Why ancient Prasangika buddhist Chandrakirti claimed "There is no chariot which depends on its parts"? Today during reference checking I arrived at this wiki page, where the famous ancient Prasangika buddhist Chandrakirti claimed &quot;There is no chariot which depends on its parts&quot;?
But per the firmly established &quot;dependent origination&quot; Buddhism's key doctrine, every external phenomenon is conditioned and dependent on other dharmas. So we cannot say the arising of a composite is dependent on its parts? This sounds a little confusing and uncommon. For example, my car's battery is broken, until I fix it or change a new one, I cannot use the car any more as car. So for the car to have any relevance to me, I have to address even a very small part (battery), otherwise that car is essentially non-existent even at car's &quot;conventional level&quot;. I certainly feel and experience a strong necessary karmic dependency here.
Are there any historical accounts or conventional explanation for Chandrakirti's above claim or are there any special deep meanings here from Prasangika school of thought which emphasizes to establish a position of emptiness through showing the logical consequences of the incorrect position that the questioner already accepts as a common starting ground?
This wiki page link is not a great translation and it is easy to be confused if you don't understand what is being negated/refuted by this line of reasoning: the inherent existence of a chariot. If you understand what is being negated, then
the fourth point becomes: &quot;There is no inherently existing chariot which depends on its parts&quot; and the simile often given is of a lion in the forest.