Abstract

The depth and diversity of scholarship on both Nāgārjuna and Kant is so staggering that any work invoking both risks losing itself in a sea of competing currents. I hope that the present offering is modest enough to stay afloat, but incisive enough to present interested readers with a thought-provoking case. Rather than a comparison between Kant and Nāgārjuna, my goal is to present an interpretation of Nāgārjuna that is lent systematic support by Kantian presumptions. Specifically, I am proposing a reading of Nāgārjuna's Mūlamad-hyamakakārikā that takes advantage of a Kantian picture of the nature of judgment to account for how this text may achieve its goals.To accomplish this, we must set out with a...