Ontological nihilism is not nothingness. It is meaninglessness; that whatever is has no purpose, serves no design, means - nothing.
I wonder if you have read about Elizabeth, Princess of Bohemia's correspondence with Descartes. Even in his own lifetime, Descartes substance dualism was shown to be untenable.
On the history and emergence of nihilism: Who were the famous moral nihilists (philosophers) of 20th and 19th century?
I would link both Yogacara-Mahayana Zen, and Postmodernist Antifoundationalism, to at least Epistemological Nihilism: How come nihilism is so popular today?
I'm not convinced nihilism can be matched to ontology, because ontology is the study of being, and nihilism is a value claim that must be subsequent to that and a o t what is found to be. Whatever is, is simply whatever we experience, whatever is arising, however we experience it. Whether or not the inferences we draw are illusions, deceptions, confusions, belongs to epistemology.
The most substantial critique of the Cogito is surely the Private Language Argument. We don't have abstractions privately, but only as part of our initiation into a collective intelligence that predates and will outlive us that we call language.
I don't think it's coherent to claim bosons aren't a category, because their indistinguishability is their defining property. That is about ontology, the self-evident pattern of what is. To take up a stance of nihilism to that is just to deny regularities in perceptions. To say it has no intrinsic or deeper meaning or significanxe, outside of local human communities that make agreemenrs so, no problem.