Korean Journal of Buddhist Studies ISSN:1598-0642(Print) 불교학연구

Dialectics of Western philosophy have been often compared with Nagarjuna’s thought. It’s mainly due to Hegel’s dialectic asserting that the relation between ‘These’ and ‘Antithese’ is not just oppositional but also connected each other. Nagarjuna also emphasizes that all things are dependently originated in Mūlamadhyamakakārikā (MMK). This study compares Nagarjuna’s logical negation in MMK with Adorno’s dialectical negation in Negative Dialektik, by focusing on suffering. These two philosophers share common insight on the causes and cure mechanism of suffering. This study points out two causes of suffering: one with conceptualization caused by differentiation on object, and the other with the substantialization of conceptions. It also indicates cure mechanism as the right negation, which has two traits: one is the concrete reasoning that necessarily but naturally leads to negation of substantial conceptions, and the other the self-awareness and self-reflection that will be enlarged by realizing the error of conventional and substantial conception. However, two thinkers have a large difference about the extinction of suffering. Nagarjuna targets even the thinking of differentiation as the thing to be negated and reflected, while Adorno insists never to give up thinking. Since Adorno’s dialectics begin with the solid premise, separating of the subject and the object, in his aspect, the individual’s suffering is related to the social problems, and therefore it is impossible for the individual completely to resolve his suffering in the world, not Utopia totally free and lack of suppression. Contrastively, Nagarjuna sees the relation of the subject and the object temporal and originating dependently. So his thought opens the possibility for extinction of suffering even under the world with lots of suppression and discomfort through the acquisition of the sincere realization for emptiness.