yadave wrote:Namdrol wrote:The emptiness of salt does not prove salt does not exist, it merely removes the claim that there is an existent called "salt" When salt is analyzed, no salt is found in salt. There is no entity among the components of salt that make salt salt.
Salt molecules are entities, conditioned entities, the smallest things we find that have properties we know of that make salt salt, make salty taste salty. What are you looking for?
If salt molecules are conditioned entities they are unable to act as salt alone. Hence there is no "salt" in the appearance we are labeling salt because the conditions which support the appearance of "salt" do not end at "salt molecules", do they? Salt molecules, we will readily, are conditioned entities upon which we lable the aggregate we are calling salt. But a salt molecule itself is an aggregate, and so and so forth. A salt molecule cannot act as salt, it must be in an aggregate to have that function. And a given salt molecule itself cannot function without the aggregate upon which it depends. And that dependence has both depth as well as extension i.e. not only does it depend on its own specific causes and conditions, but its dependence is lateral, since it depends the presence of the element of sodium, chloride, as has been mentioned above. Not only does salt molecule depend on these two elements, it depends on conditions of pressure, heat, and so on. So a great deal more goes into producing the appearance we are labeling salt mere salt molecules. In fact, the presence of salt molecules is dependent on every other phenoemena in the universe i.e. karana hetu or "creative cause" or the "dominant condition" the principle that all phenomena are causes for all other phenomena apart from themselves. When all of this is taken into consideration, as any proper analysis must, we find that in a very real sense salt is empty of salt just as persons are empty of persons, and just as all conditioned phenomena are empty of conditoned phenomena.
Whatever arises dependently, that is empty -- that is Nagarjuna's message -- there is no place where we say "Oh, we can stop our analysis here". If you stop your analysis, you are in effect making a claim of independence, at least, that is what Nagarjuna is trying to force you to admit.
Well I apologize, Namdrol, I know we've been through this, but we do find a basis for our labels.
Only if we arbitrarily limit our analysis of dependent relations. And if we limit that analysis, the Madhyamakas will try to force us to admit that we have made a claim about essences.
The only way I can make sense of your assertion is by imagining some kind of blocks world where we are looking for a smallest indivisible block to label. But we don't do this when looking for the smallest component of salt, we label this "salt molecule." For Padma's composite thunderstorm, we find a basis consisting of wind, rain, lightning, an array of composite entities that we collectively label "thunderstorm." We don't include "airplanes" in our collection because they are not required to have a "thunderstorm."
Airplains and all other phenomena are required, it is intrinsic to the logic of the six causes and four conditions, which are the six causes and four conditions that Nagarjuna sets out and dismantles completely in the first chapter of the MMK.