空性与创造：本体论的根本差异

核心论证 Core Argument

佛教中观学派的创始人龙树（Nāgārjuna）在其《中论》（Mūlamadhyamakakārikā）中系统阐述了"空性"（śūnyatā）的概念：一切事物都无自性（svabhāva），万法皆由因缘和合而生，没有任何独立自存的实体。这一洞见深刻而精妙，构成了大乘佛教哲学的基石。然而，基督教的创造论（creatio ex nihilo）提出了一个根本不同的本体论框架：宇宙并非无始无终的缘起之流，而是由一位自有永有的位格神从无中创造出来的。正如神学家Colin Gunton在《The Triune Creator》中所阐明的，创造论意味着世界具有真实的存在和内在的目的。 这两种本体论之间的张力不可轻易化解。在龙树的体系中，甚至"空性"本身也是空的（空空），任何关于终极实在的肯定性陈述都会落入"戏论"（prapañca）。这导致了一种彻底的认识论谦卑，但也使得任何关于宇宙意义和目的的言说变得极为困难。相比之下，创世记开篇"起初，神创造天地"宣告了一个有开端、有目的、有方向的宇宙。哲学家Keith Ward在《Religion and Creation》中指出，基督教的创造观为科学探索提供了哲学根基——正因为宇宙出自理性的创造者，它才具有可理解的秩序。 更深层的差异在于对"自我"的理解。佛教的"无我"（anātman）教义否认永恒灵魂的存在，认为执著于自我是痛苦的根源；基督教则教导人是按照神的形象被造的，每个灵魂都具有永恒的价值和不可替代的尊严。这不是说佛教缺乏对人的关怀——菩萨道的慈悲精神令人敬佩——而是说两种世界观对"人是什么"这个根本问题给出了截然不同的回答。Paul Williams，这位从佛教皈依天主教的牛津学者，在《The Unexpected Way》中坦承，正是对人格永恒性的渴望促使他重新审视基督信仰。

Nāgārjuna, founder of the Buddhist Mādhyamaka school, systematically articulated the concept of 'emptiness' (śūnyatā) in his Mūlamadhyamakakārikā: all phenomena lack inherent existence (svabhāva), everything arises through dependent origination, and no independently self-existing entity exists. This insight is profound and subtle, forming the cornerstone of Mahāyāna Buddhist philosophy. Yet Christianity's doctrine of creation (creatio ex nihilo) presents a fundamentally different ontological framework: the universe is not a beginningless stream of dependent arising, but was created from nothing by a self-existent personal God. As theologian Colin Gunton clarifies in 'The Triune Creator,' the doctrine of creation means the world possesses genuine existence and inherent purpose. The tension between these two ontologies cannot be easily resolved. In Nāgārjuna's system, even 'emptiness' itself is empty (the emptiness of emptiness), and any affirmative statement about ultimate reality falls into 'conceptual proliferation' (prapañca). This leads to radical epistemological humility but also makes it extremely difficult to speak of cosmic meaning and purpose. By contrast, Genesis opens with 'In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth,' proclaiming a universe with a beginning, purpose, and direction. Philosopher Keith Ward notes in 'Religion and Creation' that the Christian view of creation provides philosophical grounding for scientific inquiry—precisely because the universe comes from a rational Creator, it possesses intelligible order. The deeper difference lies in understanding the 'self.' Buddhism's anātman doctrine denies the existence of an eternal soul, viewing attachment to self as the root of suffering; Christianity teaches that humans are created in God's image, each soul possessing eternal worth and irreplaceable dignity. This is not to say Buddhism lacks concern for persons—the Bodhisattva path's compassion is admirable—but that these two worldviews give radically different answers to the fundamental question 'What is a human being?' Paul Williams, an Oxford scholar who converted from Buddhism to Catholicism, acknowledged in 'The Unexpected Way' that it was precisely the longing for personal permanence that led him to reexamine Christian faith.