Switch to: References

Citations of:

A note on Nagarjuna and the Naiyayikas

In Musashi Tachikawa, Shoun Hino & Toshihiro Wada (eds.), Three Mountains and Seven Rivers: Prof. Musashi Tachikawa's Felicitation Volume. Motilal Banarsidass Publishers (2004)

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Authority in Early Prāsaṅgika Madhyamaka.Kevin Vose - 2010 - Journal of Indian Philosophy 38 (6):553-582.
    This paper examines the role of pramāṇa in Jayānanda’s commentary to Candrakīrti’s Madhyamakāvatāra. As the only extant Indian commentary on any of Candrakīrti’s works (available only in Tibetan translation), written in the twelfth century when Candrakīrti’s interpretation of Madhyamaka first became widely valued, Jayānanda’s Madhyamakāvatāraṭīkā is crucial to our understanding of early Prāsaṅgika thought. In the portions of his text examined here, Jayānanda offers a pointed critique of both svatantra inferences and the broader Buddhist epistemological movement. In developing this critique, (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Language, Understanding and Reality: A Study of Their Relation in a Foundational Indian Metaphysical Debate. [REVIEW]Eviatar Shulman - 2012 - Journal of Indian Philosophy 40 (3):339-369.
    This paper engages with Johaness Bronkhorst’s recognition of a “correspondence principle” as an underlying assumption of Nāgārjuna’s thought. Bronkhorst believes that this assumption was shared by most Indian thinkers of Nāgārjuna’s day, and that it stimulated a broad and fascinating attempt to cope with Nāgārjuna’s arguments so that the principle of correspondence may be maintained in light of his forceful critique of reality. For Bronkhorst, the principle refers to the relation between the words of a sentence and the realities they (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Who is that Masked Man? Candrakīrti’s Opponent in Prasannapadā I 55.11–58.13.Anne MacDonald - 2011 - Journal of Indian Philosophy 39 (6):677-694.
    The paper aims to determine the identity of an unnamed opponent in a passage of the first chapter of the Prasannapadā whose school affiliation eluded traditional Tibetan scholars and is disputed by modern scholars. The individual(s) in question, whose fundamental ontological views are made evident in the passage’s opening objection as presented by Candrakīrti, has/have alternatively been identified as the Mādhyamika Bhāviveka, as representatives of the Naiyāyika school and, following Stcherbatsky, as Dignāga and/or later members of his epistemological-logical tradition. Although (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark