Journey mapping: illustrated through Dunzo’s order-tracking experience

Whether you are eating, sleeping, gaming, commuting, or working, you are having an experience. And designing richer experiences is the core objective design thinking. Journey mapping is a tool that can be used to map the current experience and imagine an enhanced one. In this article, I would like to present journey mapping process using an example of Dunzo’s order-tracking experience. I will use the blog “Revamping Dunzo’s order tracking experience” by Divyanshu Nandwani as input to build the journey map. Divyanshu has nicely captured the thoughts and emotions of Dunzo’s customers from the time they place an order to receiving it. And he also presents how the experience was enhanced subsequently.

We will look at journey mapping as a 5-step process: (1) Gather customer inputs (2) identify journey stages (3) map customer experience (4) identify dark and bright spots, and (5) frame the challenge.

1. Gather customer inputs: The journey map needs customer or stakeholder inputs. In the case of order tracking, you will need what customers are thinking, at what stage of the journey, with what emotion, and with what kind of emotional intensity. You may use interviews, observations, input from the customer support department, data available through apps, etc. In the case of Dunzo, they got the inputs from support tickets, research interviews, and by looking at the data. Since customers reached out to the delivery partner directly, delivery partners also become an important source of input. If you are launching a new product or service, your input will come from your potential customers’ existing journey that you are planning to enhance. Here is what Dunzo folks have gathered as mentioned in the blog:
2. Identify journey stages: It helps to divide the journey into a few stages. For example, the order tracking journey can be divided into the following milestones: (1) Order received (2) Order accepted by the outlet (3) Partner assigned (4) Partner at the outlet (5) Parcel picked (6) Parcel delivered. These six milestones divide the journey into five stages. We could have made this into a 4-stage or an 8-stage journey by reducing/adding stages. 

The vertical axis of this journey map corresponds to the emotional intensity associated with the observation. The middle line denotes neural emotion. We place observations with positive emotions in the upper half and observations with negative emotions in the lower half of the map. When an observation has high intensity of positive emotion, say the customer is extremely happy, the observation will be placed on the top of the map. Conversely, when the customer is extremely annoyed, it will be placed towards the bottom of the map.

3. Map customer experience:  Once we have observations/thoughts gathered from customers and the stages of the journey ready, we can start placing the observations on the map. For example, observation 2 “Why hasn’t a partner been assigned yet?” is placed in stage-2 where the order is accepted by the outlet but the partner is not assigned yet. Since the customer is likely to be anxious while raising this question, the observation has been placed in the lower half. I have assumed that the anxiety is medium (not very low and not acute). Likewise, I have placed most of the observations listed in step-1 on the map below.

Note that map building can be an ongoing process and is best done by a team rather than an individual. It can be built over a period, say a month, and then looked at for patterns, particularly dark and bright spots.

4. Identify dark and bright spots: Bright spots are those observations where the customer is really happy/excited etc. They are located in the upper half of the journey map, especially towards the top side. For example, observation-13 “Oh yes! The partner is moving” is a bright spot. In contrast, observation-16 “Why is it taking time at the store?” is a dark spot. 

5. Frame the challenge:  The primary objective of journey mapping is problem discovery. Journey map offers multiple options for framing a challenge. For example,

• Focus on one stage where you want to enhance the experience (e.g. it could be stage-4 in the journey map above which has two dark spots)
• Focus on dark spots and ask, “How do we reduce/eliminate the anxiety of our customers?”
• Focus on bright spots and ask, “How to replicate the joy across other stages?”
• Frame a challenge around end-to-end experience?  For example, the dunzo blog presents following end-to-end experience framing, “How do we show that the order status is coming from the partner and not from the machine? How do we give a human vibe to the order status updates?”

It helps to identify a concrete metaphor or analogy while framing the challenge. For dunzo, the inspiration came from our friendly chat messages. They framed the challenge as “How do we deliver status updates as personalized messages coming from the partner in first person?” This was supplemented by adding animations.

Journey mapping is useful irrespective of whether you are in a B2B, B2C, or D2C business, whether you are offering a product, a service, or a solution. Hope you get to try it out.

Becoming a zombie, one day at a time: A Kazuo Ishiguro depiction from Living (2022 film)

This is how Mr. Williams (Bill Nighy), a senior bureaucrat, narrates how he came to live like a zombie to his former colleague Miss Harris (Aimée Lou Wood). This Kazuo Ishiguro script from the film Living (2022) reads more like a poem.

What was your name for me?

Mr. Zombie, I wasn’t always

When I was your age what

I wanted was to be a gentleman

 

Nothing grand, just a rank-and-file

Gentleman, wearing a suit and a hat

 

Life just crept up on me

One day proceeding the next

 

Small wonder I didn’t notice

What I was becoming

Then I looked at you, and I remembered

what it was like to be alive 

 

You may not be wanting to be a gentleman. But it could be “a successful person”, “a leader”, “a famous person” or even “an enlightened person”. The burden of becoming can be very heavy. Watch out, you might actually become what you wanted. And also turn into a zombie.

Sensing and solving: two modes of mind and the solving mode bias

Whether you are driving on the road, walking on the pavement, or eating in a restaurant by the side, you are likely to be in the solving mode. You are most likely trying to go from your current state to a desired state. The desired state could be being in your office, achieving 8000 steps for the day, or being satiated with your favorite food. While eating, walking, or driving, which is happening without your conscious effort, you are also likely to be trying to solve more complex problems like project planning, hiring/firing, providing help to aging parents, etc. And yet could this tendency to be in the solving mode be a handicap to solving problems in challenging situations? If so, what is needed to balance things? We will explore this in this article.

Sensing mode and solving mode: Let’s begin with a simplistic yet useful perspective that says that the mind is iterating through two modes: sensing and solving. Sensing mode involves estimating the state of the world including the body state and solving mode involves mental simulation and action to change the current state to match a desired state. Underlying both modes is a model or a map with a set of beliefs guiding the navigation through the world. These modes are also known as being and doing modes [1] or perceptual inference and active inference [2]. The picture above depicts perspective.

The sensing mode uses a map consisting of a set of beliefs to estimate the current state and the desired state [3]. The gap between the current and desired state could be based on our primate homeostatic needs such as hunger, thirst, cooler shelter, etc. But it could also be based on higher-level beliefs regarding security such as a secure job, a secure bank balance, a caring circle of friends and family, etc.

Bridging the gap: Solving mode tries to find different paths to go from the current state to a more secure desired state. It does so by changing the current state through action. To maintain homeostasis, heart rate, blood pressure, and various other parameters may be changing without our conscious awareness. This is covert action. A subset of solving part gets expressed as overt action. If my job is insecure, an action may involve sending a resume to friends and posting it on job sites. It could also involve building new skills that may be more relevant in the changing scenario. It could also involve reducing discretionary spending so that there is a better saving for the rainy days.

The sensing mode can also reduce the gap between the current and desired state. It does so by updating existing beliefs resulting in a re-estimation of the current and desired states. For example, I may have a belief that I must have a job. Suppose this belief gets questioned and I entertain a belief that it may be good to try out freelancing or even taking a break for six months and traveling. Then the current state of an insecure job doesn’t look so bad and the desired state doesn’t need to have a job.

A key difference between solving and sensing is the presence and absence of time. Solving involves belief simulation over multiple time scales e.g. if I send a resume to friends, I might get a call for an interview after a few days. Sensing, on the other hand, involves belief updates e.g. Is a job necessary?

Solving mode bias: As the belief map gets more and more sophisticated, solving mode takes over. It feels it knows the current state, why waste time and energy in sensing? It begins to suppress sensing pathways. We begin to go through the motion smoothly without sensing any newness. Tables, chairs, rooms, roads, and even people begin to appear the same and predictable. There may be updates in lower-level beliefs such as a friend’s phone number or the color of the street light but the higher-level beliefs get frozen. These could be religious beliefs, political ideologies, or even scientific theories.

Sensing the limitation of solving mode: Solving mode bias can create an impression that the world is predictable and the map of the world as projected by the current beliefs is reality. It feels as if any problem or conflict can be resolved through more and more simulation and action of different options and scenarios holding the current beliefs tight. Sometimes it works, other times it doesn’t. A key turning point happens in this process when there is a sensing of the limitation of the solving mode. It is a realization that no matter how sophisticated the beliefs, a map is just a map never the territory. This insight may open newer sensing pathways that have been suppressed by the solving mode. And the quality of listening and observation improves. People with opposite beliefs don’t look morons anymore and the urge to “clean” the world subsides.

To summarize, both sensing and solving can reduce the gap between the current and desired state. We have a tendency to rely mostly on the solving mode which tries to change the current state to match the desired state. Sensing involves belief updates which may result in new current and desired states. Over-reliance on solving mode dampens the sensing mode. A good first step to rebalancing the solving-sensing imbalance is to observe the constant time travel and the urge to change the world. 

sources:

[1] J. Mark. G. Williams, “Mindfulness and psychological process”, Emotion, 2010, vol. 10, No. 1, pages 1-7. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20141295/

[2] Norman Farb et. al., “Interoception, contemplative practice, and health”, Frontiers in Psychology, June 2015, https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00763

[3] Norman Farb et. al. June 2015 (same as [2])

4 quotes from Prof Edgar Schein that are stuck with me

 

Prof Edgar Schein passed away on January 26 at the age of 94. His son and collaborator Peter Schein wrote, “He and I had just finished a work gig at about 5p and were chatting after and a few hours after that he passed away peacefully, no pain, no illness, no hospitalization. As he wanted it.”

Ed Schein’s work had a huge influence on my consulting career – both in the area of culture of innovation and my consulting style. It is no surprise that I have quoted him in sixteen of my blogs since 2008. Many of them were on topics that I found interesting in his books, articles, and interviews. As I added more areas of study like design thinking and mindfulness, I realized I had something to learn from Schein in each of them. In this article, I present 4 quotes from Ed Schein that are stuck with me.

Observation is an intervention: Schein says, “If I go into an organization to observe something, my presence there, what questions I ask, and everything I do is an intervention in that organization’s life.” And adds, “The notion that I can go there and ‘gather data in order to plan an intervention later’ is, I now realize, one of the most nonsensical ideas in the field of consulting.”[1] I have illustrated this in my blog Where does intervention begin? Story of Dr Kiran Bedi’s first day at Tihar Jail (2010).

Changing culture is a misnomer: Schein says, “I think changing culture is a misnomer. You change people’s behaviour, and you may eventually influence their beliefs,” he adds, “If you define culture as a common learned response, then it changes with success. If you impose a new way of doing things, and people try it and it works, then slowly they build a new culture.” [2] I wrote about this topic in my blog – Saying “We need a culture of innovation” is mostly correct and useless (2009).

Focus more on process than on content: When I am in a meeting arguing with a colleague, I may be focused on his argument and my counter-argument. That is the content of the conversation. Schein suggests that I should focus more on the process [3]. For example, can I observe the process of communication, “I am trying to compete with my colleague and showing to others that I am brighter and smarter?” This may lead to a reflection, “Why am I arguing here? Is it possible to appreciate the other person’s point and build a relationship that might lead to a better solution?” Focus on process involves observing how anxieties such as losing an argument and aspirations about one’s career are driving the thinking and behaviour. I wrote about this in – 3 tips on being mindful in the corporate world: An Edgar Schein perspective (2019). Another way Schein puts this is, “Listening to the other is secondary to listening to the self.” [4]

There is no “real problem”, only a set of worries: In the final chapter titled “Concluding comments – some final thoughts on how to be really helpful” of the book “Humble consulting: how to provide real help faster” Schein mentions the following: “To be really helpful requires locating what the real problem is, that is, what is worrying the client while accepting the fact that there is no ‘real problem,’ only a set of worries that may be all over the map. To locate what is worrying the client requires open and trusting communication between client and helper. The client has to feel secure enough to reveal what is personally bothering him or her.” [5] I wrote about this in the blog “My 3 takeaways from Edgar Schein’s Humble consulting” (2016)

In one of the online webinars in May 2021 when asked for final words, Ed asked this question, “Can we get to level-two relationships (i.e. beyond transactional) among countries and among larger units to develop ways of saving the planet and thereby saving ourselves?”

For someone like me who got to know about Ed and his thoughts only through books and interviews Ed’s passing away does not change much. It is such a joy to read/listen to Ed. Thank you, Ed.

Sources:

[1] James Campbell Quick, “The next frontier: Edgar Schein on organizational therapy”, The Academy of Management Executive: Feb 2000, page 32.

[2] Tony Manning talks to Edgar Schain, May 2004.

[3] “Humble leadership: Edgar Schein: talks at Google”, interview by Karen May at Google, Feb 2, 2016 (Ed’s quote is at 18:50).

[4] James Campbell Quick, “The next frontier: Edgar Schein on organizational therapy”, The Academy of Management Executive: Feb 2000, page 32.

[5] Edgar Schein, “Humble consulting: how to provide real help faster,” Berrett-Koehler, 2016.

Image sources: amorebeautifulquestion.com, amazon.com

4 modes of problem-solving applied to “reducing student anxiety”

Over the past decade, I have been using 4 approaches to problem-solving to give an overview of problem-solving techniques in my workshops and classes. In this article, I illustrate these 4 modes of problem-solving by applying them to the problem of “reducing student anxiety”. I did this exercise in my class last month at IIT Bombay while teaching a course on the management of innovation. Many of the ideas have come from students as we did the exercise together.

Student anxiety is a broad topic and we realized we could break it down into different sub-topics such as exam anxiety, anxiety due to parental pressures, anxiety due to peer pressure, placement anxiety, etc. This is an example of systems-centric thinking where we try to break down a complex problem into sub-problems and try to solve each separately. Of course, the sub-problems may be interlinked, and solving one sub-problem may exacerbate another one. Despite this possibility, we decided to focus on the sub-problem of exam anxiety.

1.  System-centric approach:

We looked at some of the Systematic Inventive Thinking techniques

a.  Subtraction:  Can we subtract the exam from the course?

b.  Division: Make attendance 100% weightage and exam 0% (Reduce weightage of exam and increase somewhere else)

c.  Multiplication: Give an option of multiple attempts to refine your score in the exam

d.  Task unification: 1. Keep self-assessment 2. Keep peer-assessment 3. Let every student set and answer her own exam

e.  Attribute dependency: Exam is offered at multiple difficulty levels. Student gets to choose the difficulty level of the exam

f.   Reversal: Instead of the teacher setting exam for the students, students set exam for the teacher 

2.       Solution-centric approach:

a.   Using metaphors: Can writing an exam be as stress-free as chatting with friends in a café? Can exam writing be a group exercise?

b.   Using internal bright spots: A personalized app that keeps track of student’s stress level perhaps through biomarkers such as HRV (Heart Rate Variability) available on smartwatches. And when it senses that anxiety is rising, gives suggestions for activities based the past data that reduce his anxiety. Suggestions could be: have chocolate, go talk to a friend, read a book, listen to music, take a walk, etc.   

3.  Problem-centric approach: Through this mode, one goes into the root cause of the problem of “exam anxiety”. Why does it arise? What is the “virus” and what could be the “vaccine”? Is the fear of failure the root cause? Is this an evolutionarily deep-rooted tendency? If so, can it be dampened when it remains high? What does neuroscience say? Is there an anti-anxiety pill without any side effects?

4.  Sensing-centric approach: In this mode, one begins by saying, “I don’t know why students are anxious about exams”. Can I listen to and observe students as they prepare for and respond to exam pressure? Can I listen to and observe teachers and parents as to how they respond to exams? Is it possible for students, teachers, and parents to become aware of their own anxiety?

Hope this gives some idea of how the 4 modes of problem-solving may be applied to a given situation.

Building innovation stamina: 4 basic workouts

When it comes to building running stamina, workouts may include a combination of stretching, slow runs, sprints, strength training, etc. What kinds of workouts are involved in building innovation stamina? Let’s look at 4 key components of innovation stamina and identify a basic workout for each of them. The 4 components are curiosity stamina, experimentation stamina, communication stamina, and collaboration stamina. Innovation is a team sport and hence innovation stamina is more relevant for a team than an individual. However, let’s focus on an individual in this article.

1.  Curiosity stamina: This stamina depicts one’s ability to remain curious about one challenge area for a long duration.

Daily workout: Listening: Spending time listening to people who may be facing the challenge or have overcome the challenge or carry some expertise related to the challenge area. If you are curious about a technology trend, then the workout may involve listening to / studying what experts/friends have to say on the topic.

Listening may also happen by watching a video, reading a book, research paper, etc. Any serious study would need the discipline of taking notes, keeping recorded interviews, etc.

A typical by-product of this exercise is framing one or more challenges with additional constraints e.g. focusing on specific types of people, using different metaphors or analogies, etc. With input from people, the challenge statement may undergo changes. Keeping a diary of challenge statements along with assumptions and constraints helps.

2.  Experimentation stamina: This stamina represents one’s ability to perform experiments to validate one or more assumptions or hypotheses associated with an idea. 

Daily workout: Prototyping: A prototype can be feels-like such as a before-and-after storyboard, or it may be a looks-like prototype such as app wireframes or it may be works-like such as a simulation model. Building higher fidelity prototypes typically needs more sophisticated tools, specialized skills, and more effort. The key parameters to watch out for are cost and speed of prototyping. You want the cost to be as low as possible and the speed to be as high as possible.

Like how a gym enables workouts, a lab enables prototyping by providing access to tools, platforms, and coaches. Hence, serious stamina builders try to get access to a gym or build a low-cost gym of their own.

3.  Communication stamina: This stamina depicts one’s ability to communicate one’s idea effectively in a short time again and again despite unfavorable responses in the past.

Daily workout: idea pitching: Idea pitching can start with friends and family. And it gets extended to mentors, investors, potential/current customers, partners, etc. A key by-product is a feedback which may be used to improvise the idea, the prototype, and the pitch. Investment is also a by-product, not necessarily in the form of money but it could also be in the form of time from a mentor or an influencer opening a channel to potential customers. 

4.  Collaboration stamina: This stamina represents one’s ability to collaborate with and co-create new products/services with colleagues despite differences in opinions or priorities.

Daily workout:  Brainstorming: It is common to meet over a cup of coffee but not so common to meet with a specific challenge as agenda to be discussed. And it is even more difficult to retain an interest in the challenge for all the parties involved. Collaboration stamina is the toughest and trickiest stamina to build. Who is contributing more? Who should get the credit? Questions like these would pop up sooner or later and need to be resolved amicably.

A typical by-product of collaboration is a joint project. Many challenge campaigns make it mandatory for the submission to be teamwork. Quality of listening and mutual respect play a big role in cultivating collaboration stamina.

To summarize, we looked at 4 components of innovation stamina: curiosity, experimentation, communication, and collaboration, and 4 associated basic workouts to cultivate those components viz. listening, prototyping, idea pitching, and brainstorming.

Nāgārjuna’s śūnyatā through Mūlamadhyamakakārikā verses

“Reality is unknown and unknowable” is one of the hypotheses I explore in my book “Mindfulness: connecting with the real you” (2019). Over the past year, as I began to explore ancient Buddhist texts where a similar notion is expressed, it was inevitable that I encounter Nagarjuna’s sunyata (emptiness). Nagarjuna from the 2^nd-3rd century CE is a towering figure among the Buddhist teachers from India. He shed fresh light on one of the core tenets of Buddhism – Pratītyasamutpāda (प्रतीत्यसमुत्पाद) commonly translated as dependent origination or dependent arising.

Nagarjuna championed the term sunyata (शून्यता) to express his understanding of dependent arising. Mūlamadhyamakakārikā (मूलमध्यमककारिका, MMK) translated as “Fundamental wisdom of the middle path” is Nagarjuna’s main text which is considered one of the foundational texts in Mahayana Buddhist traditions. MMK is a series of 450 verses organized into 27 chapters. I haven’t read the entire MMK yet. However, this is my first attempt to pick a few verses to present my understanding of Nagarjuna’s sunyata. Who knows? It might open new channels of conversations that I enjoy and learn from.

On English translation: I have used the Sanskrit version of MMK from here. I have used this online Sanskrit dictionary and also referred to translations inspired by multiple Buddhist traditions such as Tibetan (Jay Garfield), Japanese Zen (Kenneth Inada), Theravada (David Kalupahana) as well as works by T R V Murti, G C Nayak, and Ananda Mishra. All sources are given at the end. However, I haven’t stuck to any particular translation and sometimes used my own phrases.

How important is sunyata to Nagarjuna?

सर्वं च युज्यते तस्य शून्यता यस्य युज्यते ।

सर्वं न युज्यते तस्य शून्यं यस्य न युज्यते ॥ 24.14 ||

sarvaṃ ca yujyate tasya śūnyatā yasya yujyate

sarvaṃ na yujyate tasya śūnyaṃ yasya na yujyate

Whoever is in tune with^1,2 sunyata is in tune with everything

Everything is out of tune for him who is out of tune with sunyata

 

Is sunyata the middle path of Buddha?

यः प्रतीत्यसमुत्पादः शून्यतां तां प्रचक्ष्महे ।

सा प्रज्ञप्तिरूपादाय प्रतिपत्सैव मध्यमा ॥ 24.18 ||

yaḥ pratītyasamutpādaḥ śūnyatāṃ tāṃ pracakṣmahe

sā prajñaptirūpādāya pratipatsaiva madhyamā

We see clearly that whatever is dependently arising is sunyata

That is a term for inter-dependence³, is itself the middle way.

 

यः प्रतीत्यसमुत्पादं पश्यतीदं स पश्यति ।

दुःखं समुदयं चैव निरोधं मार्गमेव च ॥ 24.40 ||

yaḥ pratītyasamutpādaṃ paśyatīdaṃ sa paśyati

duḥkhaṃ samudayaṃ caiva nirodhaṃ mārgameva ca

Whoever sees dependent arising, sees this

Suffering, its arising and its cessation, and the path itself

 

What is sunyata?

The following two verses are my most favourite as far as sunyata is concerned.

शून्यता सर्वदृष्टीनां प्रोक्ता निःसरणं जिनैः ।

येषां तु शून्यतादृष्टीस्तानसाध्यान् बभाषिरे ॥ 13.8 ||

śūnyatā sarvadṛṣṭīnāṃ proktā niḥsaraṇaṃ jinaiḥ

yeṣāṃ tu śūnyatādṛṣṭīstānasādhyān babhāṣire

Sunyata is the dissipation⁴ of all views, said the wise,

They spoke, For whomever, sunyata is a view are incorrigible⁵

My comment: “all views” means all rigid beliefs. Hence, sunyata is a state where all beliefs are tentative.

 

अस्तीति शाश्वतग्राहो नास्तीत्युच्छेददर्शनं ।

तस्मादस्तित्वनास्तित्वे नाश्रीयेत विचक्षणः ॥ 15.10 ||

astīti śāśvatagrāho nāstītyuccedadarśanaṁ

tasmād astitvanāstitve nāśrīyeta vicakṣaṇaḥ

Saying “it exists” means holding onto permanency, saying “it doesn’t exist” is the nihilistic view

Hence, a wise man doesn’t resort to “exists” or “doesn’t exist”

 

How does perception of sunyata manifest itself?

अपरप्रत्ययं शान्तं प्रपञ्चैरप्रपञ्चितं ।

निर्विकल्पमनानार्थमेतत्त्वस्य लक्षणं ॥ 18.9 ||

aparapratyayaṃ śāntaṃ prapañcairaprapañcitaṃ

nirvikalpamanānārthametattvasya lakṣaṇaṃ

Not dependent on another, peaceful, unfooled by the conceptual play⁶

Thoughtless, without multiplicity, these are the characteristics of reality^7,8

My comment: When reality perceives its nature to be sunya i.e. dependently arising it manifests itself through these characteristics.

 

What does it mean practically?

MMK is not written in the spirit of a “step-by-step guide to sunyata” 😊 However, we can infer a few things which may be practical. The first thing to notice is that, at least in these verses, Nagarjuna is not talking about what to do or not do. He is talking about a kind of seeing or perceiving. The phrase in verse 24.40 – यः पश्यति स पश्यति, yaḥ paśyati sa paśyati, one who sees, sees – communicates the spirit. In sunyata, it is the perception that matters, not action.

Next, if I pay attention to my mental state and observe that it is anxious or agitated (i.e. not peaceful) then it would imply that I am not perceiving sunyata (last verse 18.9). That means not all beliefs have been dissipated yet (13.8). That is, at least one view (belief) is being held too tightly and the current or an imagined situation has threatened its validity. For example, the belief could be that “I must always have a job” or “I must always be liked by family/friends/colleagues” or “I must be successful” etc. and in the current or in an imagined situation this may not be true. Nagarjuna is indirectly nudging us to ask, “Is there a belief being held too tightly? (15.10)”

Not sure if you noticed, but all the sample beliefs in the para above assume “I am an independent agent”. 😊 Am I? Or is it just another belief held tightly? Am I getting fooled by my thought process? (18.9) Looks tricky? Who says the middle path is not slippery? In fact, Nagarjuna says misperception of sunyata can be as dangerous as a snake held incorrectly (24.11, सर्पो यथा दुर्गृहीतो, sarpo yathā durgṛhīto).

Going back to the hypothesis in my book, is Nagarjuna saying that reality is unknown and unknowable? In verse 15.10 Nagarjuna is suggesting that taking a hard stance on “it is” or “it is not” is dangerous. Once I take a hard stance, I need to defend it, either win or lose arguments, all of this generates suffering sooner or later. Once I see this, I may say “yes” or “no” to any question but tentatively – treating every belief as a hypothesis.

I am sure MMK has much more to offer than what I have presented here. And I am looking forward to exploring it further.  In the meantime, I am happy to hear your comments and I welcome them in the spirit of MMK, all views are tentative 😊 

Update-1: (24-Oct-22) English translation of the second line of verse 24.18 was earlier translated as "That is a term (used) for dependent (arising), is itself the middle way." It has been updated to "That is a term for inter-dependence, is itself the middle way". Thanks to Prof. Ananda Mishra for his comments.

Notes:

1. Kenneth Inada translates the Sanskrit term युज्यते (yujyate) as “in correspondence with”. He translates the first line as: “Whatever is in correspondence with sunyata all is in correspondence (i.e. possible).” 
2. Jay Garfield translates this line as: “For him to whom emptiness is clear, everything becomes clear.”
3. Kenneth Inada translates this line as, "It is a provisional name (i.e. thought construction) for the mutuality (of being) and, indeed, it is the middle path". Garfield translates it as, "That, being a dependent designation, is itself the middle way".
4. Jay Garfield translates this line as: “The victorious ones have said, that emptiness is the relinquishing of all views."
5. The Sanskrit word asādhyān (असाध्यान्) has been translated as incorrigible as in Kenneth Inada’s translation. Jay Garfield translates it as “accomplish nothing”. His line: “For whoever emptiness is a view, that one will accomplish nothing.”
6. The phrase "prapañcaiḥ aprapañcitaṃ" (प्रपञ्चैः अप्रपञ्चितं) has been translated here as “unfooled by the conceptual play”. Inada translates it as: “non-conceptualized by conceptual play” and Garfield translates it as: “Not fabricated by mental fabrication”.
7. The word tattva (तत्त्व) is also translated as suchness or thusness corresponding to the Sanskrit word tathatā (तथता) as mentioned by G C Nayak pg 20. Garfield also mentions “reality (that-ness)”.
8. For T R V Murti tattva is “the Real is something in itself, self-evident and self-existent” pg 139 2016 edition. This is the Absolutistic interpretation of Nagarjuna’s Madhyamaka. Ananda Mishra (additional source 3 below) gives a good overview of nihilistic and absolutistic interpretations and suggests, “The true meaning of sunyata can never be grasped by mere textual exegesis, rhetorics, dialectics or analytics and discursive reasoning. It is something to be realized and felt within.” Dalai Lama also mentions a similar view (see additional source 4 below). 

Sources:

1. Sanskrit Devanagari version edited by Douglas Bachman, 2001. (Available from archive.org)
2. P. L. Vaidya, “Mādhyamakaśāstra of Nāgārjuna with the commentary Prasannapadā by Candrakīrtī”, Buddhist Sanskrit texts No. 10, The Mithila Institute, 1960. (Available from archive.org). This is a Sanskrit text in Devanagari which includes MMK commentary by Candrakīrtī (7^th century CE). I haven’t read Candrakīrtī’s commentary yet. However, it is not possible to read Nagarjuna without encountering Candrakīrtī.

English translations:

1. Jay L. Garfield, “The fundamental wisdom of the middle way”, Oxford University Press, 1995.
2. Kenneth K. Inada, “Nagarjuna: A translation of his Mulamadhyamakakarika”, Sri Satguru Publications, 1993. (Available at archive.org)
3. David J. Kalupahana, “Mūlamadhyamakakārikā of Nāgārjuna: The philosophy of the middle way”, Motilal Banarasidass Publishers, 1999. (Available at archive.org)

Additional sources referring to the Sanskrit version of MMK (I am sure there are many other books that refer to MMK in Tibetan, Chinese, Korean and Japanese editions):

1. T R V Murti, “The central philosophy of Buddhism: A study of Mādhyamika system”, Motilal Banarasidass Publishers, 2016. First published in 1955, this book gives a good exposition of Nagarjuna and Madhyamika school and compares it with various other Buddhist, Hindu, and Jain schools and western scholars like Kant and Hegel. TRV interprets Nagarjuna as an Absolutist.
2. G C Nayak, “Madhyamika sunyata: A reappraisal”, Indian Council of Philosophical Research, 2001. (Available on archive.org) A short (150 pages) and yet very good appraisal of Nagarjuna and his commentator Chandrakirti’s philosophical enterprise. Invokes Wittgenstein quotes a few times to compare it with Nagarjuna.
3. Ananda Mishra, “Nāgārjuna’s śūnyatā: Beyond being and nothingness”, Journal of East-West thought, Vol. 8 No. 1, 2018.
4. Dalai Lama, “Nagarjuna’s ‘fundamental wisdom’ – day-1”, This is a 3-hour lecture delivered by Dalai Lama at Taj Mahal Hotel, New Delhi on March 20, 2015. At the time of the lecture, he was 4 months short of turning 80. He focuses on chapter 24 of MMK. He sometimes speaks in English and other times speaks in Tibetan and there is a translator. However, it is clear that he has studied Nagarjuna deeply and speaks from the heart. He does not translate verse by verse. Roughly, the first 40 minutes is an overview of different Buddhist schools, 41:30 Talks about core tenets like dependent origination, dependent designation, and non-independence of self. 1:17:30 Starts with chapter 24 At 1:39:50 he mentions, “That experience (of having a weak negative emotion) goes for years, decades and then real transformation (happens) in our emotions” and then adds, “These are not just empty words – I myself although not very big experience but (have had) some experiences. Therefore, these days I often talk about emptiness, emptiness like that.”

image source: wikipedia.org