Asian Philosophy 13 (2 & 3):115 – 129 (2003)
|Abstract||Those who claim the concept of enlightenment (nibānna) has not evolved must rest their claim on a strong distinction between changing and variant interpretations of the concept on the one hand, and what the term really means or refers to on the other. This paper examines whether all evolution of the concept of enlightenment is best seen as interpretive variation rather than as embodying real notional change - a change in the reference of the term. It is implausible to suppose that the enlightenment has not evolved, and also implausible to suppose that the notion of enlightenment is the same across various sects of Buddhism. Zen enlightenment is not the same as Theravada enlightenment. Two points of controversy about nibnna are discussed and Christian attitudes toward scripture are compared with those in Buddhism.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Hsin-Chun Huang (2009). Epistemological Approach to Chán Enlightenment: A Philosophical Study. Eastern Book Linkers.
Darrin M. McMahon (2001). Enemies of the Enlightenment: The French Counter-Enlightenment and the Making of Modernity. Oxford University Press.
Tzvetan Todorov (2008). The Spirit of the Enlightenment. Critical Horizons 9 (2):177-187.
Stephen Miller (2001). Three Deaths and Enlightenment Thought: Hume, Johnson, Marat. Associated University Presses.
Graeme Garrard (2006). Counter-Enlightenments: From the Eighteenth-Century to the Present. Routledge.
Charles W. Mills (2002). Defending the Radical Enlightenment. Social Philosophy Today 18:9-29.
Peter Hanns Reill (1975). The German Enlightenment and the Rise of Historicism. University of California Press.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads18 ( #68,478 of 556,773 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #64,754 of 556,773 )
How can I increase my downloads?