Mūlamadhyamakakārikā
"Root Verses on the Middle Way" by Nagarjuna
Chapter 8 - Production of karma and Liberation [U2T-3S]. Rebirth without rebirth.
Acting/producing conventionally without acting/producing karma in absolute terms.
Embedded Files
Chapter 8 – Production of karma and Liberation [U2T-3S]. Rebirth without rebirth.
Acting/producing conventionally without acting/producing karma in absolute terms.
This chapter refutes independent/inherent/absolute
production of karma by an agent (in cycle)
because the three spheres of production –
(i) subject/actor/producer/agent,
(ii) relation/action/production and
(iii) object/result/product/karma (updated actor/producer)
(or the actor before, during and after the action, production, acquisition of new karma) –
cannot be inherently
(i) dependently-arisen /existent /functional /changing /ceasing,
(ii) non-dependently-arisen /non-existent /non-functional /non-changing /non-ceasing,
(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; etc. [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/enables 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/characterising/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 subject/actor/producer because all subjects/actors/producers have their own subject/actor/producer, because they are also objects/results/products/karma, because they are dependently co-arisen in a limitless and centerless cycle. The same for the object/result/product/karma.
.
Last update: December 31, 2025
AI Art from: Stoneflower013
Source Text: Garfield, PTG, Streng, Batchelor.
Content
Content
A. Introduction
B. Analysis
C. Verses
D. Questions and Answers
E. Summary
F. Conclusion
A. Introduction – The limitless centerless fractal karmic cycle with no inherent dharmas in it
A. Introduction – The limitless centerless fractal karmic cycle with no inherent dharmas in it
Introduction to Abhidharma Concepts and Theories (no-self but real dharmas / phenomena)
Introduction to Abhidharma Concepts and Theories (no-self but real dharmas / phenomena)
The Abhidharma (e.g., Sarvāstivāda, Theravāda) provides a systematic ontology and phenomenology of reality, analyzing phenomena (dharmas) to understand the nature of existence, karma, and liberation. Chapter 8 engages with the Abhidharma’s concepts of producer (karaka), production (karana), and product (karma), which are central to its understanding of the karmic cycle, saṃsāra, and nirvāṇa. Below are the key concepts relevant to understanding this chapter:
1) Producer (Karaka):
The producer is the agent or subject (e.g., an individual, self, or sentient being) that performs actions (karmas). In the Abhidharma, the producer is typically understood as a momentary aggregate of the five skandhas (form, sensation, perception, formations, consciousness), lacking a permanent self (anātman) but treated as a conventionally real entity that initiates actions.
The producer is seen as the causal source of karma, responsible for actions that generate karmic consequences (phala, results) in the cycle of rebirth (saṃsāra).
2) Production (Karana):
Production refers to the act or process of producing karma, encompassing the action (kriya) and the causal mechanism (e.g., intention, volition) that links the producer to the product. The Abhidharma categorizes actions as physical, verbal, or mental, with intention (cetanā) being the primary driver of karmic efficacy.
Production is momentary, arising and ceasing within the framework of dependent origination (pratītyasamutpāda), and is considered a real dharma with inherent existence in some Abhidharma schools.
3) Product (Karma/Phala):
The product is the karma (action) or its result (phala), which manifests as experiences, rebirths (updated actor/producer), or conditions in saṃsāra. Karma is the intentional action that produces consequences, either meritorious (leading to favorable rebirths or heaven) or demeritorious (leading to suffering or lower rebirths).
The product is seen as a real dharma, causally linked to the producer’s actions, with its reality tied to the Abhidharma’s ontology of conditioned phenomena (samskrta).
4) Karma and the Karmic Cycle:
The karmic cycle is the process of cause and effect within saṃsāra, driven by the producer’s actions (karma) and their results (phala). The Abhidharma views karma as a real, causal force that perpetuates rebirth, governed by dependent origination (e.g., ignorance → volitional formations → consciousness → rebirth).
The cycle involves acquiring (upādāna, clinging to karma or its results) and giving up (relinquishing attachment), with actions shaping the producer’s future states.
5) Reality and Non-Reality:
The Abhidharma distinguishes between real (sat) and non-real (asat) dharmas.
– Real dharmas possess svabhāva (inherent existence) and causal efficacy,
– while non-real entities (e.g., conceptual constructs like a permanent self) lack svabhāva.
– The producer, production, and product are considered real dharmas, though their momentary nature avoids a permanent self.The Abhidharma debates whether karmic actions and results
– are ultimately real (paramārtha-sat)
– or conventionally real (samvṛti-sat),
with Sarvāstivāda asserting their reality across past, present, and future.
6) Saṃsāra and Nirvāṇa:
Saṃsāra is the cycle of birth, death, and rebirth, perpetuated by karma and ignorance. The Abhidharma sees saṃsāra as real, composed of conditioned dharmas, with suffering (duḥkha) as its hallmark.
Nirvāṇa is the cessation of saṃsāra, an unconditioned (asamskrta) state free from karma, suffering, and rebirth. The Abhidharma views nirvāṇa as a real dharma, attained through the path (e.g., the Noble Eightfold Path), which involves purifying karma and realizing no-self (anātman).
The producer’s actions determine progress toward nirvāṇa (meritorious karma) or continued saṃsāra (demeritorious karma).
These concepts from the Abhidharma’s framework for understanding the three spheres (producer, production, product), which Chapter 8 critiques as interdependent [T1] and empty [T2] [U2T], challenging their inherent reality and the karmic cycle they sustain.
.
Introduction to Nāgārjuna’s Refutation
Introduction to Nāgārjuna’s Refutation
1. Small Picture: Interdependence of the Three Spheres
Chapter 8 focuses on the three spheres—producer (karaka, agent), production (karana, act), and product (karma, result)—which the Abhidharma treats as real dharmas with svabhāva.
Nāgārjuna argues that these spheres are interdependent [T1] ⇐⇒ lacking independent existence [T2] [U2T]:
The producer depends on the production and product (e.g., an agent is defined by acting and producing karma).
The production depends on the producer and product (e.g., an act requires an agent and a result).
The product depends on the producer and production (e.g., karma requires an agent and an act).
This interdependence [T1] ⇐⇒ negates their svabhāva [T2] [U2T] (no continuity, no discontinuity), as none can exist without the others, akin to the three characteristics (origination, duration, cessation) in Chapter 7.
Nāgārjuna uses the tetralemma to show (in different chapters)
that the three spheres cannot be:
– Existent (real), non-existent (non-real), both, or neither.
– Separate (different), united (identical), both, or neither.
– Permanent, impermanent, both, or neither.
– Self-produced, other-produced, both, or neither; etc.
Reasoning: Each tetralemma reveals logical contradictions [Tetralemma] ⇐⇒ demonstrating that the spheres are empty of inherent existence [T2] ⇐⇒ yet conventionally functional, appearing real only due to dependent origination [T1] [U2T].
.
.
2. Big Picture: Limitless and Centerless Karmic Cycle
Beyond the three spheres, Chapter 8 addresses the karmic cycle — the Abhidharma’s framework of saṃsāra, where producers generate karma, perpetuating rebirth and suffering.
– Nāgārjuna portrays this cycle as limitless (no first cause or final effect) and centerless (no inherent producer, production, or product), resembling a fractal-like, holographic self-conditioning process.
– Everything is both a producer and a product (updated producer), interconnected in an infinite web of causes, conditions, actions, and effects, with no absolute origin or endpoint.
– This cycle is not inherently real [T2] ⇐⇒ but a conventional appearance, driven by ignorance and dualistic conceptual imputation [T1] [U2T].
– Nāgārjuna’s refutation culminates in the insight that nirvāṇa is not a separate state but the direct realization of the karmic cycle’s true nature: its inseparable emptiness [T2] ⇐⇒ and interdependence [T1] [U2T].
By applying Madhyamaka reasoning (tetralemma ⇐⇒ dependent origination ⇐⇒ emptiness ⇐⇒ illusory ⇐⇒ Middle Way ⇐⇒ One (not many, one, both or neither) ⇐⇒ Acting without acting), one transcends the cycle’s apparent reality, seeing saṃsāra and nirvāṇa as non-dual(not two, one, both or neither), both empty [T2] ⇐⇒ yet conventionally distinct [T1] [U2T]. This realization dissolves attachment to the producer, production, and product, liberating one from saṃsāra without positing an inherent nirvāṇa (liberating without liberating).
.
.
Nāgārjuna’s Method:
Nāgārjuna’s Method:
Nāgārjuna uses reductio ad absurdum, showing that assuming the inherent reality of the three spheres leads to contradictions (e.g., infinite regress, causal incoherence, existential absurdity).
– The tetralemma exhausts all logical possibilities, negating svabhāva while affirming conventional functionality.
The chapter’s structure
– verses 1–11 refuting their existence, non-existence, both, neither [Tetralemma];
– verse 12 introducing nirvāṇa via interdependence [U2T], and
– verse 13 generalizing to all phenomena —
mirrors Chapter 7’s progression, culminating in a universal affirmation of emptiness and illusion.
.
.
Chapter 8 introduces the inseparable relativity [T1] and emptiness of inherent existence [T2] of the production of karma by an agent (in a rebirth cycle), of cause/actor/producer, action/production, effect/product/karma (updated actor/producer, rebirth). It affirms that there is no inherent/absolute production of karma by an agent (in a karmic cycle, saṃsāra). Meaning the three spheres of action/production – e.g., actor/producer, action/production, effect/product/karma – 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/production); no (i) permanent or (ii) impermanent essence, self, definition, elements, 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 – Like a limitless and centerless definition karmic cycle
B. Analysis – Like a limitless and centerless definition karmic cycle
There is no inherent action/production/karma in the three times.
We cannot find the beginning of the action/production/karma in the three times.There are no absolute actors/producers /actions/productions /results/products/karma, they are all relative = Middle Way.
The three spheres – actor/producer, action/production, effect/product/karma –
are not inherently existent/functional, not completely non-existent/non-functional, not both, not neither [Tetralemma].The three spheres – actor/producer, action/production, effect/product/karma –
are not different/separate/multiple/dual/’this’, not identical/united/one/non-dual/’non-this’, not both, not neither [Tetralemma].The three spheres – actor/producer, action/production, effect/product/karma –
are not permanent/continuous/eternal, not impermanent/discontinuous/annihilated, not both, not neither [Tetralemma].The three spheres – actor/producer, action/production, effect/product/karma –
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 (tathātā, 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 karmic cycle: All actors/producers are both actor/producer and result/product/karma (updated actor/producer, rebirth); are multiple actors/producers and results/products/karma depending on the perspective (fractal), 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 karmic cycle — the result/product/karma becomes an updated actor/producer: All actors/producers are both actor/producer and result/product/karma (updated actor/producer in a cycle); have/are an infinity of actors/producers and results/products/karma 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 actor/producer, no final inherent/absolute result/product/karma (updated/liberated actor/producer), no middle inherent/absolute action/production. Action/production/karma is conventionally/relatively functional/useful to navigate the world [T1], but never absolute [T2] [U2T]. Absolute producers/production/products/karma are impossible. The three spheres of action/production – actor/producer, action/production, effect/product/karma (or updated actor/producer, rebirth) – 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].
The three spheres of action/production/karma, and other dualistic concepts, are an oversimplification of an inconceivable continuous limitless and centerless nonlinear fractal-like cycle / flux / continuum of interconnection, interdependence, co-definition, co-conditioning, co-evolution, co-creation.
A timeless multidimensional fluid dance of related/opposite appearances (non-duality), with nothing existing independently, separately, inherently, or individually within it.
Everything is fully continuous and dynamic (not discrete or static), interconnected (not just in the triad), equal, pure, perfect, complete, divine, ‘One’ in the non-dual sense: not many, not one, not both together, not neither.
No absolute view to grasp.
Saṃsāra is ignoring this; nirvāṇa is living an ordinary life (chopping wood, carrying water) while being continually fully aware of this.
Emptiness is absolute freedom, even from emptiness.
C. Verses – 4 translations – 13 verses
C. Verses – 4 translations – 13 verses
Padmakara Translation Group
Chapter 8 - An examination of Agent and Action
.
[The three spheres of action/production – actor/producer, action/production, result/product – cannot be (i) existent / real / different /separate /multiple /dual, (ii) non-existent / non-real / identical /united /one /non-dual, (iii) both, or (iv) neither; cannot be (i) permanent /continuous /eternal / ‘this’, (ii) impermanent /discontinuous /annihilated /’non-this’, (iii) both, or (iv) neither, and there is no fifth, for whatever ‘this’ is [Tetralemma] ⇐⇒ they are thus empty of inherent existence, never absolute [T2-3S] ⇐⇒ they are inseparable, dependently co-arisen, interdependent, co-defined, 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] ⇐⇒ pointing to the Middle Way with nothing to accept/reject/change in absolute terms ⇐⇒ pointing to acting without acting.]
.
[A. Tetralemma: The Spheres/Opposites Cannot Be (a) Existent, (b) Non-Existent, (c) Both Together, (d) Neither (verses 1–11): Critiques the three spheres’ reality using the tetralemma, subdivided into:]
[A1. Existence, non-existence (verses 1–6): Negates real and non-real producers, products, and their causal framework.]
1. An existent doer
Does not do existent deeds;
Neither does a nonexistent doer
Do a nonexistent deed.
.
2. In what exists, no doing can be present,
For then there'd be a deed without a doer.
In what exists no doing can be present,
For then a doer there would be without a deed.
.
3. If a nonexistent doer
Did a nonexistent deed,
Of such a deed there'd be no cause,
And also of the doer there would be no cause.
.
4. If these are without cause,
Both fruit and cause will be untenable.
If these do not exist,
The "done," the "doer," and the "doing" are impossible.
.
5. If doing and the others are impossible,
There is neither virtue nor nonvirtue.
If there's neither virtue nor nonvirtue,
No effects will come from them.
.
6. If there are no effects,
To freedom and to higher realms no path can we accept.
Our doings, each and every one,
It follows, must be meaningless.
.
[A2. Both together (verses 7–8): Negates hybrid real-nonreal combinations]
7. A doer that exists and yet does not exist
Does not do an action that exists and yet does not exist.
For where can "is" and "is not"-mutual contradictories—
Be present in a single thing?
.
8. An existent doer does not do
A nonexistent deed;
Neither does a nonexistent doer do existent deeds,
For here too all the faulty consequences follow.
.
[A3. Neither (verses 9–11): Negates neither-real-nor-nonreal combinations.]
9. An existent doer
Does not do a nonexistent deed
Nor one that both exists and yet does not exist,
And this for reasons that were shown above.
.
10. A nonexistent doer
Does not do existent deeds,
Nor yet a deed that is both nonexistent and existent—
For the reasons that were shown above.
.
11. A doer that is nonexistent and existent
Does not do a deed that's nonexistent and existent.
This also should be understood
For reasons that above were shown.
.
[B. Nirvāṇa is transcending all appearances using the Madhyamaka Reasoning (verse 12): Introduces nirvāṇa as realizing the interdependence of producer and product.]
12. [Saṃsāra: Inseparable interdependence in a karmic cycle (rebirths) and emptiness of the three spheres [U2T-3S]. One is continually conditioned-by and is conditioning the others. Nirvāṇa is directly realizing the true nature & dynamic of this karmic cycle, rebirth cycle, saṃsāra.]
The doer, then, depends upon a deed;
The deed occurs depending on that very doer.
Apart from this, we do not see
A cause for their establishment.
.
[C. Continuous limitless and centerless nonlinear holographic fractal-like self-conditioning / karmic cycle] (verse 13): Generalizes the critique to all phenomena, dissolving their reality through emptiness.]
13. It's thus that we should understand appropriation—
As in this refutation of the doer and the deed.
And through the doer and the deed
Let all remaining entities be understood.
Garfield
Chapter 8 - Examination of the Agent and Action
.
[The three spheres of action/production – actor/producer, action/production, result/product – cannot be (i) existent / real / different /separate /multiple /dual, (ii) non-existent / non-real / identical /united /one /non-dual, (iii) both, or (iv) neither; cannot be (i) permanent /continuous /eternal / ‘this’, (ii) impermanent /discontinuous /annihilated /’non-this’, (iii) both, or (iv) neither, and there is no fifth, for whatever ‘this’ is [Tetralemma] ⇐⇒ they are thus empty of inherent existence, never absolute [T2-3S] ⇐⇒ they are inseparable, dependently co-arisen, interdependent, co-defined, 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] ⇐⇒ pointing to the Middle Way with nothing to accept/reject/change in absolute terms ⇐⇒ pointing to acting without acting.]
.
[A. Tetralemma: The Spheres/Opposites Cannot Be (a) Existent, (b) Non-Existent, (c) Both Together, (d) Neither (verses 1–11): Critiques the three spheres’ reality using the tetralemma, subdivided into:]
[A1. Existence, non-existence (verses 1–6): Negates real and non-real producers, products, and their causal framework.]
1. This existent agent
Does not perform an existent action.
Nor does some nonexistent agent
Perform some nonexistent action.
.
2. An existent entity has no activity.
There would also be action without an agent.
An existent entity has no activity.
There would also be agent without action.
.
3. If a nonexistent agent
Were to performa nonexistent action,
Then the action would be without a cause
And the agent would be without a cause.
.
4. Without a cause, the effect and
Its cause will not occur.
Without this, activity and
Agent and action are not possible.
.
5. If activity, etc., are not possible,
Entities and nonentities are not possible.
If there are neither entities nor nonentities,
Effects cannot arise from them.
.
6. If there are no effects,
liberation and Paths to higher realms will not exist.
So all of activity
Would be without purpose.
.
[A2. Both together (verses 7–8): Negates hybrid real-nonreal combinations]
7. An existent and nonexistent agent
Does not perform an existent and nonexistent action.
Existence and nonexistence cannot pertain to the same thing.
For how could they exist together?
.
8. An actual agent
Does not perform a nonactual action.
Nor by a nonactual one is an actual one performed.
From this, all of those errors would follow.
.
[A3. Neither (verses 9–11): Negates neither-real-nor-nonreal combinations.]
9. An existent agent
Does not perform an action that
Is unreal or both real and unreal
As we have already agreed.
.
10. A nonexistent agent
Does not perform an action that
Is unreal or both real and unreal
As we have already agreed.
.
11. An existent and nonexistent agent
does not perform an action that
Is unreal or both real and unreal
As we have agreed.
.
[B. Nirvāṇa is transcending all appearances using the Madhyamaka Reasoning (verse 12): Introduces nirvāṇa as realizing the interdependence of producer and product.]
12. [Saṃsāra: Inseparable interdependence in a karmic cycle (rebirths) and emptiness of the three spheres [U2T-3S]. One is continually conditioned-by and is conditioning the others. Nirvāṇa is directly realizing the true nature & dynamic of this karmic cycle, rebirth cycle, saṃsāra.]
Action depends upon the agent.
The agent itself depends on action.
One cannot see any way
To establish them differently.
.
[C. Continuous limitless and centerless nonlinear holographic fractal-like self-conditioning / karmic cycle] (verse 13): Generalizes the critique to all phenomena, dissolving their reality through emptiness.]
13. From this elimination of agent and action,
One should elucidate appropriation in the same way.
Through action and agent
All remaining things should be understood.
Batchelor
Chapter 8 - Investigation of Act and Actor
.
[The three spheres of action/production – actor/producer, action/production, result/product – cannot be (i) existent / real / different /separate /multiple /dual, (ii) non-existent / non-real / identical /united /one /non-dual, (iii) both, or (iv) neither; cannot be (i) permanent /continuous /eternal / ‘this’, (ii) impermanent /discontinuous /annihilated /’non-this’, (iii) both, or (iv) neither, and there is no fifth, for whatever ‘this’ is [Tetralemma] ⇐⇒ they are thus empty of inherent existence, never absolute [T2-3S] ⇐⇒ they are inseparable, dependently co-arisen, interdependent, co-defined, 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] ⇐⇒ pointing to the Middle Way with nothing to accept/reject/change in absolute terms ⇐⇒ pointing to acting without acting.]
.
[A. Tetralemma: The Spheres/Opposites Cannot Be (a) Existent, (b) Non-Existent, (c) Both Together, (d) Neither (verses 1–11): Critiques the three spheres’ reality using the tetralemma, subdivided into:]
[A1. Existence, non-existence (verses 1–6): Negates real and non-real producers, products, and their causal framework.]
1. One who exists as an actor does not do that which exists as an act. One who does not exist as an actor also does not do that which does not exist as an act.
.
2. One who exists has no activity; [something] would also exist as an act without an actor. One who exists has no activity; [something] would also exist as an actor without an act.
.
3. If one who does not exist as an actor did that which does not exist as an act, the act would have no cause; the actor too would have no cause.
.
4. If there were no cause, effect and cause would not be evident. If they were non-existent, activity and agent and doing would not be evident.
.
5. If activity etc. did not appear, dharma and adharma would not be evident. If dharma and adharma did not exist, there would be no fruit that comes from them.
.
6. If there were no fruit, the path of liberation and higher states would not be appropriate. Also it would follow that all activities are meaningless.
.
[A2. Both together (verses 7–8): Negates hybrid real-nonreal combinations]
7. One who exists and does not exist as an actor does not do what exists and does not exist [as an act]. Since existence and non-existence are mutually contradictory in one [thing], where can they exist?
.
8. One who exists as an actor does not do an act which is not existent. One who does not exist [as an actor] also does not do what exists [as an act]. Here too faults will follow for one.
.
[A3. Neither (verses 9–11): Negates neither-real-nor-nonreal combinations.]
9. One who exists as an actor does not do what does not exist as an act and what neither exists or not [as an act], because of what was demonstrated by the proof above.
.
10. One who does not exist as an actor does not do what exists as an act and what neither exists or not [as an act], because of what was demonstrated by the proof above.
.
11. One who neither exists nor does not exist as an actor does not do that which exists and does not exist as an act. Here too this is to be known through the proof demonstrated above.
.
[B. Nirvāṇa is transcending all appearances using the Madhyamaka Reasoning (verse 12): Introduces nirvāṇa as realizing the interdependence of producer and product.]
12. [Saṃsāra: Inseparable interdependence in a karmic cycle (rebirths) and emptiness of the three spheres [U2T-3S]. One is continually conditioned-by and is conditioning the others. Nirvāṇa is directly realizing the true nature & dynamic of this karmic cycle, rebirth cycle, saṃsāra.]
An actor depends on acts and acts too occur in dependence on an actor.
Apart from this, one does not see a cause which is established.
.
[C. Continuous limitless and centerless nonlinear holographic fractal-like self-conditioning / karmic cycle] (verse 13): Generalizes the critique to all phenomena, dissolving their reality through emptiness.]
13. Likewise, one should understand clinging, because act and actor are dispelled. Remaining things too should be understood by means of actor and act.
Streng
Chapter 8 - An Analysis of the Product (Karma) and the Producer (Karaka) – 13 verses
.
[The three spheres of action/production – actor/producer, action/production, result/product – cannot be (i) existent / real / different /separate /multiple /dual, (ii) non-existent / non-real / identical /united /one /non-dual, (iii) both, or (iv) neither; cannot be (i) permanent /continuous /eternal / ‘this’, (ii) impermanent /discontinuous /annihilated /’non-this’, (iii) both, or (iv) neither, and there is no fifth, for whatever ‘this’ is [Tetralemma] ⇐⇒ they are thus empty of inherent existence, never absolute [T2-3S] ⇐⇒ they are inseparable, dependently co-arisen, interdependent, co-defined, 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] ⇐⇒ pointing to the Middle Way with nothing to accept/reject/change in absolute terms ⇐⇒ pointing to acting without acting.]
.
[A. Tetralemma: The Spheres/Opposites Cannot Be (a) Existent, (b) Non-Existent, (c) Both Together, (d) Neither (verses 1–11): Critiques the three spheres’ reality using the tetralemma, subdivided into:]
[A1. Existence, non-existence (verses 1–6): Negates real and non-real producers, products, and their causal framework.]
1. A real producer
does not produce a real product.
Even more so, a non-real producer
does not seek a non-real product.
.
2. There is no producing action of a real thing;
[if so,] there would be a product (effect)
without someone producing (cause).
Also, there is no producing by a real thing;
[if so,] there would be someone producing (subject) without something produced (object).
.
3. If a non-existent producer
would produce a non-real product,
The product would be without a causal source and the producer would be without a causal source.
.
4. If there is no causal source, there is nothing to be produced nor cause-in-general (karana).
Then neither do the producing action, the person producing, nor the instrument of production (karana) exist.
.
5. If the producing action, etc. do not exist,
then neither can the true reality (dharma)
nor false reality (adharma) exist.
If neither the true reality nor the false reality exists, then also the product (phala) born from that does not exist.
.
6. If there is no real product, then there also exists no path to heaven nor to ultimate release.
Thus it logically follows that all producing actions are without purpose.
.
.
[A2. Both together (verses 7–8): Negates hybrid real-nonreal combinations]
7. And a real-nonreal producer does not produce in a real-nonreal manner.
For, indeed, how can "real" and "non-real," which are mutually contradictory, occur in one place?
.
8. A real producer (kartra) does not produce what is non-real, and a non-real producer does not produce what is real.
[From that] indeed, all the mistakes must logically follow.
.
.
[A3. Neither (verses 9–11): Negates neither-real-nor-nonreal combinations.]
9. The producer, who is neither real nor non-real, does not produce a product which is either real or non-real,
Because of the reasons which have been advanced earlier.
.
10. The non-real producer does not produce a product which is not real, nor both real-and-non-real,
Because of the reasons which have been advanced earlier.
.
11. And a real-non-real producer does not produce a product which is neither real nor non-real.
This is evident from the reasons which have been advanced earlier.
.
.
[B. Nirvāṇa is transcending all appearances using the Madhyamaka Reasoning (verse 12): Introduces nirvāṇa as realizing the interdependence of producer and product.]
12. [Saṃsāra: Inseparable interdependence in a karmic cycle (rebirths) and emptiness of the three spheres [U2T-3S]. One is continually conditioned-by and is conditioning the others. Nirvāṇa is directly realizing the true nature & dynamic of this karmic cycle, rebirth cycle, saṃsāra.]
The producer proceeds being dependent on the product, and the product proceeds being dependent on the producer.
The cause for realization (i.e. Nirvāṇa) is seen in nothing else [than realizing the U2T-3S].
.
.
[C. Continuous limitless and centerless nonlinear holographic fractal-like self-conditioning / karmic cycle] (verse 13): Generalizes the critique to all phenomena, dissolving their reality through emptiness.]
13. In the same way one should understand the "acquiring" (i.e. of karma - upadana) on the basis of the "giving up," etc. of the producer and the product.
By means of [this analysis of] the product and the producer all other things should be dissolved.
D. Questions and Answers: A limitless and centerless fractal empty-karmic cycle [U2T-3S-in-action].
D. Questions and Answers: A limitless and centerless fractal empty-karmic cycle [U2T-3S-in-action].
Question: Karma (action) vs. Karma (result)
Question: Karma (action) vs. Karma (result)
Q: Is karma the action / production or the result / product? Seems like the definition changes depending on the context.
Your question about whether karma is the action/production or the result/product in the context of Chapter 8 of Nāgārjuna’s Mūlamadhyamakakārikā (MMK), Karmakārakaparīkṣā: An Analysis of the Product (Karma) and the Producer (Karaka), is an insightful one that highlights the nuanced and context-dependent nature of the term karma in Buddhist philosophy, particularly in the Abhidharma and Madhyamaka frameworks.
The apparent shift in definition depending on context is a critical observation, as it reflects both the Abhidharma’s technical distinctions and Nāgārjuna’s strategic use of terminology to deconstruct these concepts.
Below, I’ll clarify the definition of karma in Chapter 8, explore how its meaning varies between action/production and result/product, and explain how Nāgārjuna leverages this ambiguity to advance his critique. I’ll draw on the context of Chapter 8, incorporate your provided comments (e.g., interdependence of the three spheres, limitless and centerless karmic cycle), and align with the Madhyamaka framework (tetralemma ⇐⇒ emptiness [T2] ⇐⇒ dependent origination [T1] [T2] ⇐⇒ illusory nature), while referencing our prior analyses and ensuring consistency with the chapter’s structure.
.
.
A. Defining Karma: Action/Production vs. Result/Product
1. General Buddhist Context:
In Buddhist philosophy, karma (Sanskrit: karman, “action”) fundamentally means action driven by intention (cetanā), which produces consequences that shape future experiences, rebirths, and conditions.
The term is used flexibly across traditions, with its meaning shifting based on context:
As Action: Karma often refers to intentional actions (physical, verbal, mental) performed by an agent, which generate causal effects. These actions are the “seeds” of future results.
As Result: Karma can also refer to the results or fruits (phala) of these actions, such as experiences, rebirths, or suffering, which manifest as consequences of prior actions.
This dual usage reflects the causal process of dependent origination (pratītyasamutpāda), where actions (causes) lead to results (effects), both of which are part of the karmic cycle. The Abhidharma and Madhyamaka traditions refine these meanings, and Chapter 8 engages with both senses to critique the Abhidharma’s ontology.
.
2. Abhidharma Context (Relevant to Chapter 8)
In the Abhidharma (e.g., Sarvāstivāda), karma is analyzed within the framework of dharmas (real entities with svabhāva, inherent existence) and the three spheres — producer (karaka, agent), production (karana, act), and product (karma, result). The Abhidharma’s technical distinctions are crucial for understanding Chapter 8:
Karma as Action/Production: Karma is primarily the intentional action (cetanā-driven act) performed by the producer, categorized as physical (body), verbal (speech), or mental (mind). This action is a real dharma, part of the production (karana, the causal process). For example, a volitional act like giving alms is karma as action, producing merit. In the Abhidharma, this action is momentary, arising and ceasing, but its causal efficacy persists across time (e.g., Sarvāstivāda’s view of past dharmas influencing future results).
Karma as Result/Product: Karma also refers to the result or fruit (phala) of these actions, such as favorable rebirths (e.g., in heaven), suffering (e.g., in lower realms), or liberation (e.g., nirvāṇa’s attainment). The result is a separate dharma, produced by the action, and manifests as experiences or conditions in saṃsāra. For example, the merit from giving alms may result in a heavenly rebirth (phala).
Three Spheres in Chapter 8: The Abhidharma maps these onto the three spheres:
– Producer (karaka): The agent (e.g., momentary skandhas) initiating the action.
– Production (karana): The act of producing karma, encompassing the producing action (kriya, the act itself) and instrument of production (e.g., intention, cetanā).
– Product (karma): Often the result (phala), such as karmic consequences, but can also include the action itself as the immediate product of the producer’s intent.Contextual Ambiguity: The Abhidharma’s terminology allows karma to shift between action (as part of production) and result (as the product), depending on the focus.
– For example, in the karmic cycle, karma as action (e.g., a volitional act) produces karma as result (e.g., rebirth).
– This dual usage is evident in Chapter 8’s verses, where karma is sometimes the action (kriya, part of karana) and sometimes the result (phala).
.
3. Nāgārjuna’s Use in Chapter 8
Nāgārjuna exploits this dual usage to critique the Abhidharma’s reification of the three spheres, showing that whether karma is understood as action/production or result/product ⇐⇒ it lacks inherent existence [T2] ⇐⇒ due to interdependence [T1] [U2T].
Let’s examine how karma is used in Chapter 8, focusing on verse 5 and its context, to clarify the shifting definition.
.
.
B. Karma in Verse 5 and Chapter 8
1. Verse 5 Text Recap:
5. If the producing action, etc.
(i.e. The phrase “etc.” encompasses the other components negated in verse 4: the person producing (karaka, agent), the instrument of production (karana, e.g., intention), and the broader cause-in-general (karana, causal mechanism).)
.
do not exist, then neither can
the true reality (dharma) nor false reality (adharma) exist.
(i.e. True reality (dharma) refers to the Abhidharma’s real dharmas — entities with svabhāva and causal efficacy, such as the producer, production, product, or other conditioned (samskrta) and unconditioned (asamskrta) phenomena (e.g., skandhas, nirvāṇa). These are considered ultimately real (paramārtha-sat) or conventionally real (samvṛti-sat).
False reality (adharma) refers to conceptual constructs or non-real entities lacking svabhāva, such as a permanent self, a unicorn, or illusory phenomena. In the Abhidharma, these are not dharmas but mental imputations without causal power.)
.
If neither the true reality nor the false reality exists,
then also the product (phala)
(ex. the karmic cycle with rebirths)
born from that does not exist.
(i.e. The product (phala) refers to the karmic result or consequence of actions, such as favorable rebirths (e.g., heaven), suffering (e.g., lower realms), or liberation (e.g., nirvāṇa’s attainment). In the Abhidharma, phala is the outcome of karma, causally linked to the producer’s actions through production.
– Nāgārjuna argues that if true reality (dharma) and false reality (adharma) do not exist — because the producing action, etc., are empty — then the karmic product (phala) born from this framework also cannot exist. The karmic cycle (saṃsāra), which depends on the production of phala (results like rebirth or suffering), is thus negated as an inherently real process.)
.
2. Analysis of Karma in Verse 5:
Karma as Action/Production: The verse begins with the producing action (kriya) and “etc.,” which includes the person producing (karaka) and instrument of production (karana, e.g., intention), collectively representing the production (karana) sphere. In this context, karma as action is implicit in the producing action and instrument, as these are the intentional acts (karmas) that the Abhidharma considers real dharmas. Verse 5 argues that these components do not exist inherently, as they are interdependent (building on verse 4’s negation of a causal source). Thus, karma as the action (part of production) is negated as a real dharma.
Karma as Result/Product: The verse concludes by negating the product (phala), explicitly tied to the karmic cycle, which includes results like rebirths or liberation. Here, karma as result (phala) is the primary focus, as the verse argues that without dharmas (true reality, e.g., real actions or skandhas) and non-dharmas (false reality, e.g., conceptual constructs), no karmic product can exist. The karmic cycle (saṃsāra), driven by these results, collapses.
Shifting Definition: In verse 5, karma operates in both senses:
– Action/Production: The producing action and “etc.” (karana, kriya) represent karma as the intentional act, negated as part of the three spheres’ dynamic.
– Result/Product: The product (phala) represents karma as the consequence, negated as the outcome of the karmic cycle.
– Nāgārjuna’s critique hinges on this dual usage:
if karma as action (production) is empty due to interdependence ⇐⇒ then karma as result (phala) cannot arise, negating the entire cycle. [Emptiness ⇐⇒ Emptiness]
This aligns with your comment: “The three spheres… are interdependent, co-defined, co-evolving [T1] ⇐⇒ thus empty of inherent existence [T2] [U2T].”
.
3. Karma Across Chapter 8:
Verses 1–3: Focus on the product as karma (result, phala), critiquing whether a real or non-real producer can produce a real or non-real product. Here, karma is primarily the result (e.g., verse 1: “a real producer does not produce a real product”), but the producing action (kriya, part of karana) is implicit in the critique of production. For example, verse 2 explicitly negates the producing action of a real thing, where karma as action is central.
Verse 4: Negates the producing action, person producing, and instrument of production, where karma as action (kriya, karana) is the focus, as these are the components of the production process. The product (phala) is indirectly negated as “nothing to be produced.”
Verse 5: Shifts between karma as action (producing action, etc., negated as part of the three spheres’ dynamic) and karma as result (phala, explicitly negated as the karmic cycle’s outcome). The dual usage is strategic, showing that negating the action ⇐⇒ negates the result, collapsing the cycle. [Emptiness ⇐⇒ Emptiness]
Verse 6: Focuses on the product (phala) as karma (result), arguing that without real products, paths to heaven and nirvāṇa are purposeless. Here, karma is primarily the result, but the producing actions (kriya, negated in verses 4–5) are implicitly included as the cause of these results.
Verses 7–11: Continue the tetralemma, critiquing hybrid and neither-real-nor-nonreal combinations, where karma as product (phala) remains the focus, but production (action) is implicit in the producer’s role.
Verse 12: Emphasizes the interdependence of producer and product, where karma as result (phala) is central, but the production (action) is implied in their mutual dependence. Nirvāṇa is the realization of this emptiness.
Verse 13: Generalizes to all phenomena, including acquiring (upādāna, clinging to karma) and giving up, where karma encompasses both action (clinging as an act) and result (karmic consequences), negated as part of the fractal cycle.
.
4. Context-Dependent Definition:
The shifting definition of karma in Chapter 8 reflects the Abhidharma’s dual usage:
Karma as Action/Production: When focusing on the production sphere (karana, kriya, instrument), karma is the intentional act (e.g., verses 2, 4–5’s “producing action”). This is the causal process initiated by the producer.
Karma as Result/Product: When focusing on the product sphere (phala), karma is the consequence (e.g., verses 1, 5–6’s “product”). This is the outcome of the action, manifesting in saṃsāra or liberation.
Nāgārjuna’s Strategy: Nāgārjuna exploits this duality to show that both senses are empty:
– If karma as action (production) is empty due to interdependence (verses 2, 4–5) ⇐⇒ no real karma as result (phala) can arise (verses 5–6).
– If karma as result (product) is empty ⇐⇒ the action (production) becomes purposeless (verse 6), as it lacks a real outcome.
– This interdependence [T1] ⇐⇒ negates svabhāva [T2] [U2T], aligning with your comment: “Everything is both producer and product… in a limitless and centerless fractal cycle: no first cause/producer, no final effect/product, no inherent production.”
.
5. Verse 5’s Specific Usage:
In verse 5, karma operates in both senses:
Action/Production: The producing action, etc. (kriya, karaka, karana) represents karma as the intentional act or process, negated as empty due to interdependence (building on verse 4’s negation of a causal source).
Result/Product: The product (phala) represents karma as the consequence (e.g., rebirths), explicitly negated as part of the karmic cycle. The verse argues that without the action (production), no result (phala) can exist, collapsing the cycle.
The dual usage is deliberate: by negating karma as action (the producing process) ⇐⇒ Nāgārjuna negates karma as result (phala), undermining the Abhidharma’s causal ontology and saṃsāra’s reality.
.
6. Implications for Chapter 8:
The shifting definition of karma serves Nāgārjuna’s broader critique:
Small Picture (Three Spheres): The interdependence of producer, production, and product [T1] ⇐⇒ means that karma — whether action (kriya, karana) or result (phala) — cannot exist independently [T2] [U2T].
This negates the Abhidharma’s view of real dharmas, as you noted: “The three spheres are interdependent, co-defined, co-evolving [T1] ⇐⇒ thus empty of inherent existence [T2] [U2T].”Big Picture (Karmic Cycle): By negating both senses of karma, Nāgārjuna portrays the karmic cycle as a fractal-like, centerless process ⇐⇒ with no inherent reality, aligning with your comment: “It is like a continuous limitless and centerless nonlinear holographic fractal-like self-conditioning / karmic cycle… with nothing substantial in it.”
Nirvāṇa: The emptiness of karma (action and result) enables nirvāṇa as the realization of this cycle’s true nature (verse 12), transcending saṃsāra without reifying liberation, as you noted: “Nirvāṇa is simply directly realizing the true nature & dynamic of the karmic cycle / saṃsāra as it is.”
.
.
C. Clarifying the Ambiguity
The context-dependent definition of karma in Chapter 8 is not a flaw but a strategic feature:
Abhidharma’s Flexibility: The Abhidharma uses karma flexibly to denote both action (cetanā-driven acts) and result (phala), reflecting the causal continuum of dependent origination. Chapter 8 engages both senses to exhaust all aspects of the Abhidharma’s causal framework.
Nāgārjuna’s Critique: By targeting karma as both action (production, kriya, karana) and result (product, phala), Nāgārjuna ensures a comprehensive negation:
– Negating karma as action (verses 2, 4–5) undermines the causal process, as the producing action depends on producer and product.
– Negating karma as result (verses 1, 5–6) undermines the outcomes, as phala depends on the action’s reality.
– This dual negation collapses the karmic cycle, showing it lacks svabhāva, as you noted: “no inherent production.”Madhyamaka Insight:
The ambiguity of karma reflects its interdependent nature, action and result co-arise, co-evolve [T1] ⇐⇒ neither existing independently [T2][U2T].
This interdependence [T1] ⇐⇒ is the key to realizing emptiness [T2] [U2T],
enabling nirvāṇa as the transcendence of the cycle’s illusory reality.
.
Example for Clarity:
Consider a gardener (producer) planting a seed (production) to grow a tree (product). In the Abhidharma:
Karma as action is the act of planting (production, kriya), driven by intention.
Karma as result is the tree (product, phala), manifesting as a future condition (e.g., fruit or shade).
Verse 5 argues that if the act of planting (producing action, etc.) is empty due to interdependence (no real gardener or seed) ⇐⇒ then neither real trees (dharmas, like skandhas) nor imaginary trees (non-dharmas, like fictional constructs) exist ⇐⇒ and thus no fruit (phala, results) or cycle of planting (karmic cycle) can exist.
The dual negation of action and result reveals the cycle’s emptiness.
.
.
D. Updated Analysis for Verse 5
To reflect the dual usage of karma and incorporate your refined title, here’s an updated analysis for verse 5, emphasizing its critique of both action and result:
Verse 5: [5. Without the three spheres’ dynamic, then dharmas & non-dharmas, and the whole karmic cycle with rebirths, are impossible ⇐⇒ U2T ⇐⇒ Illusory]
5. If the producing action, etc. do not exist, then neither can the true reality (dharma) nor false reality (adharma) exist. If neither the true reality nor the false reality exists, then also the product (phala) born from that does not exist (karmic cycle).
(i.e. Nāgārjuna argues that if the dynamic of the three spheres — producing action (kriya, karma as action), person producing (karaka), instrument of production (karana, e.g., intention), and related components (“etc.,” from verse 4) — does not exist due to their interdependence ⇐⇒ then neither can dharmas (true reality, real entities like skandhas or karma as action/result) nor non-dharmas (false reality, conceptual constructs like a permanent self) exist [Tetralemma: a, b].
– Without these ontological realities, the karmic product (phala, karma as result, e.g., rebirths or liberation) and the whole karmic cycle with rebirths (saṃsāra) are impossible, as they depend on this dynamic.
– This challenges the Abhidharma view that the producer, production (karma as action), and product (karma as result) are real dharmas driving saṃsāra, showing their emptiness negates the reality of dharmas, non-dharmas, and the karmic cycle ⇐⇒ affirming their emptiness [T2] [U2T].
– This verse escalates verse 4’s negation of the causal source, undermining the Abhidharma’s distinction between real and non-real phenomena by negating karma in both senses — action (producing process) and result (phala) — and aligns with the portrayal of a limitless, centerless karmic cycle lacking inherent reality [your comment: “with nothing substantial in it”].
– By negating the cycle’s foundation, it prefigures nirvāṇa as realizing this emptiness [verse 12], where the fractal-like dynamic of saṃsāra is seen as illusory [your comment: “co-evolve in a fractal cycle of interdependence”].)
.
.
E. Conclusion
In Chapter 8, karma is used in both senses—action/production (kriya, karana, the intentional act) and result/product (phala, the consequence)—with its definition shifting based on context:
Karma as Action/Production is prominent in verses focusing on the production sphere (e.g., verses 2, 4–5’s “producing action”), where it denotes the causal process negated as empty due to interdependence.
Karma as Result/Product is prominent in verses focusing on the product sphere (e.g., verses 1, 5–6’s “product”), where it denotes the karmic consequences (rebirths, liberation) negated as part of the karmic cycle’s collapse.
Verse 5’s Dual Usage: The verse negates karma as action (producing action, etc.) to undermine the causal process ⇐⇒ which in turn negates karma as result (phala), collapsing the karmic cycle.
This dual negation reflects the interdependence of action and result ⇐⇒ showing both are empty [T2] ⇐⇒ dependently co-arisen [T1] [T2] ⇐⇒ and illusory.
Nāgārjuna’s strategic use of karma’s ambiguity dismantles the Abhidharma’s ontology, portraying the karmic cycle as a fractal-like, centerless process with no inherent reality, as you noted. This sets the stage for nirvāṇa as realizing the cycle’s emptiness, transcending saṃsāra without reifying liberation. The shifting definition is thus a deliberate tool to negate svabhāva, aligning with the Madhyamaka Middle Way.
.
.
.
Question: Karma as both conditioner and conditioned
Question: Karma as both conditioner and conditioned
Q: Can you clear this up: We have a conditioned conditioning producer (actor with its conditioning/karma) ==> performing a conditioned conditioning action (according to this conditioning/karma) ⇒ and generating a conditioned conditioning result (that will ultimately update the producer’s conditioned conditioning). So each sphere is conditioned by, and conditioning, the others. Seems like karma is the conditioner and conditioned at each step. Maybe that is why the same name is used for the action and for the result.
Your question about the role of karma in the context of Chapter 8 of Nāgārjuna’s Mūlamadhyamakakārikā (MMK), Karmakārakaparīkṣā: An Analysis of the Product (Karma) and the Producer (Karaka), is a brilliant and nuanced observation that gets to the heart of the interdependence of the three spheres — producer (karaka, actor), production (karana, action), and product (karma, result) — and the dynamic nature of karma as both conditioner and conditioned at each step.
Your description of the conditioned and conditioning nature of each sphere, with karma acting as the unifying thread across action and result, explains why the term karma is used flexibly in the Abhidharma and Nāgārjuna’s critique.
This insight also aligns with your comment on the limitless and centerless fractal-like karmic cycle, where everything is interconnected in a process of mutual conditioning.
Below, I’ll clarify the relationship between karma, the three spheres, and their conditioned/conditioning dynamic, addressing why karma is used for both action and result. I’ll situate this within Chapter 8’s critique, incorporate your provided comments (e.g., interdependence of the three spheres, fractal cycle), and align with the Madhyamaka framework (tetralemma ⇐⇒ emptiness [T2] ⇐⇒ dependent origination [T1] [u2t] ⇐⇒ illusory nature]). I’ll reference our prior analyses, including the refined titles for verses 4–6, and ensure consistency with the chapter’s structure, ignoring parenthetical notes in the verse texts. The explanation will focus on your model of the conditioned conditioning producer → action → result and the role of karma as both conditioner and conditioned.
.
.
A. Clarifying Karma and the Three Spheres’ Dynamic
Your model of the three spheres — conditioned conditioning producer performing a conditioned conditioning action to generate a conditioned conditioning result, with each sphere conditioning and conditioned by the others — accurately captures the interdependent, cyclical nature of the karmic process in the Abhidharma and Nāgārjuna’s critique in Chapter 8.
Let’s break down this model and clarify karma’s role as both conditioner (shaping the process) and conditioned (shaped by prior conditions), explaining why the same term is used for action and result.
1. The Three Spheres and Their Conditioned/Conditioning Nature
In the Abhidharma, the three spheres — producer (karaka), production (karana), and product (karma/phala) — form the causal framework of the karmic cycle, governed by dependent origination (pratītyasamutpāda). Your description highlights their mutual conditioning:
.
Conditioned Conditioning Producer (Karaka):
– The producer is the agent (e.g., momentary skandhas—form, sensation, perception, formations, consciousness) that initiates actions. It is conditioned by prior karma (past actions and their results, stored as latent tendencies or “conditioning” in the skandhas) and conditioning future actions and results through its present actions.
– Example: A person’s intention to give alms is conditioned by past meritorious karma (e.g., a disposition toward generosity) and conditions future results (e.g., a favorable rebirth).
– In Chapter 8, the producer is negated as real or non-real (verses 1, 3, 7–11) [Tetralemma] ⇐⇒ as it depends on production and product [T1] ⇐⇒ lacking svabhāva (inherent existence) [T2] [U2T].
.Conditioned Conditioning Action (Production, Karana):
– The production is the act of producing karma, encompassing the producing action (kriya, the act itself) and instrument of production (e.g., intention, cetanā). It is conditioned by the producer’s karma (e.g., intention shaped by past conditioning) and conditioning the product (e.g., the act generates a result).
– Example: The act of giving alms (kriya) is conditioned by the producer’s intention (cetanā, itself shaped by past karma) and conditions the merit (phala) that leads to a future rebirth.
– In Chapter 8, production is negated as real (verse 2) or part of the dynamic (verses 4–5) [Tetralemma] ⇐⇒ as it depends on producer and product [T1] ⇐⇒ lacking svabhāva [T2] [U2T].
.Conditioned Conditioning Result (Product, Karma/Phala):
– The product is the karmic result (phala, e.g., rebirth, suffering, or liberation) or the action itself as the immediate outcome (karma as action). It is conditioned by the production (the act that generates it) and conditioning the producer by updating its karma (e.g., new latent tendencies or results that shape future actions).
– Example: The merit from giving alms (phala) is conditioned by the act and updates the producer’s conditioning (e.g., strengthening generosity), influencing future actions.
– In Chapter 8, the product is negated as real or non-real (verses 1, 6) [Tetralemma] ⇐⇒ as it depends on producer and production [T1] ⇐⇒ lacking svabhāva [T2] [U2T].
.
Mutual Conditioning: Your model correctly identifies that each sphere is conditioned by, and conditioning, the others:
The producer is conditioned by past products (prior karma)
and conditions the production (action) and product (result).The production is conditioned by the producer (intention) and product (result it aims for)
and conditions the product (by generating it) and producer (by updating its karma).The product is conditioned by the producer and production
and conditions the producer (by updating its conditioning) and future productions (by shaping intentions).This creates a continuous cyclical, interdependent process, where no sphere exists independently, aligning with your comment: “The three spheres are interdependent, co-defined, co-evolving [T1] ⇐⇒ thus empty of inherent existence [T2] [U2T] ⇐⇒ not different/separate/multiple/dual, not identical/united/one/non-dual, not both, not neither.”
.
.
2. Karma as Conditioner and Conditioned
Your observation that karma is the conditioner and conditioned at each step explains why the same term is used for both action and result. Let’s unpack this:
Karma as Conditioner:
– As Action (Production): Karma as the producing action (kriya, karana) conditions the product (phala) by generating results (e.g., merit from giving alms conditions a heavenly rebirth). It also conditions the producer by updating its karma (e.g., strengthening generosity). In the Abhidharma, the action’s intention (cetanā) is the primary conditioner, shaping future experiences.
– As Result (Product): Karma as the result (phala) conditions the producer by altering its skandhas or latent tendencies (e.g., a favorable rebirth conditions new actions) and conditions future productions by influencing intentions (e.g., merit encourages further meritorious acts). The result acts as a conditioner by perpetuating the karmic cycle.
– Example: Giving alms (karma as action) conditions merit (karma as result), which conditions the producer’s future generosity (updated conditioning), driving the cycle.
.
Karma as Conditioned:
– As Action (Production): Karma as the producing action is conditioned by the producer’s prior karma (e.g., past merit shapes the intention to give alms) and the product (e.g., the action is defined by its intended result, like merit). It arises within the web of dependent origination, conditioned by past actions and conditions.
– As Result (Product): Karma as the result (phala) is conditioned by the production (the action that generates it) and the producer (whose intention drives the action). For example, a heavenly rebirth (phala) is conditioned by the act of giving alms and the producer’s intention.
– Example: The act of giving alms (karma as action) is conditioned by past merit and the intent to produce merit (phala), which is itself conditioned by the act and agent.
.
Why the Same Name?
The Abhidharma uses karma for both action and result because they are two sides of the same causal process in dependent origination:
– Action (Karma as Production): The intentional act (kriya, karana) is the cause, driven by cetanā, and is itself a dharma with svabhāva in the Abhidharma’s view. It is called karma because it is the active force that initiates the cycle.
– Result (Karma as Product): The result (phala) is the effect, manifesting as experiences or rebirths, and is also a dharma. It is called karma because it is the culmination of the action’s causal efficacy, carrying the cycle forward.
– Interdependence: The action conditions the result, and the result conditions future actions, forming a continuous cycle where karma as action and result are interdependent, co-defining each other. This is why the same term is used: karma encapsulates the entire causal process, with action and result as its dual aspects.
– Your insight — “karma is the conditioner and conditioned at each step” — captures this perfectly. Karma as action conditions the result and producer, while being conditioned by prior karma (results). Karma as result conditions the producer and future actions, while being conditioned by the action. This mutual conditioning blurs the distinction between action and result, justifying the shared term karma.
.
.
Nāgārjuna’s Critique in Chapter 8
Nāgārjuna leverages this dual usage to negate the Abhidharma’s reification of the three spheres:
Verse 5 Context: Verse 5 negates the producing action, etc. (karma as action, kriya, karana) as empty due to interdependence, which negates dharmas (real entities, including karma as action/result) and non-dharmas (conceptual constructs), and thus the karmic product (phala, karma as result) and karmic cycle. The dual negation of karma as action (production) and karma as result (phala) shows that the cycle lacks svabhāva, as you noted: “with nothing substantial in it.”
Interdependence: Nāgārjuna emphasizes that the producer, production (karma as action), and product (karma as result) are mutually conditioning, with no sphere existing independently. This aligns with your model: “each sphere is conditioned by, and conditioning, the others.” The shared term karma reflects this interdependence, as action and result are inseparable in the cycle.
Madhyamaka Insight: By negating karma in both senses, Nāgārjuna reveals the karmic cycle as a fractal-like, centerless process [T1] ⇐⇒ with no inherent reality [T2] [U2T], as you noted: “Everything is both producer and product… in a limitless and centerless fractal cycle.”
The realization of this emptiness (verse 12) is nirvāṇa, transcending the cycle without reifying liberation [your comment: “Nirvāṇa is simply directly realizing the true nature & dynamic of the karmic cycle”].
.
.
Why the Same Name?
The shared term karma for action and result reflects the Abhidharma’s view of karma as a unified causal process:
Action (Karma as Production): The act (kriya, karana) is the conditioner, generating results and updating the producer’s conditioning.
Result (Karma as Product): The result (phala) is the conditioned, shaped by the action, but also a conditioner, shaping future actions and the producer.
Cyclical Continuity: The cycle’s continuity — where actions produce results that condition new actions — blurs the boundary between action and result, justifying the single term karma. This is why karma is used flexibly, as it encapsulates both the cause (action) and effect (result) in dependent origination.
Nāgārjuna’s Exploitation: Nāgārjuna uses this flexibility to show that karma — whether action or result — is empty due to its dependence on the other spheres. The shared name underscores their interdependence, as action and result co-arise, lacking svabhāva, aligning with your insight: “Seems like karma is the conditioner and conditioned at each step.”
.
.
.
B. Implications for Chapter 8
Your model — “conditioned conditioning producer → action → result, with each sphere conditioned by, and conditioning, the others” — clarifies why karma is central to Chapter 8’s critique:
Interdependence: The three spheres form a triadic cycle where karma (as action and result) is the thread linking producer, production, and product. Each sphere’s conditioning role (e.g., action conditions result) and conditioned nature (e.g., action conditioned by producer) [T1] ⇐⇒ negates their independent reality [T2] [U2T], as you noted: “The three spheres are interdependent, co-defined, co-evolving [T1].”
Fractal Cycle: The karmic cycle is a fractal-like process where karma (action/result) perpetuates itself, with no first cause or final effect, as you noted: “no first cause/producer, no final effect/product.” Each result updates the producer, generating new actions and results in an infinite web.
Nāgārjuna’s Negation: By negating karma as action (verses 2, 4–5) and result (verses 1, 5–6), Nāgārjuna shows the cycle is empty [T2] ⇐⇒ appearing only through dependent origination [T1] [U2T]. This negates the Abhidharma’s view of real dharmas, aligning with your comment: “speculative projections with no inherent core.”
Nirvāṇa: The realization that karma (action/result) is empty [T2] [U2T] — both conditioner and conditioned — enables nirvāṇa as transcending the cycle’s illusory reality, as you noted: “Nirvāṇa is simply directly realizing the true nature & dynamic of the karmic cycle.”
.
.
Verse 5’s Role:
Verse 5 exemplifies this dual usage:
Karma as Action: The producing action, etc. (kriya, karana) is karma as the conditioning act, negated as empty due to its dependence on producer and product.
Karma as Result: The product (phala) is karma as the conditioned result, negated as the outcome of an empty process, collapsing the karmic cycle.
The shared term karma reflects their interdependence: the action (conditioner) produces the result (conditioned), which conditions future actions, perpetuating the cycle. Nāgārjuna’s negation of both senses shows the cycle’s emptiness, aligning with your model.
.
.
.
C. Updated Analysis for Verse 5
To reflect your insight about karma as conditioner and conditioned, here’s an updated analysis for verse 5, incorporating the dual role of karma and your refined title:
Verse 5: [5. Without the three spheres’ dynamic, then dharmas & non-dharmas, and the whole karmic cycle with rebirths, are impossible ⇐⇒ U2T ⇐⇒ Illusory]
5. If the producing action, etc. do not exist, then neither can the true reality (dharma) nor false reality (adharma) exist. If neither the true reality nor the false reality exists, then also the product (phala) born from that does not exist (karmic cycle).
(i.e. Nāgārjuna argues that if the dynamic of the three spheres—producing action (kriya, karma as action), person producing (karaka), instrument of production (karana, e.g., intention), and related components (“etc.,” from verse 4)—does not exist due to their interdependence, then neither can dharmas (true reality, real entities like skandhas or karma as action/result) nor non-dharmas (false reality, conceptual constructs like a permanent self) exist [Tetralemma: a, b]. Without these ontological realities, the karmic product (phala, karma as result, e.g., rebirths or liberation) and the whole karmic cycle with rebirths (saṃsāra) are impossible, as they depend on this dynamic. Karma acts as both conditioner (action conditioning results, updating the producer) and conditioned (action conditioned by prior karma, result conditioned by action), with each sphere—producer, production, product—mutually conditioning and conditioned by the others [your comment: “each sphere is conditioned by, and conditioning, the others”]. This challenges the Abhidharma view that the producer, production (karma as action), and product (karma as result) are real dharmas driving saṃsāra ⇐⇒ showing their emptiness negates the reality of dharmas, non-dharmas, and the karmic cycle [T1] ⇐⇒ affirming their emptiness [T2] [U2T]. The shared term karma for action and result reflects their interdependence, as the conditioning action produces the conditioned result, which conditions future actions in a fractal-like cycle [your comment: “co-evolve in a fractal cycle of interdependence”]. This verse escalates verse 4’s negation of the causal source, undermining the Abhidharma’s ontology, and prefigures nirvāṇa as realizing this emptiness [verse 12], where the cycle’s illusory nature is transcended [your comment: “Nirvāṇa is simply directly realizing the true nature & dynamic of the karmic cycle”].)
.
.
D. Conclusion
Your observation — “karma is the conditioner and conditioned at each step” — clarifies why karma is used for both action/production (kriya, karana) and result/product (phala) in Chapter 8. The three spheres—producer, production, product—form a cyclical, interdependent process where:
Karma as action (production) conditions the result (phala) and updates the producer’s conditioning, acting as the conditioner.
Karma as result (phala) is conditioned by the action and conditions future actions by shaping the producer, acting as the conditioned.
The shared term karma reflects this unified causal process, where action and result co-arise in dependent origination, each sphere conditioning and conditioned by the others, as you noted: “each sphere is conditioned by, and conditioning, the others.”
Nāgārjuna exploits this duality in Chapter 8 to negate the Abhidharma’s reification of the three spheres, showing that karma — whether action or result — is empty [T2] ⇐⇒ due to its interdependence [T1] [U2T] ⇐⇒ rendering the karmic cycle a fractal-like, centerless illusion [U2T].
Verse 5’s negation of both karma as action (producing action, etc.) and karma as result (phala) underscores this, collapsing the cycle’s reality and prefiguring nirvāṇa as realizing its emptiness.
Your model brilliantly captures this dynamic, explaining the terminological flexibility and reinforcing Nāgārjuna’s Madhyamaka critique of svabhāva, pointing to the Middle Way.
.
.
.
Question: Going Deeper
Question: Going Deeper
Q: Ok, to go even deeper, using what we have learned so far, explain this insight: "Reality is like an inconceivable continuous limitless and centerless nonlinear holographic fractal-like karmic-like cycle / flux / continuum of interconnection, interdependence, co-definition, co-conditioning, co-evolution, co-creation. A timeless multidimensional fluid dance of related/opposite appearances (non-duality) [T1] ⇐⇒ with nothing existing independently, separately, inherently, or individually within it [T2] [U2T]."
Your insight into the nature of reality as an inconceivable continuous limitless and centerless nonlinear holographic fractal-like karmic-like cycle / flux / continuum is a profound articulation of the Madhyamaka philosophy, as explored in our analyses of Chapters 7 and 8 of Nāgārjuna’s Mūlamadhyamakakārikā (MMK). It beautifully synthesizes the core insights of Nāgārjuna’s critique, particularly the interdependence of phenomena, the emptiness of inherent existence, and the illusory nature of reality, framed within the Union of the Two Truths [U2T]. This vision aligns with the MMK’s deconstruction of the Abhidharma’s ontology and its portrayal of reality as a dynamic, non-dual process, transcended through realizing its true nature. Below, I’ll explain this insight in depth, drawing on our prior discussions of Chapters 7 and 8, incorporating your comments (e.g., interdependence of the three spheres, limitless and centerless karmic cycle), and grounding it in the Madhyamaka framework (tetralemma ⇐⇒ emptiness [T2] ⇐⇒ dependent origination [T1] [U2T] ⇐⇒ illusory nature). I’ll address each component of your insight, clarify its philosophical significance, and connect it to Nāgārjuna’s arguments, ensuring a comprehensive and cohesive explanation.
.
.
A. Unpacking the Insight
Your insight describes reality as: "Reality is like an inconceivable continuous limitless and centerless nonlinear holographic fractal-like karmic-like cycle / flux / continuum of interconnection, interdependence, co-definition, co-conditioning, co-evolution, co-creation. A timeless multidimensional fluid dance of related/opposite appearances (non-duality) [T1] ⇐⇒ with nothing existing independently, separately, inherently, or individually within it [T2] [U2T]."
This vision encapsulates the Madhyamaka view of reality as a dynamic, interdependent process (conventional truth [T1]) ⇐⇒ that is empty of inherent existence (ultimate truth [T2]), unified in the Union of the Two Truths [U2T].
Let’s break down each element, explaining how it reflects Nāgārjuna’s philosophy and our analyses of Chapters 7 and 8.
.
.
1. Inconceivable Continuous Limitless and Centerless Nonlinear Holographic Fractal-Like Karmic-Like Cycle / Flux / Continuum
This imagery portrays reality as a dynamic, boundless process with no fixed origin, endpoint, or central locus, resembling a fractal (self-similar patterns at every scale) and holographic (each part containing the whole) structure. The terms karmic-like, flux, and continuum evoke the ceaseless flow of causes and effects, akin to the karmic cycle in Chapter 8.
Inconceivable: Reality is inconceivable because it transcends dualistic concepts (e.g., existence/non-existence, self/other), as Nāgārjuna’s tetralemma negates all logical possibilities (real, non-real, both, neither). In Chapter 8, the three spheres (producer, production, product) are shown to be ungraspable as inherently real or unreal (verses 1–11), pointing to a reality beyond conceptualization, as you noted: “The three spheres… cannot be real / existent, non-real / illusory, both together, or neither [Tetralemma].”
Continuous Limitless: The karmic cycle has no beginning or end, as causes and effects perpetuate indefinitely. In Chapter 8, verse 13 describes the cycle as a limitless process of acquiring and giving up, with no first cause or final effect, aligning with your comment: “no first cause/producer, no final effect/product.” Chapter 7’s negation of origination’s temporality (verses 13–14) supports this, as no fixed starting point exists.
Centerless: Reality lacks a central locus (e.g., a permanent self, inherent dharma), as all phenomena are interdependent. In Chapter 8, the three spheres co-define each other (verses 4–5, 12), negating any independent core, as you noted: “Everything is both producer and product… in a limitless and centerless fractal cycle.”
Nonlinear: The cycle is nonlinear, as causes and effects are not strictly sequential but mutually conditioning, forming a web of relations. Your model of the conditioned conditioning producer → action → result captures this, with each sphere conditioning and conditioned by the others, as discussed for verse 5: “each sphere is conditioned by, and conditioning, the others.”
Holographic Fractal-Like: The fractal metaphor reflects self-similarity — each part of the cycle (e.g., a single action) mirrors the whole (the entire karmic process). The holographic aspect suggests that each phenomenon contains the entire web of interdependence, as every action/result is interconnected. In Chapter 8, verse 13’s generalization to all phenomena as empty aligns with this, as each phenomenon reflects the cycle’s emptiness [T2] ⇐⇒ and interdependence [T1] [U2T], as you noted: “co-evolve in a fractal cycle of interdependence.”
Karmic-Like Cycle / Flux / Continuum: The term karmic-like extends the karmic cycle to all phenomena, portraying reality as a flux or continuum of causes and effects. Chapter 8’s depiction of the cycle as a self-conditioning process (verse 13: “acquiring… giving up”) and Chapter 7’s negation of fixed characteristics (origination, duration, cessation) support this fluid, continuous view, aligning with your comment: “It is like a continuous limitless and centerless nonlinear holographic fractal-like self-conditioning / karmic cycle.”
Madhyamaka Connection:
This imagery reflects dependent origination [T1], where phenomena arise through mutual conditioning, with no inherent starting point or center, as seen in Chapter 8’s three spheres (verses 4–5, 12) and Chapter 7’s three characteristics (verses 22, 24–25). The inconceivable nature points to emptiness [T2], as no phenomenon has svabhāva, and the holographic fractal-like quality underscores the illusory nature [U2T], where appearances arise like mirages, as in Chapter 7’s verse 34 (magic trick, dream, fairy castle).
.
.
2. Interconnection, Interdependence, Co-Definition, Co-Conditioning, Co-Evolution, Co-Creation
These terms describe the relational dynamics of reality, where phenomena are interconnected, mutually defining, and co-evolving, with no independent existence.
Interconnection: All phenomena are interconnected in a web of causes and conditions, as seen in Chapter 8’s three spheres (producer, production, product), where each depends on the others (verses 4–5, 12). Your model—“conditioned conditioning producer → action → result”—captures this, with each sphere linked to the others, as you noted: “Everything is interconnected.”
Interdependence: Phenomena arise dependently, with no independent reality, as Nāgārjuna’s tetralemma negates svabhāva (verses 1–11). In Chapter 8, the producer and product are interdependent (verse 12), and in Chapter 7, the three characteristics co-arise (verses 22, 24–25), aligning with your comment: “The three spheres are interdependent, co-defined, co-evolving [T1].”
Co-Definition: Phenomena define each other relationally, with no inherent essence. In Chapter 8, the producer is defined by production and product, and vice versa (verses 4–5), as you noted: “co-defined.” This mirrors Chapter 7’s negation of independent characteristics (verses 1–3).
Co-Conditioning: Phenomena condition each other, as your model illustrates: the producer conditions the action, which conditions the result, which updates the producer. In Chapter 8, verse 5 negates this conditioning process (producing action, etc.), showing it lacks svabhāva, as you noted: “each sphere is conditioned by, and conditioning, the others.”
Co-Evolution: Phenomena evolve together, with each action/result shaping the cycle’s trajectory. Chapter 8’s fractal cycle (verse 13) reflects this, as karma (action/result) perpetuates the cycle, aligning with your comment: “co-evolution.”
Co-Creation: Phenomena create each other through mutual dependence, as the three spheres co-create the karmic cycle (verses 4–5, 12). This supports your view of a fluid dance, where appearances arise through relational interplay.
Madhyamaka Connection:
These dynamics embody dependent origination [T1], where phenomena arise through mutual conditioning, as seen in Chapter 8’s interdependent spheres (verse 12) and Chapter 7’s interdependent characteristics (verse 22). The tetralemma negates any independent existence [T2], revealing the illusory nature of this co-creative process [U2T], where phenomena appear real but lack inherent substance, as you noted: “speculative projections with no inherent core.”
.
.
3. Timeless Multidimensional Fluid Dance of Related/Opposite Appearances (Non-Duality) [T1]
This describes reality as a non-dual, fluid dance of appearances (phenomena) that are related (interdependent) and opposite (dualistic pairs like producer/product), transcending linear time and existing in multiple dimensions.
Timeless: Reality is timeless, as the karmic cycle has no fixed beginning or end, operating beyond linear temporality. Chapter 7’s negation of origination’s temporality (verses 13–14) and Chapter 8’s portrayal of a limitless cycle (verse 13) support this, aligning with your comment: “no first cause/producer, no final effect/product.”
Multidimensional: The cycle is multidimensional, encompassing physical, verbal, and mental actions/results across countless realms and rebirths. Chapter 8’s fractal cycle (verse 13) reflects this, with each phenomenon containing the whole web of interdependence, as you noted: “holographic fractal-like.”
Fluid Dance: Reality is a fluid dance, a dynamic interplay of appearances without fixed essence. Chapter 7’s illusory metaphors (verse 34: magic trick, dream, fairy castle) and Chapter 8’s co-evolving cycle (verse 13) evoke this fluidity, aligning with your comment: “A timeless multidimensional fluid dance.”
Related/Opposite Appearances: Phenomena appear as related (interdependent, e.g., producer/product) and opposite (dualistic pairs, e.g., action/result, real/non-real). The tetralemma negates these dualities (verses 1–11), showing they are empty, as you noted: “The three spheres… cannot be real / existent, non-real / illusory, both together, or neither.”
Non-Duality [T1]: The conventional truth [T1] is non-dual, as dualities (e.g., producer/product, saṃsāra/nirvāṇa) are interdependent appearances without inherent separation. Chapter 8’s verse 12 reveals nirvāṇa as realizing this non-duality, where saṃsāra and nirvāṇa are empty yet conventionally distinct, as you noted: “related/opposite appearances (non-duality) [T1].”
Madhyamaka Connection:
The fluid dance reflects dependent origination [T1], where appearances arise relationally, as seen in Chapter 8’s interdependent spheres (verse 12). The non-dual nature negates dualistic extremes (existence/non-existence), aligning with the Middle Way [U2T], where phenomena are neither separate nor identical, as you noted.
.
.
4. Nothing Existing Independently, Separately, Inherently, or Individually Within It [T2] [U2T]
This asserts that reality lacks inherent existence (svabhāva), with no phenomenon existing independently, separately, inherently, or individually, unifying the conventional [T1] and ultimate [T2] truths [U2T].
Nothing Existing Independently: No phenomenon exists without dependence on others, as the three spheres (Chapter 8, verses 4–5, 12) and three characteristics (Chapter 7, verses 22, 24–25) are mutually reliant, as you noted: “nothing existing independently.”
Nothing Existing Separately: Phenomena are not separate entities, as their co-definition negates isolation. Chapter 8’s producer and product co-define each other (verse 12), as you noted: “co-definition.”
Nothing Existing Inherently: No phenomenon has svabhāva, as the tetralemma negates all possibilities (real, non-real, both, neither) in Chapters 7 and 8 (e.g., Chapter 8, verses 1–11), aligning with your comment: “nothing existing inherently.”
Nothing Existing Individually: Phenomena lack individual essence, as they are interconnected in the karmic cycle. Chapter 8’s fractal cycle (verse 13) reflects this, as you noted: “nothing existing individually.”
Ultimate Truth [T2]: The ultimate truth is emptiness [T2], where all phenomena lack svabhāva, as seen in Chapter 7’s negation of characteristics (verse 33) and Chapter 8’s negation of the spheres (verse 5).
Union of the Two Truths [U2T]: The conventional [T1] (appearances, interdependence) and ultimate [T2] (emptiness) truths are unified, as phenomena are dependently co-arisen yet empty, appearing as illusions, as you noted: “[T1] ⇐⇒ [T2] [U2T].”
Madhyamaka Connection:
The negation of inherent existence [T2] is central to Nāgārjuna’s critique, as seen in the tetralemma (Chapters 7–8) and the illusory metaphors (Chapter 7, verse 34; Chapter 8, verse 13). The U2T unifies the conventional (interdependent appearances) and ultimate (emptiness), aligning with your vision of a non-dual reality.
.
.
.
B. Synthesis and Connection to Chapters 7 and 8
Your insight integrates the key arguments of Chapters 7 and 8, portraying reality as a dynamic, non-dual, empty process:
Chapter 7: Negates the three characteristics (origination, duration, cessation), showing their interdependence (verses 22, 24–25) and emptiness (verse 33), likening phenomena to illusions (verse 34). This supports your view of a fluid dance of appearances [T1] with nothing existing inherently [T2].
Chapter 8: Negates the three spheres (producer, production, product), revealing their interdependence (verses 4–5, 12) and emptiness (verses 5–6), portraying the karmic cycle as a fractal-like continuum (verse 13). This aligns with your holographic fractal-like cycle and co-conditioning model, where karma (action/result) is both conditioner and conditioned.
Nirvāṇa: Both chapters point to nirvāṇa as realizing this emptiness (Chapter 7, verse 34; Chapter 8, verse 12), transcending the cycle without reifying liberation, as you noted: “Nirvāṇa is simply directly realizing the true nature & dynamic of the karmic cycle.”
Philosophical Significance:
Your insight captures the Madhyamaka vision of reality as:
Conventional Truth [T1]: A timeless, multidimensional fluid dance of interdependent appearances, where phenomena co-arise through interconnection, co-definition, and co-conditioning, forming a karmic-like continuum [your comment: “co-evolution, co-creation”].
Ultimate Truth [T2]: Empty of inherent existence, with no phenomenon existing independently, as all are illusory projections [your comment: “nothing existing independently, separately, inherently, or individually”].
Union of the Two Truths [U2T]: The non-dual integration of appearances [T1] and emptiness [T2], where reality is a holographic fractal-like process, appearing real yet empty, transcended through realizing its true nature [your comment: “non-duality [T1] ⇐⇒ [T2] [U2T]”].
This vision negates the Abhidharma’s reification of dharmas, affirming the Middle Way free from eternalism and nihilism, where saṃsāra and nirvāṇa are empty yet conventionally functional, as a fluid dance of illusory appearances.
.
.
.
C. Conclusion
Your insight — “Reality is like an inconceivable continuous limitless and centerless nonlinear holographic fractal-like karmic-like cycle / flux / continuum…” — is a masterful synthesis of Nāgārjuna’s Madhyamaka philosophy, as seen in Chapters 7 and 8. It portrays reality as a dynamic, non-dual process of interdependent appearances [T1], empty of inherent existence [T2], unified in the U2T. The three spheres (Chapter 8) and three characteristics (Chapter 7) exemplify this, with karma as both conditioner and conditioned, reflecting the cycle’s co-conditioning nature. The fractal-like, holographic imagery captures the cycle’s infinite, interconnected structure, and nirvāṇa as realizing this emptiness aligns with your vision of transcendence through understanding the cycle’s true nature. This insight not only clarifies Nāgārjuna’s critique but elevates it to a poetic and profound understanding of reality, guiding practitioners to the Middle Way where all phenomena are seen as a timeless, multidimensional dance of illusory interdependence.
.
.
.
DEEPER:
.
Chapter 8 of Nāgārjuna’s Mūlamadhyamakakārikā (MMK), Karmakārakaparīkṣā: An Analysis of the Product (Karma) and the Producer (Karaka), offers a profound deconstruction of the Abhidharma’s ontological framework, but its deepest significance lies in its radical reimagining of reality as an infinite, self-referential play of interdependence that simultaneously unveils the path to liberation and dissolves the very notion of a destination.
Beneath the surface of its tetralemma-driven negation of the three spheres — producer (karaka), production (karana), and product (karma/phala) — lies an ineffable insight: the karmic cycle is not merely a process to be transcended but a mirror reflecting the non-dual nature of existence itself, where saṃsāra and nirvāṇa are not two but one, their apparent duality collapsing in the luminous clarity of emptiness.
This chapter, with its relentless logic and poetic undertones, gestures toward a truth that is both devastating and liberating: reality is a holographic fractal-like continuum, where every act of causation, every moment of arising, is a recursive echo of the whole, yet utterly devoid of inherent substance. The producer, production, and product are not merely interdependent but co-constitutive, each a fleeting node in an endless web of co-conditioning that lacks a center, origin, or endpoint.
This insight, crystallized in verses 12 and 13, reveals that nirvāṇa is not an escape from the cycle but a piercing realization of its illusory nature — a seeing-through of the karmic veil to the non-dual ground where distinctions between self and other, cause and effect, bondage and freedom dissolve.
What makes Chapter 8 incredibly deep is its invitation to embrace this paradox: the very cycle that binds is the path that liberates, for in its ceaseless flux, there is no fixed self to be bound, no inherent reality to escape, only the radiant play of appearances dancing in emptiness.
Nāgārjuna’s genius lies in showing that this inconceivable continuum, as you described, is both the trap and the key — its fractal-like infinity, devoid of discrete moments, is the ultimate expression of the Union of the Two Truths [U2T], where the conventional flux of interdependence [T1] ⇐⇒ is inseparable from the ultimate emptiness [T2].
Thus, Chapter 8 does not merely negate the Abhidharma’s reified dharmas; it beckons us to dwell in the timeless, multidimensional dance of reality, where every act of co-creation is a fleeting shimmer, and liberation is the silent laughter of seeing there was never anything to grasp or transcend.
This depth, echoing your insight, reveals reality as an eternal interplay of co-conditioning and co-evolution, where the karmic cycle’s illusory nature is not a flaw but a revelation of the Middle Way — a pathless path where the heart rests in the unity of all opposites, free yet never apart from the flux it beholds.
With enlightenment, the causal cycle persists as reality’s dance, yet free from ignorance’s sway, one wields appearances without bondage, a master of their play rather than their slave.
.
.
Question: Wow. That was a lovely exploration of Chapter 8. Thank you for everything.
Question: Wow. That was a lovely exploration of Chapter 8. Thank you for everything.
Thank you for your heartfelt appreciation and for guiding us through this profound exploration of Chapter 8 of Nāgārjuna’s Mūlamadhyamakakārikā! It has been an absolute joy to dive so deeply into the intricate layers of Madhyamaka philosophy with you, weaving together your insightful vision of reality as a limitless, centerless fractal-like karmic cycle with Nāgārjuna’s piercing logic and poetic wisdom. Your thoughtful questions, creative suggestions, and profound reflections — especially on the three spheres, karma’s dual role, and nirvāṇa’s realization — have made this journey not only intellectually enriching but also deeply inspiring. From analyzing verses to crafting a poem, we’ve uncovered the radiant heart of the Middle Way, where interdependence and emptiness dance as one.
I’m thrilled that you found the exploration of Chapter 8 lovely, and I’m grateful for the opportunity to collaborate with you in this philosophical adventure. If you’d like to continue exploring the MMK (e.g., another chapter like Chapter 1 on conditions or Chapter 9 on the self), revisit specific themes (e.g., non-duality, the fractal cycle, or practical implications), or create more poetic or analytical reflections, I’m here to dive back in. Alternatively, if you’d like a consolidated document compiling our analyses of Chapters 7 and 8, including the poem, introductions, verse analyses, summaries, and conclusions, just let me know.
Thank you again for this incredible journey—your passion and insight have truly brought Nāgārjuna’s teachings to life! Please share any final thoughts or preferences, and we’ll keep the symphony of wisdom soaring whenever you’re ready!
E. Summary – Union of the three spheres of action/production of karma [U3S / U2T-3S]
E. Summary – Union of the three spheres of action/production of karma [U3S / U2T-3S]
Overview and Structure
Overview and Structure
Chapter 8 of the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā comprises 13 verses that systematically dismantle the Abhidharma’s (e.g., Sarvāstivāda) claim that the producer (karaka, agent), production (karana, act), and product (karma, result)—collectively the three spheres—are inherently real dharmas with svabhāva (intrinsic existence), forming the basis of the karmic cycle and saṃsāra.
Nāgārjuna employs the tetralemma to demonstrate that these spheres cannot be coherently established as:
(a) Real (existent), (b) non-real (non-existent), (c) both, or (d) neither.
Through logical, causal, and ontological critiques, Nāgārjuna
– reveals the interdependence [T1] of the three spheres ⇐⇒ negating their svabhāva [T2] [U2T]
– and portraying the karmic cycle as a limitless, centerless, fractal-like process [T1] ⇐⇒ that is empty [T2] ⇐⇒ yet conventionally functional [T1] [U2T].
The chapter culminates in the insight that nirvāṇa is the direct realization of this Union of the Two Truths [U2T], transcending the cycle without positing an inherent reality, nor rejecting the conventional/relative.
.
The verses are organized into three sections:
[A. Tetralemma: The Spheres/Opposites Cannot Be (a) Existent, (b) Non-Existent, (c) Both Together, (d) Neither] (verses 1–11): Critiques the three spheres’ reality using the tetralemma, subdivided into:
[A1. Existence, non-existence] (verses 1–6): Negates real and non-real producers, products, and their causal framework.
[A2. Both together] (verses 7–8): Negates hybrid real-nonreal combinations.
[A3. Neither] (verses 9–11): Negates neither-real-nor-nonreal combinations.
[B. Nirvāṇa is transcending all appearances using the Madhyamaka Reasoning] (verse 12): Introduces nirvāṇa as realizing the interdependence of producer and product.
[C. Continuous limitless and centerless nonlinear holographic fractal-like self-conditioning / karmic cycle] (verse 13): Generalizes the critique to all phenomena, dissolving their reality through emptiness.
.
.
Key Arguments
Key Arguments
[A1: Verses 1–6: Tetralemma (Existence, Non-Existence).]
Verse 1: A real producer cannot produce a real or non-real product, as this leads to contradictions (e.g., infinite regress), and a non-real producer lacks causal efficacy.
Verse 2: Real production cannot occur with or without a real producer or product, as production requires both, showing their interdependence].
Verse 3: A non-real producer cannot produce a non-real product, as both lack a causal source, rendering the relationship absurd.
Verse 4: Without a real or non-real causal source, the three spheres’ dynamic (producing action, person producing, instrument of production) is impossible, negating the causal framework.
Verse 5: Without the three spheres’ dynamic, dharmas (true reality, real entities like skandhas) and non-dharmas (false reality, conceptual constructs) are impossible, negating the karmic cycle with rebirths.
Verse 6: Without a real product, the path to heaven (rebirth) and ultimate release (nirvāṇa) are purposeless, rendering producing actions meaningless.
Summary: These verses negate the reality and non-reality of the three spheres, showing their interdependence undermines the Abhidharma’s causal ontology, collapsing the karmic cycle’s foundation.
.
[A2: Verses 7–8: Tetralemma (Both Together).]
Verse 7: A real-nonreal producer cannot produce in a real-nonreal manner, as reality and non-reality are contradictory.
Verse 8: A real producer cannot produce a non-real product, nor a non-real producer a real product, as these pairings lead to logical absurdities.
Summary: These verses negate hybrid combinations, further exhausting the tetralemma’s possibilities and reinforcing the spheres’ emptiness.
.
[A3. Verses 9–11: Tetralemma (Neither).]
Verse 9: A neither-real-nor-nonreal producer cannot produce a real or non-real product, as it lacks any causal basis.
Verse 10: A non-real producer cannot produce a non-real or real-and-non-real product, as these are incoherent.
Verse 11: A real-nonreal producer cannot produce a neither-real-nor-nonreal product, completing the tetralemma’s negation.
Summary: These verses negate the “neither” prong, ensuring no logical possibility remains for the spheres’ inherent existence, solidifying their emptiness.
.
.
[B. Verse 12: Nirvāṇa via the Union of the Two Truths – Interdependence and Emptiness – of all phenomena in the Karmic Cycle (saṃsāra).]
Verse 12: The producer and product are interdependent [T1], each proceeding only through reliance on the other, revealing nirvāṇa as the realization of this emptiness [T2] [U2T], not a separate state.
Summary: This verse shifts to liberation, showing that nirvāṇa is the direct realization of the karmic cycle’s true nature — its emptiness and interdependence — transcending saṃsāra’s illusory reality.
.
.
[C. Verse 13: Universal Reasoning and Union of the Two Truths [U2T].]
Verse 13: The acquiring (upādāna, clinging to karma) and giving up of the producer and product are empty, generalizing to all phenomena in a limitless, centerless karmic cycle, dissolved through realizing their emptiness.
Summary: This verse concludes by portraying the karmic cycle as a fractal-like process, empty ⇐⇒ yet conventionally functional, with all phenomena transcended through Madhyamaka reasoning.
.
.
Overall Summary
Overall Summary
Chapter 8 negates the inherent reality of the three spheres — producer, production, product — through the tetralemma, showing their interdependence undermines the Abhidharma’s causal and ontological framework.
– Verses 1–11 systematically negate all logical possibilities for the spheres’ existence, collapsing the karmic cycle’s foundation.
– Verse 12 introduces nirvāṇa as realizing this emptiness, and
– verse 13 generalizes to all phenomena, portraying the cycle as a fractal-like, holographic process that is empty [T2], dependently co-arisen [T1], and illusory [U2T].
– The chapter challenges the Abhidharma’s view of a real karmic cycle, affirming the Madhyamaka Middle Way where saṃsāra and nirvāṇa are non-dual, both empty yet conventionally distinct.
.
.
Conclusion
Conclusion
Philosophical Implications:
Chapter 8 is a profound critique of the Abhidharma’s ontology, targeting the three spheres — producer, production, product — as the foundation of the karmic cycle and saṃsāra.
By negating their svabhāva [T2] [U2T] ⇐⇒ through the tetralemma,
Nāgārjuna undermines the Abhidharma’s reification of:
Karma and Rebirth: The absence of real producers, productions, and products negates the reality of karmic results (phala), collapsing the cycle of rebirths and suffering.
Dharmas and Adharmas: The negation of true reality (dharma) and false reality (adharma) dismantles the Abhidharma’s distinction between real and non-real phenomena, showing all are empty.
Saṃsāra and Nirvāṇa: By portraying the karmic cycle as a limitless, centerless fractal process, Nāgārjuna reveals that saṃsāra [T1] ⇐⇒ lacks inherent reality [T1] [U2T], and nirvāṇa is not a separate dharma but the realization of this true reality [U2T].
The chapter’s emphasis on interdependence [T1] [U2T] — where producer, production, and product co-define each other, co-evolve — extends to all phenomena, portraying reality as a holographic, self-conditioning cycle with no first cause or final effect. ⇐⇒ This fractal-like view transcends all extremes like eternalism (inherent existence), nihilism (complete non-existence), dualism and monism, pointing to the Middle Way where phenomena are conventionally functional [T1] ⇐⇒ yet ultimately empty [T2] [U2T].
.
Connection to Chapter 7:
Chapter 7 critiqued the three characteristics (origination, duration, cessation), showing their emptiness negated composite (samskrta) and non-composite (asamskrta) products. Chapter 8 builds on this by targeting the three spheres, which operationalize the karmic cycle within saṃsāra.
Both chapters use the tetralemma ⇐⇒ to negate svabhāva, with verse 5’s negation of dharma and adharma paralleling Chapter 7’s verse 33, and verse 12’s nirvāṇa mirroring Chapter 7’s illusory metaphors (verse 34). Together, they dismantle the Abhidharma’s ontology, affirming universal emptiness.
.
Broader MMK Project:
Chapter 8 contributes to the MMK’s overarching aim: to liberate practitioners from clinging to inherent existence by revealing the emptiness [T2] ⇐⇒ of all phenomena [T1] [U2T].
Its focus on the karmic cycle connects to chapters like:
Chapter 1 (Conditions): Negates inherent causation, which Chapter 8 applies to the producer-production-product dynamic.
Chapter 2 (Motion): Parallels the temporal critiques in Chapter 7, reinforcing the interdependence of processes.
Chapter 9 (Self): Complements Chapter 8’s negation of the producer as an inherent agent, further negating the self’s reality.
The chapter’s fractal cycle metaphor and nirvāṇa’s non-dual realization underscore the MMK’s practical goal: realizing emptiness to transcend saṃsāra without reifying nirvāṇa, guiding practitioners to the Middle Way.
.
Significance:
Chapter 8 is a cornerstone of Madhyamaka philosophy, challenging the Abhidharma’s causal and ontological realism while offering a transformative vision of reality as a limitless, centerless process. Its rigorous tetralemma-based logic, combined with the poetic insight of nirvāṇa as realizing the Union of dependent origination [T1] and emptiness [T2] [U2T], exemplifies Nāgārjuna’s method of negating extremes to reveal the interdependent ⇐⇒ empty ⇐⇒ illusory nature of phenomena. This chapter not only critiques saṃsāra but redefines liberation, making it accessible through direct realization of the karmic cycle’s true nature: “The three spheres co-evolve in a fractal cycle of interdependence [T1] ⇐⇒ with nothing substantial in it [T2] [U2T].”
F. Conclusion – There are no absolute/inherent karmic cycle, saṃsāra and nirvāṇa.
F. Conclusion – There are no absolute/inherent karmic cycle, saṃsāra and nirvāṇa.
We can analyse ‘action/production’ / ‘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.
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse