Abstract

This dissertation examines the paradoxical relation between Emptiness or Nothingness as the animating ground of existence and the possibility of meaning and morality in human experience. Specifically, it addresses contrasting perspectives on this issue in the respective philosophies of Jiddu Krishnamurti and Thich Nhat Hanh. It is asserted that, though both thinkers consider the realization of this emptiness intrinsic to a meaningful and moral life, they disagree regarding precisely how a meaningful or moral life might be lived. ;Both thinkers claim that the meaning of existence is ultimately ineffable but do not contend that existence is simply meaningless. In fact, both claim that meaning and moral purpose in human experience only become possible when the attempt to make meaning rationally intelligible is abandoned. The attempt to reduce life to a mere object of knowledge must be abandoned or transcended in order for life to be experienced in an "enlightened" state which is unconditioned by a critically detached knower. ;The paper goes on to assert, however, that Krishnamurti and Thich Nhat Hanh disagree with respect to how enlightened realization can or should manifest itself in an authentic life. They disagree with respect to how enlightened realization can or should manifest itself in an authentic life. They disagree regarding exactly how an authentic life is lived. It is argued that Krishnamurti conceived of authentic living as relatively more remote or disengaged from the corruption of egoistic or unenlightened living than does Thich Nhat Hanh, who envisions enlightened or authentic experience as radically co-extensive with unenlightened experience. ;This difference in perspective has been reflected in divergent attitudes toward world events and human affairs. It is concluded that Thich Nhat Hanh's attitude has been one of active engagement with the strife and suffering in world affairs, while Krishnamurti seemed to consider involvement in the turmoil of an unenlightened world to be incompatible with authentic living. Thus, Thich Nhat Hanh has been comfortable taking an active role in events such as the Vietnamese War, while Krishnamurti remained deliberately aloof from events such as World War II during his lifetime