Nagarjuna, the profound philosopher of the Madhyamaka school of Buddhism, introduced the concept of the fourfold negation/tetra lemma. This approach deconstructs conventional views of existence, nonexistence, both, and neither to reveal the interdependent nature of all phenomena. He was a profound contributor towards the concept of Shunyata, the emptiness of things and/or the interdependance of all phenomena. By reframing these negations within a functional contextualist framework, we can explore their transformative power not only in philosophy but also in how we may approach our own mental events, beliefs about the world, and our sense of self.
Functional contextualism, rooted in modern behavioural science, emphasises understanding phenomena based on their context and functional outcomes. It aligns seamlessly with Nagarjuna’s method, which seeks to transcend rigid conceptualizations and foster liberative insights. Let us delve into each of Nagarjuna’s four negations through this lens, enriched by metaphors and insights into self and some example mental events.
1. It is (Existence)
In the first negation, Nagarjuna questions the assumption of independent existence. From a functional contextualist perspective, the belief that something “just is” serves as a shortcut for managing complexity but often leads to rigid thinking. For example, we might say, "I am anxious," treating anxiety as a fixed truth about ourselves rather than a transient experience.
Metaphor: A mirror reflecting an image. While the reflection appears real, its existence depends entirely on the mirror and the object being reflected. Without one or the other, the reflection dissolves. Similarly, our beliefs about ourselves and the world arise from complex interdependencies rather than inherent existence.
Contextual Insight: Seeing “self as content” means recognizing that our identities often crystallize around stories and labels. This first negation invites us to loosen our grip on these stories and explore their origins and functions.
2. It is not (Nonexistence)
Here, Nagarjuna denies the outright negation of phenomena, challenging nihilism. Functional contextualism echoes this stance by emphasizing that dismissing something as “nonexistent” also overlooks the contextual factors that give rise to its perceived presence.
Metaphor: The shadow of a tree. Though a shadow lacks substance, it exists due to the interplay of light, the tree, and an observer. Denying its existence outright ignores the conditions that create it.
Contextual Insight: Moving beyond “self as content,” this negation points us toward “self as context,” where we observe our thoughts, feelings, and experiences as processes occurring within a broader field of awareness. This perspective enables us to acknowledge experiences without becoming ensnared by them.
3. It is both (Existence and Nonexistence)
The third negation refutes the paradoxical assertion that something can simultaneously exist and not exist. Functional contextualism views this as a reminder that such dualities often arise from the mind’s attempt to resolve complexity with inadequate conceptual tools.
Metaphor: A rope mistaken for a snake in dim light. The mind oscillates between “is” and “is not” as it attempts to reconcile incomplete information, but the reality is neither.
Contextual Insight: This negation challenges the stability of “self as content” narratives and even “self as context.” It nudges us toward the Buddhist concept of no-self (“anatta”), where identity itself is seen as a construction devoid of inherent essence.
4. It is neither (Neither Existence nor Nonexistence)
Finally, Nagarjuna denies the validity of asserting neither existence nor nonexistence. Functional contextualism resonates with this by rejecting absolute positions, focusing instead on the practical implications of holding certain beliefs.
Metaphor: A cloud that dissolves into the sky. While the cloud seemed discrete, its dissolution reveals its true nature as part of the ever-changing atmosphere. Neither the cloud nor its absence can be pinned down as ultimate truth.
Contextual Insight: This negation aligns with the Buddhist understanding of “no-self,” urging us to transcend both the content and context of the self. From this perspective, the self is not an entity to defend or deconstruct but an evolving process intertwined with the world.
Applying the Fourfold Negation to Mental Events and Beliefs
Our mental events—thoughts, emotions, and beliefs—often mirror the assumptions embedded in the fourfold schema. For instance, consider the belief, “I am unworthy.” This belief may feel inherently true (“it is”), entirely unfounded (“it is not”), simultaneously valid and invalid (“it is both”), or utterly perplexing (“it is neither”).
By applying Nagarjuna’s framework:
We recognize the contextual origins of the belief (“it is”).
We challenge its solidity (“it is not”).
We explore the interplay of affirmation and negation (“it is both”).
We dissolve attachment to the belief entirely (“it is neither”).
Through this process, we reposition the self:
From self as content, where beliefs define us.
To self as context, where we observe beliefs as transient events.
Toward no-self, where the illusion of a separate, permanent self dissolves, allowing us to act with freedom and compassion.
Conclusion
Nagarjuna’s fourfold negation, viewed through the lens of functional contextualism, becomes a powerful tool for examining our own mental events and beliefs. By deconstructing rigid notions of existence and identity, we can create space for flexibility, awareness, and liberation. Through metaphors and insights into the self as content, context, and no-self, we can engage with our lives more skillfully, embracing interdependence and impermanence as sources of profound freedom and wellbeing.
Comments