[1][note 1] The first phrasing, the Middle Way, refers to a spiritual practice that steers clear of both extreme asceticism and sensual indulgence.
It is the Noble Eightfold Path, and nothing else, namely: right understanding, right thought, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness and right concentration.
[5][6] Indologist Johannes Bronkhorst concludes that the first extreme mentioned here "indulgence in desirable sense objects" does not refer to a specific religious movement or practice, but to the actions of common people.
[7] The Buddhist texts depict (and criticize) Jain ascetics as those who practice extreme self-mortification (Bronkhorst cites MN 14).
Meanwhile, the scorching path includes numerous "ways of mortifying and tormenting the body" including going naked, restricting their food intake in various ways, wearing various kinds of rough clothing, "they tear out their hair and beard," "they constantly stand, refusing seats," they maintain the squatting posture, and "they lie on a mat of thorns".
[11][12] Gethin 78 According to Bhikkhu Bodhi, there are two extreme metaphysical views that are avoided through the Buddha's "teaching by the middle" (majjhena dhammaṃ):[13] According to Bodhi, by steering clear of both of these extremes, dependent origination teaches that "existence is constituted by a current of conditioned phenomena devoid of a metaphysical self yet continuing on from birth to birth as long as the causes that sustain it remain effective.
[14] According to David Kalupahana, the terms "existence" (atthitā) and "non-existence" (natthitā) are referring to two absolutist theories (which were common in Indian philosophy at the time): the doctrine of permanent existence found in the Upanishads and the doctrine of non-existence (at death) of the materialist Carvaka school.
'"Another passage which discusses personal identity with regard to the middle teaching is found in the Aññatarabrāhmaṇasutta (SN 12.46, with a Chinese parallel at SA 300).
The discourse then states that the Buddha teaches by the middle and outlines the twelve elements of dependent origination.
[18] "Dependent origination" also gives a rationale for rebirth: Conditioned Arising is [...] a 'Middle Way' which avoids the extremes of 'eternalism' and 'annihilationism': the survival of an eternal self, or the total annihilation of a person at death.
[19]In the Theravāda Buddhist tradition, the usage of the term "Middle Way" is discussed in 5th-century CE Pali commentaries.
The Pali commentary to the Samyutta Nikaya (SN) states: The Tathāgata teaches the Dhamma by the middle without veering to either of these extremes—eternalism or annihilationism—having abandoned them without reservation.
By the formula of dependent origination, the effect is shown to occur through the cause and to cease with the cessation of the cause, but no agent or experiencer (karaka, vedaka) is described.
[22]The influential Theravāda doctrinal compendium called the Visuddhimagga states: "Dependent origination" (paticca-samuppada) represents the middle way, which rejects the doctrines, 'He who acts is he who reaps' and 'One acts while another reaps' (S.ii.20) ..."[23]The metaphysical import of the "middle teaching" is interpreted in different ways by modern Theravada Buddhists.
Bhikkhu Bodhi comments on the Kaccānagotta-sutta as follows:[24] In view of these explanations it would be misleading to translate the two terms, atthita and natthita, simply as "existence" and "nonexistence" and then to maintain (as is sometimes done) that the Buddha rejects all ontological notions as inherently invalid.
The Buddha's utterances at [SN] 22:94, for example, show that he did not hesitate to make pronouncements with a clear ontological import when they were called for.
In the present passage atthita and natthita are abstract nouns formed from the verbs atthi and natthi.
"[25] Regarding the Kaccānagotta-sutta, Thanissaro Bhikkhu writes:[26]this sutta is describing the state of mind of a person focusing on the origination or cessation of the data of the senses.
A person in that state of mind would see nothing in that mode of perception that would give rise to thoughts of existence or non-existence with regard to those sense data.
[27] The Ajahns further state that:The advice given in the last passage closely matches the practice of vipassana (insight) meditation: this consists of, firstly, the calm and attentive observation of the arising of all patterns of experience.
There is a complete acceptance of all that arises and no confusion about the fact that all patterns of experience are of the same dependent, insubstantial nature.
[27] In Mahāyāna Buddhism, the Middle Way refers to the insight into śūnyatā ("emptiness") that transcends the extremes of existence and non-existence.
[28][29] Madhyamika philosophy, based on the Buddha's Perfection of Wisdom Sutras, was set forth by the great Indian master Nagarjuna.
Nagarjuna's influential Mūlamadhyamakakārikā -‘The Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way’ (MMK) famously contains a reference to the Kaccāyanagotta Sutta in its 15th chapter.
Inspired by the buddhist logician Dignāga he felt it was necessary to present syllogistic arguments which prove the Madhyamaka view.
[32] The sixth chapter of Chandrakirti's Madhyamakavatara, ‘Entering the Middle Way’[33] explains the meaning of Nagarjuna's work specifically from a Prasangika Madhyamika standpoint.
The Yogācāra school examines emptiness through its central teaching of the three basic modes of existence or "three natures" (svabhāva).
"[39] The Yogācāra position is that there is something that exists, the empty and purely mental (prajñapti-matra) stream of dependent arising.
[38] In Tibetan Buddhism, there are numerous interpretations of Madhyamaka philosophy, all of which represent the intent of the Buddha's middle way and the right view outlined by Nagarjuna.
[51] In Chan Buddhism, the Middle Way describes the realization of being free of the one-sidedness of perspective that takes the extremes of any polarity as objective reality.