David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Indian Philosophy 18 (1):81-91 (1990)
In the various texts the phrase “something does not exist there” was interpreted in the following way: “elephants, cows, etc.” (Cūlasuññata-sutta) “the imagined, or conceptualized” (Yogācāra tradition), “the five skandhas, the elements, the sensory fields as eternal and solid entities” (Abhidharmasamuccaya), “all conventional phenomena” (Dolpo-pa), “inherent reality” (rGyal-tshab-rje), “accidental pollution with regard to the tathāgatagarbha (Gung-thang). The phrase “something that remains there does exist as a real existent” was interpreted also in different ways: “monks, palace, world, etc” (Cūlasuññata-sutta), “the perfect, or accomplished” (Yogācāra tradition), “the Selflessness” (Abhidharmasamuccaya), “the perfect, emptiness exists eternally” (Dol-po-pa), “the lack of inherent reality” (rGyal-tshab-rje), “the purity of tathāgatagarbha 's nature” (Gung-thang).This survey shows that the Buddhist tradition interpreted the same scriptural sentence in radically different ways. Each commentator attempted to present the scriptural statement in a way which suited best his own philosophical view. It is evident that no agreement with regard to the exegesis of this sentence can be obtained. After all, the Buddha has set up a model in the (Cūlasuññata-sutta), where he interpreted the statement in a process-manner. There is no definitive description of voidness
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Tom J. F. Tillemans (1984). Two Tibetan Texts on the “Neither One nor Many” Argument for Śūnyatā. Journal of Indian Philosophy 12 (4):357-388.
Guy Bugault (2000). The Immunity of Śūnyatā: Is It Possible to Understand Madhyamakakārikās, 4,8-9? [REVIEW] Journal of Indian Philosophy 28 (4):385-397.
Glyn Richards (1978). Śūnyatā: Objective Referent or Via Negativa? Religious Studies 14 (2):251 - 260.
Michael G. Barnhart (1994). Śūnyatā, Textualism, and Incommensurability. Philosophy East and West 44 (4):647-658.
David Efird (2010). Is Timothy Williamson a Necessary Existent? In Bob Hale & Aviv Hoffmann (eds.), Modality: Metaphysics, Logic, and Epistemology. Oup Oxford.
Thomas Hofweber (2000). Quantification and Non-Existent Objects. In T. Hofweber & A. Everett (eds.), Empty Names, Fiction, and the Puzzles of Non-Existence. Csli Publications.
Jonathan Tallant (2010). There's No Existent Like 'No Existence' Like No Existent I Know. Philosophical Studies 148 (3):387-400.
Alessandro Tomasi (2008). Technology From the Standpoint of Sunyata. Asian Philosophy 18 (3):197 – 212.
Shōhei Ichimura (2001). Buddhist Critical Spirituality: Prajñā and Śūnyatā. Motilal Banarsidass Publishers.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads9 ( #157,093 of 1,100,994 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #177,033 of 1,100,994 )
How can I increase my downloads?