Sātmaka, Nairātmya, and A-Nairātmya: Dharmakīrti's Counter-Argument Against the Proof of Ātman [Book Review]
Graduate studies at Western
Journal of Indian Philosophy 39 (4-5):391-410 (2011)
|Abstract||Ātman (soul) and Nairātmya (no soul) are, for the Brahmanical schools and the Buddhists respectively, equally fundamental tenets which neither side can concede to the other. Among the 16 formulations presented by Uddyotakara, the fifteenth, which is a proof of Ātman and is originally an indirect proof ( avīta/āvīta ), is presented in a prasaṅga -style, and contains double negation ( na nairātmyam ) in the thesis. However, it is perhaps Dharmakīrti who first transformed it into a normal style ( sātmakam ). He is well aware of the law of excluded middle, and insisits that the negation is paryudāsa . On the Nyāya side, Uddyotakara at least seems to be unaware of the law of the logical equivalence of contraposition concerning pervasion ( vyāpti ). After Uddyotakara, however, Vyoman (Vyomaśiva), Bhāsarvajña and Vācaspatimiśra, all seem to be well aware of it. Dharmakīrti, in his conter-argument against the proof of ātman , discusses the negative expressions ‘‘ nairātmya ” and ‘‘ a-nairātmya ” Dharmakīrti here uses two logical arguments skillfully and tactically. As a critic of both the authenticity of the Veda and the existence of ātman , he insists on the theory of dichotomy and the equivalence of anvaya and vyatireka , whereas as an apologist he denies the application of these theories to the relation between the existence of ātman and the concept of nairātmya , because for him as a Buddhist the latter is not a negative but essentially positive state of affairs|
|Keywords||Ātman Prasaṅga Kevalavyatirekin Nairātmya Paryudāsa Contraposition Dichotomy|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Kyō Kanō (2001). Pariśesa, Prasanga, Kevalavyatirekin – the Logical Structure of the Proof of Ātman. Journal of Indian Philosophy 29 (4):405-422.
Dan Arnold (2008). Dharmakīrti's Dualism: Critical Reflections on a Buddhist Proof of Rebirth. Philosophy Compass 3 (5):1079-1096.
Narendra V. Soosania (1974). Dialogues on the Ātman: Conversations with Contemporary Hindu Monks on the Nature and the Experience of the Ātman. [N. V. Soosania].
Miri Albahari (2002). Against No-Ātman Theories of Anattā. Asian Philosophy 12 (1):5 – 20.
Baldev Raj Sharma (1972). The Concept of Ātman in the Principal Upaniṣads, in the Perspective of the Saṁhitās. New Delhi,Dinesh Publications.
Satchidanandendra Saraswati (1970). The Vision of Atman: Yajnavalkya's Initiation of Maitreyi Into the Intuition of Reality. Adhyatma Prakasha Karyalaya.
Narendra V. Soosania (1974). The Atman: An Ontological Autobiography. Lund,[the Author, Box 708, 22 00 7 Lund].
Narendra V. Soosania (1974). On the Nature and the Experience of the Ātman. Lund[Privately Printed by N. V. Soosania, Box 708, 22 00 7].
S. R. Bhatt (2005). The Concepts of Ātman and Paramātman in Indian Thought. Gujarat Vidyasabha, B. J. Institute of Learning & Research.
Roger R. Jackson (1999). Atheology and Buddhalogy In Dharmakīrti's Pramānavārttika. Faith and Philosophy 16 (4):472-505.
Chris Mortensen (2004). Dharmakirti and Priest on Change. Philosophy East and West 54 (1):20-28.
Mark B. Woodhouse (1978). Consciousness and Brahman-Atman. The Monist 61 (January):109-124.
Added to index2011-07-20
Total downloads12 ( #101,226 of 739,347 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,538 of 739,347 )
How can I increase my downloads?