, non-existence, or even liberation itself — is the essence of nirvana.

      3. Immediacy of Liberation: The non-duality of samsara and nirvana means liberation is not a distant goal but a present reality. Every moment of causality, action, or perception is an opportunity to realize emptiness [U2T], transforming samsara into nirvana right here and now.

      4. Primordial Perfection as Practice: Recognizing the primordial perfection of phenomena shifts our attitude: we no longer need to "fix" ourselves or the world. Instead, we can act conventionally — planting seeds, walking paths, seeing forms — while resting in the ultimate truth of their emptiness, free from fixation [U2T-in-action].

      5. Beyond Language: The ineffability of reality invites us to transcend without rejecting conceptual proliferation. Meditation becomes a practice of resting in the "beyond" — beyond words, beyond dualities, beyond the cycles themselves — where reality is directly experienced as empty, interdependent, and perfect.
         .
         .

D. Final Reflection: A Path of Radical Freedom

The first three chapters of the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā offer a vision of radical freedom: a reality where all phenomena, cycles, and experiences are empty, interdependent, and primordially perfect, yet ineffable and free from conceptual fixation. This freedom is not an escape from the world (rejecting this or that) but a transformation of our relationship to it. The individual realizes their thoughts and actions are empty, the collective sees its interactions as a co-creative dance, and the cosmos is understood as a vast, centerless play of dependent origination — all equally pure, all equally divine.

For the practitioner, this means living in the world [T1] while resting in its emptiness [U2T] (in the sense of [U2T-in-action]): acting without attachment, perceiving without grasping, and understanding causality without reifying it. The cycles of causality, action, and perception — once seen as binding — are now the very ground of liberation, their emptiness revealing the non-duality of samsara and nirvana. This is Nāgārjuna’s profound gift: a path that liberates not by changing reality, but by changing how we see it, leading to a direct realization of its ineffable, perfect nature.

E. Summary

Answer 1: Below is a detailed summary and conclusion for Chapter 3 of Nāgārjuna’s Mūlamadhyamakakārikā (MMK), titled "An Analysis of Vision and Other Sense-Faculties" (Cakṣurādivṛttiparīkṣā), written in paragraph form and structured according to the provided Madhyamaka Reasoning framework: [Tetralemma ⇐⇒ Emptiness ⇐⇒ Dependent Origination ⇐⇒ Illusory ⇐⇒ Middle Way ⇐⇒ One]. The analysis focuses on the chapter’s deconstruction of perception through the three spheres of perception – (i) perceiver / actor, (ii) perception / action, and (iii) perceived / result –, applying the tetralemma to reveal their emptiness and interdependence, and concluding with the non-dual implications of the Middle Way.
.

In Chapter 3 of the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā, Nāgārjuna meticulously dismantles the notion of perception as an inherently real process, focusing on the six sense faculties — vision, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching, and thought — and their corresponding objects. Through a series of nine verses, he employs his Madhyamaka method to expose the incoherence of positing inherent existence in the triad of perception: (i) the perceiver, (ii) the perception, and (iii) the perceived. 

• • [1. Tetralemma:] By applying the tetralemma — demonstrating that these elements
    cannot be different, identical, both, or neither – 

  • [2. Emptiness:] ⇐⇒ Nāgārjuna reveals their emptiness,

  • [3. Dependent origination:] ⇐⇒ interdependence,

  • [4. Illusory:] ⇐⇒ and illusory nature,

  • [5. Middle Way:] ⇐⇒ guiding us toward the Middle Way

  • [6. One:] ⇐⇒ and a non-dual understanding of reality as primordially interconnected and pure.

This chapter extends the critiques of causality (Chapter 1) and motion (Chapter 2) into the realm of sensory experience (perception), reinforcing the central Madhyamaka insight that
all phenomena lack intrinsic essence [T2]
⇐⇒ yet function conventionally through relational dependence [T1] [U2T].
.

[1. Tetralemma:] Nāgārjuna begins by scrutinizing vision as a representative case, later extending his analysis to all sense faculties. He argues that the perceiver, perception, and perceived cannot be coherently understood as inherently existent under any logical configuration. They cannot be different, separate, or multiple (dual), for if perception were distinct from the perceiver (e.g., the eye) or the perceived (e.g., a form), it could exist independently, yet perception requires both a faculty and an object to function, as shown in verses 4 and 7. Nor can they be identical, united, or one (non-dual), as verse 2 highlights: if perception were the same as the perceiver, it would absurdly see itself, collapsing the distinction between agent and act. They cannot be both different and identical simultaneously, as this violates logical consistency, nor can they be neither, as this negates the conventional experience of perception altogether, leaving no fifth possibility (verse 6). Through this tetralemma, Nāgārjuna systematically undermines any attempt to establish perception as inherently real, exposing the contradictions that arise when we cling to fixed notions of perceiver, perception, or perceived.
.

[2. Emptiness:] The tetralemma’s failure to establish inherent existence in the perceiver, perception, or perceived leads directly to their emptiness (śūnyatā, T2). Because these elements cannot stand alone — neither as separate entities nor as a unified whole — they lack any intrinsic, absolute essence. Verse 5 asserts that neither perception nor “no-perception” perceives, and the perceiver exists only in relation to perception, negating any independent reality. Similarly, verse 8 extends this to the consequences of perception (knowledge, sensation, desire), which collapse without an inherently existent object or faculty. Emptiness here is not a nihilistic void but the absence of self-sustaining essence, revealing that perception is a conceptual construct rather than an absolute truth. By showing that no component of perception holds up under scrutiny, Nāgārjuna liberates us from reifying sensory experience as ultimately real.
.

[3. Dependent Origination:] This emptiness implies that the perceiver, perception, and perceived are dependently co-arisen (pratītyasamutpāda, T1), interdependent, and co-defined by the mind’s conditioning. Verse 7 uses the analogy of a son depending on a mother and father to illustrate how knowledge (consciousness) arises only through the interdependence of the eye and visible forms. Each element of perception — faculty, act, and object — exists only in relation to the others, co-evolving and co-ceasing like reflections in a mirror. They are merely labeled or imputed by the mind, shaped by past experiences, habits, and karma, as verse 9 generalizes across all senses. This interdependence [U2T] binds emptiness and conventional appearance: while perception lacks inherent reality, it functions relationally within the web of conditioned existence, allowing us to experience sights, sounds, and thoughts conventionally.
.

[4. Illusory:] Because perception is empty and dependently arisen, it is illusory, akin to dreams, mirages, or echoes — present yet insubstantial. Verses 6 and 8 emphasize that without an inherently existent perceiver or perceived, the entire perceptual process, including its karmic consequences (e.g., desire, birth, death), lacks ultimate reality. Like a reflection that appears vivid but has no independent substance, perception seems real in everyday experience but dissolves under analysis. This illusory nature does not negate its conventional utility—we still navigate the world through sight and sound — but underscores that clinging to perception as ultimately true is a delusion rooted in misunderstanding its relational, contingent nature.
.

[5. Middle Way:] Recognizing perception as empty, interdependent, and illusory, Nāgārjuna points us to the Middle Way, free from all extremes and middle, like naïve realism (existence / determinism), nihilism (non-existence / chaos), dualism, and monism (radial oneness). Verse 9 advises against apprehending the hearer, what is heard, or any sensory component as self-existent, urging us to neither reify nor deny these phenomena in absolute terms. Instead, we engage them conventionally, using sensory experience as a relative tool without grasping at it as ultimate truth. This balanced approach avoids altering perception’s apparent function while perception through its lack of intrinsic essence, aligning with the Madhyamaka vision of living skillfully within the interplay of the Two Truths [U2T].
.

[6. One:] Ultimately, Chapter 3 reveals that perception, like all phenomena, is primordially interconnected, pure, and complete in a non-dual sense—not many, not one, not both, not neither. The perceiver, perception, and perceived, though conventionally distinct, are empty of separation or unification, existing as part of an indivisible, illusory web of interdependence. This “One” is not a singular entity but a dynamic, divine wholeness, free from dualistic extremes, where all sensory experience is relatively useful [T1] yet never absolute [T2]. Nāgārjuna’s deconstruction thus liberates us from fixation on perception’s apparent reality, inviting a profound realization of reality’s non-dual purity, where conventional distinctions dissolve into the seamless interdependence of all things. 

.
.

Answer 2: In Chapter 3 of Nāgārjuna’s Mūlamadhyamakakārikā, titled "An Analysis of ‘Vision’ and Other Sense-Faculties," Nāgārjuna extends his scrutiny of inherent existence to the process of perception, systematically dismantling the notion that the six sense faculties — vision, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching, and thought — along with their objects and agents (1st truth), possess independent reality (2nd truth). 

He begins by questioning perception’s self-sufficiency: if perception cannot see itself, how can it see anything else? Drawing on Chapter 2’s analysis of movement, he rejects analogies like fire (which burns itself and others) as inapplicable, noting that perception, like "present going to," lacks a fixed moment of operation when dissected into past, present, and future. Without an inherently existent act of perception, there’s nothing truly "perceived," and thus no basis for claiming "perception perceives." This leads to a deeper unraveling: neither perception nor "no-perception" perceives, and the "perceiver" itself — supposedly the agent behind perception — cannot exist with or without perception, collapsing the entire triad of perceiver, perception, and perceived into interdependence.

Nāgārjuna concludes that perception, like causation and movement [T1], is empty of inherent existence [T2], existing only conventionally through mutual dependence [T1] [U2T]. Just as a son’s birth presupposes parents, knowledge (or perception) arises dependently between the eye and visible forms — neither element stands alone. Without an independently real "perceived" or "perception," the fourfold consequences (knowledge, sensations, desire) and their karmic outcomes (acquisition, existence, birth, aging, death) lose their footing. 

He extends this logic to all sense faculties, asserting that hearers, what is heard, and so forth, are equally devoid of self-existence. Chapter 3 thus reinforces the Madhyamaka view: perception is a relational process, not a collection of solid entities, mirroring the dreamlike, co-defined nature of reality seen in prior chapters. By negating the inherent reality of the sense-fields, Nāgārjuna invites us to see them as provisional, interdependent appearances, further illuminating the emptiness that pervades all phenomena.

F. Conclusion

We can analyse ‘perception/cognition’ / ‘dependent origination’ in terms of the three spheres of any relation/action (physical, conceptual, mental), and in terms of the opposites of any duality, triad, quad … Why? Because that is the way our ordinary conditioned dualistic conceptual mind(s) operates/creates; and because our goal is to transcend (without rejecting) it by realizing the way it naturally functions and the real nature of its fabrications.

There is useful relative conventional dependent origination (causality) [T1] ⇐⇒ but it is never absolute, never reality as it is [T2] [U2T]. There are no independent/absolute/inherently-existing/sure causes, conditions, causal relations and effects about anything anytime. Reality as it is is not causal nor dual in absolute terms. So we can use those concepts conventionally/relatively [T1] but never in absolute terms [T2] [U2T-in-action]; without attachment, reification, effort or absolutes; without apprehending anything in absolute terms; non-dualistically, without opposing/uniting anything in absolute terms, without accepting / rejecting / changing anything in absolute terms; thus acting more and more in accord with the Middle Way free from all extremes and Middle, acting more and more in accord with reality as it is (tathata, suchness) as pointed out by the Union of the Two Truths [U2T] and its corollaries [U3S / Uopp / U3T / UGM / U3K / U2T-2T].

Union of the Two Truths [U2T]: All phenomena/dharmas are empty of inherent existence, never absolute, not really dependent, originating/coming, conditioned, existent, changing, increasing, decreasing, ceasing/going, /liberated [T2] ⇐⇒ precisely because they are dependently co-arisen, interdependent, co-defined, co-evolving, co-imputed by the mind, mere designations/names, conventional truths/tools [T1] [U2T] ⇐⇒ like illusions, reflection, mirages, dreams, echos, ‘there, yer not there’ [Illusory] ⇐⇒ not inherently existent/functional, not completely non-existence/non-functional, not both, not neither; not different/separate/multiple/dual, not identical/united/one/non-dual, not both, not neither; not permanent/continuous/eternal, not impermanent/discontinuous/annihilated, not both, not neither; not dependently-arisen [T1-only], not empty of inherent existence [T2-only], not both truths together and in opposition [2T], not neither of the two truths [1T]; not ‘this’, not ‘non-this’, not both, not neither, and there is no fifth, for whatever ‘this’ is [Tetralemma]. They are conventionally relatively functional and useful but never in absolute terms.

Union of opposites [Uopp]: The opposites of any duality/triad/quad (including the three spheres [3S] of any relation/activity, self-others [opp], the three times [3T], the two truths [2T], the Ground and its manifestations [GM], the three kayas [3K], the four noble truths, the 12 links or dependent oritination, saṃsāra and nirvāṇa [opp]) are empty of inherent existence, never absolute, not really dependent, originating/coming, conditioned, existent, changing, increasing, decreasing, ceasing/going, afflicted/liberated [T2] ⇐⇒ precisely because they are dependently co-arisen, interdependent, co-defined, co-evolving, co-imputed by the mind, mere designations/names, conventional truths/tools [T1] [U2T] ⇐⇒ like illusions, reflection, mirages, dreams, echos, ‘there, yer not there’ [Illusory] ⇐⇒ not inherently arising/existent/functional/changing/ceasing, not completely non-arising/non-existent/non-functional/non-changing/non-ceasing, not both, not neither; not different/separate/multiple/dual, not identical/united/one/non-dual, not both, not neither; not permanent/continuous/eternal, not impermanent/discontinuous/annihilated, not both, not neither; not dependently-arisen [T1-only], not empty of inherent existence [T2-only], not both truths together and in opposition [2T], not neither of the two truths [1T]; not ‘this’, not ‘non-this’, not both, not neither, and there is no fifth, for whatever ‘this’ is [Tetralemma]. They are conventionally relatively functional and useful but never in absolute terms.