Life and Accomplishments:

Nagarjuna was an Indian philosopher who lived in the 2nd or 3rd century. He founded the Madhyamika school, a
foundation ofMahayana, and wrote the Mula-Madhyamaka-karika. Historians know little else aout his life,
however.
Madhyamika:
In e!plaining the philosophy of Madhyamika, Nagarjuna presented four positions he would not take"
#. $ll things %dharmas& e!ist' affirmation of eing, negation of noneing.
2. $ll things do not e!st' affirmation of noneing, negation of eing.
3. $ll things oth e!ist and do not e!ist' oth affirmation and negation.
(. $ll things neither e!ist or do not e!ist' neither affirmation nor negation.
Nagarjuna rejected each of these propositions and took a middle position etween eing and noneing.
Friend of the Nagas:
In some legends, Nagarjuna was efriended y the nagas, which are snake eings that live in unseen realms. Nagas
appear in many Hindu and )uddhist myths. In this story, the nagas had een guarding sutras containing teachings of
the )uddha that had een hidden from mankind for centuries. *he nagas gave these sutras, called the +isdom ,utras
-- to Nagarjuna, and he took them ack to the human world.
*he +isdom ,utras are collected under the title .rajnaparamita %.erfection of +isdom& ,utra. +herever he found
them, Nagarjuna is rememered as the one who systemi/ed and deepened the teachings of the +isdom ,utras.
The Wish-Fulfilling Jewel:
In the Transmission of the Light %Denko-roku&, 0en Master 1ei/an 2okin %#234-#325& wrote that Nagarjuna was the
student of 1apimala. 1apimala found Nagarjuna living in isolated mountains and preaching to the nagas.
*he naga king gave 1apimala a wish-fulfilling jewel. 6*his is the ultimate jewel of the world,6 Nagarjuna said.
67oes it have form, or it is formless86
1apimala replied, 69ou do not know this jewel neither has form nor is formless. 9ou do not yet know that this jewel
is not a jewel.6
:n hearing these words, Nagarjuna reali/ed enlightenment.
Writings
There exist a number of influential texts attributed to Ngrjuna, although most were probably
written by later authors. The only work that all scholars agree is Nagarjuna's is
the Mlamadhyamakakrik (undamental !erses on the "iddle #ay$, which contains the
essentials of his thought in twenty%se&en short chapters. 'ccording to (indtner
)**+
the works
definitely written by Nagarjuna are,%
"-lamadhyamaka%krik (undamental !erses of the "iddle #ay$
.-nyatsaptati (/e&enty !erses on 0mptiness$
!igraha&y&artan1 (The 0nd of 2isputes$
;aidalyaprakara a (3ul&eri4ing the 5ategories$
!ya&ahrasiddhi (3roof of 5on&ention$
9ukti < ika (/ixty !erses on 6easoning$
=atu stava (7ymn to the 'bsolute 6eality$
6atn&al1 (3recious 8arland$
.rat>tyasamutp<dah dayak<rika (5onstituents of 2ependent 'rising$
/-trasamuccaya
)odhicittavivara a (0xposition of the 0nlightened "ind$
,uh llekha ((etter to a 8ood riend$
)odhisa h<ra (6e9uisites of 0nlightenment$
There are other works attributed to Ngrjuna, some of which may be genuine and some not.
/ome confusion may be caused by the fact that there were other Ngrjunas, f.e. the /iddha
Ngrjuna, a holder of the "ahamudra%(ineage, who wrote probably se&eral important works of
esoteric :uddhism (most notably the 3a;cakrama or <i&e /tages<$, as contemporary research
suggests that these works are datable to a significantly later period in :uddhist history (late eighth
or early ninth century$, but the traditional sources maintain the theory that there was only one
Ngrjuna, who li&ed for almost *=== years (as mentioned in >eith 2owmans <"asters of
"ahamudra<$. Traditional historians (for example, the *?th century Tibetan Trantha$, aware of
the chronological difficulties in&ol&ed, account for the anachronism &ia a &ariety of theories, such
as the propagation of later writings &ia mystical re&elation. ' useful summary of this tradition, its
literature, and historiography may be found in #edemeyer @==?.
(indtner considers that the "hapraj;paramitopadeAa, a huge commentary on the (arge
3raj;paramita not to be a genuine work of Ngrjuna. This is only extant in a 5hinese
translation by >umraj1&a.There is much discussion as to whether this is a work of Ngrjuna, or
someone else. Btienne (amotte, who translated one third of the CpadeAa into rench, felt that it
was the work of a North Dndian bhik u of the/ar&sti&da school, who later became a con&ert to
the "ahayana. The 5hinese scholar%monk Ein /hun felt that it was the work of a /outh Dndian,
and that Ngrjuna was 9uite possibly the author. 'ctually, these two &iews are not necessarily in
opposition, and a /outh Dndian Ngrjuna could well ha&e studied in the northern /ar&sti&da.
Neither of the two felt that it was composed by >umraj1&a which others ha&e suggested.