To some, the mere mention of dialectics will conjure the image of Hegel. Amongst modern scholars, his reputation is maintained, his dialectical method made infamous by his own usage and strengthened through its versatility: it has expanded beyond philosophy, used within the fields of history, economics, and theology. However, Nāgārjuna, while afforded a space, has nonetheless faced criticism ever since his introduction into Western scholarship. Despite some voices rising in his defence as a post-Kantian thinker, pioneered by T.R.V. Murti and F. Stcherbatsky, a significant opposition has thrown the accusations of deviant logic and nihilism to rebuke the Madhyamika’s serious philosophical discourse. Light will be shed on Nāgārjuna’s system, guided by insight into his context, the purpose of his speculation, as well as following the direction the Madhyamika Prāsaṅgika school takes – which is the tradition most aligned with Nāgārjuna’s method and who heralded him as their primary source alongside Buddha. In so doing, the claim that Nāgārjuna is a dialectician will be defended and the doors opened for a comparison against Hegel, thereby showing the heights achieved and cementing the advanced level of Indian philosophy.