Emptiness as a philosophical concept holds intriguing parallels across spiritual and religious boundaries, echoed in diverse sources from Buddhist teachings to Hebrew scripture.

An analysis of key terms from these distinct traditions — the Buddhist principle of pratītyasamutpāda, the biblical Hebrew notion of bōqēq, and the divine self-identification “Ehyeh Asher Ehyeh” in Exodus — reveals a profound interconnectedness within understandings of emptiness.

Examining these related ideas invites a rich intertextual dialogue that bridges cultures and invites deeper contemplation of emptiness as an existential state underpinning being.

Dependent Origination in Buddhism

Pratītyasamutpāda, described as “dependent origination,” is a central tenet of Buddhist philosophy referring to the interconnected arising of phenomena based on conditions. This concept points to the causal interdependency of existence, whereby nothing possesses independent essence but instead exists in a web of contingent relations.

The principle suggests that “this being, that becomes,” underscoring reality’s transient, ever-changing nature as dynamic processes unfold across chains of interdependent occurrences.

In this worldview, emptiness constitutes the absence of permanent, inherent existence; phenomena perpetually come into fruition and pass away based on relations of dependence and temporality inherent to reality.

The Buddhist concept of emptiness (śūnyatā) aligns with the principle of pratītyasamutpāda or “dependent origination,” whereby all phenomena are understood to lack inherent existence, arising only in dependence on various conditions.

Emptiness in this context signifies the absence of permanent essences and intrinsic identities. Liberation emerges through recognizing this contingent and impermanent nature of reality.

Yet emptiness does not necessitate inaction or detachment from worldly engagement.

Meditative experiences of nonduality and emptiness can enrich one’s compassionate participation in conventional reality. By undermining egoic conditioning and attachment, realizing emptiness enables flexible, spontaneous responsiveness to life’s fluctuations in fortune and impermanence.

Thus, emptiness fosters wisdom and freedom to act in accordance with, not in denial of, the dependently originated nature of the apparent world.

This manifests in non-attached yet profoundly engaged activity reflecting heightened cognitive vitality and agency following meditative insight. Emptiness thereby enhances social relatedness and ethical action in conventional reality.

Emptiness in Judaism

The biblical term bōqēq has distinctly different cultural roots as a Hebrew notion derived from scriptural sources, bearing alternate shades of meaning.

Isaiah 24:1 utilizes this term to signify an earthly state transformed by divine judgment into desolation and emptiness from its previous form; the word translates to “void,” “waste,” or “wilderness.” This depiction of dramatic alteration conveys emptiness as an impermanent condition dependent on causative actions — in this case, imposed by God as retribution.

The verse poetically signals a process of emptying initiated by an external agent, hinting at the cyclic return as natural order is overturned and restored.

Within Exodus 3:14, God reveals his enduring, unconditional identity to Moses by declaring “Ehyeh Asher Ehyeh,” meaning “I am who I am” or “I will be what I will be.”

This statement of divine self-designation conveys a sense of ultimate being and invariance, emphasizing permanence and necessity in contrast with worldly states characterized by change and conditionality.

It connotes a return to the Earth (Gē) before God’s face shined upon its undivided waters in Genesis, dividing them (laying the firmament) into the worlds (kosmoi) we inhabit.

Emptiness (bōqēq) is Being before and after the laying of the firmament.

Yet, as the source and ground for contingent existence, God’s emptiness here signifies fullness — the generative, unlimited potential from which reality unfolds.

Relating Bōqēq and Śūnyatā

These differing articulations of emptiness share conceptual linkages visible through an intertextual lens. Pratītyasamutpāda and bōqēq both signal an understanding of existence as impermanent, contingent on causal factors, and thus devoid of enduring, isolated essence.

Emptiness is always relative — whether arising relationally or undergoing decline and de-creation. The former suggests intrinsic interrelation; the latter extrinsic dependence on a higher will.

Yet, in both, emptiness is ephemeral and conditional, representing no permanent or independent state. At the same time, “Ehyeh Asher Ehyeh” offers a counterpoint: emptiness not as isolation or mere negation, but presence, fullness, and infinite possibility when conceived as the source-less source — absolute being enabling relative becoming.

Together, these notions offer multi-dimensional entry points into philosophical dialogues on emptiness while emphasizing the contextual nature of such discourses.

As an experiential human phenomenon, emptiness gains significance through networks of meanings and interpretive lenses we bring to it.

For Buddhists, it epitomizes universal flux; for Hebrew prophets and priests, impermanence subject to divine decree; and Moses, intimacy with eternal being.

By simultaneously holding multiple frames in mind, we find resonances across worldviews that reveal universal insights about reality’s contingent construction — that things arise, abide, and pass based on interlocking relationships.

Emptiness thus proves too expansive to be bounded by a single definition, but its philosophical treatment invites a continuous reexamination of existence and essence.

Within the Hebrew scriptural tradition, understandings of emptiness arise, with the term “tohu wa-bohu” used in Genesis 1:2 to describe the state of formlessness and void before Creation. This notion of primordial emptiness as the absence of structure resonates with bōqēq in implying a base state devoid of current form or composition.

In Lurianic Kabbalah, the concept of tzimtzum relates closely to philosophical inquiry into emptiness. Tzimtzum refers to a self-withdrawal or contraction of the infinite Ein Sof, the endless being of divinity, to allow space for finite Creation to emerge. God withdraws essence to bring forth emanated existence through this act of “divine auto-limitation” (Peter Ochs).

Tzimtzum thereby constitutes a kabbalistic nondual cosmology resonating strongly with Buddhist emptiness: unconditional being contracts into conditional becoming while always already encompassing it, similar to pratītyasamutpāda –and while always ready for re-flexion after long periods of contraction, spinning the wheel of time unto eternity (Being qua the Kalakchakra).

Within Hasidism, teachings arise around ayin, Hebrew for “nothingness,” as the essence of reality unveiled when removing false masks of substance and independence in created things. Ayin signifies a fertile, pregnant emptiness from which being perpetually flowed. “The doctrine of ayin is reducible, in effect, to the dialectic of being and nothingness.” (Green, “Shevirat ha-Kelim”) Like the fertile Buddhist void, this generative nothingness of ayin sustains the dependent nature of existence.

These Jewish mystical notions echo the emptiness in Isaiah 24:1’s bōqēq, suggesting a return to primordial unstructured being (tohu wa-bohu; the pre-firmament), a redemptive contraction of essence (tzimtzum) and underlying nullity in dependent phenomena (ayin). By engaging Kabbalistic and Hasidic ideas alongside Buddhist thought on emptiness, intriguing parallels, and resonances come to light around this profound topic.

This comparative textual analysis is an initial foray highlighting fruitful cross-cultural philosophical exchanges on emptiness.

As we explore this rich conceptual terrain through different ideas in interplay, what arises is a testament to the interconnectedness of philosophical insight, which transcends linguistic and geographical boundaries even as particular understandings take distinct forms.