Skip to main content
Log in

Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge and His Successors on the Classification of Arguments by Consequence (thal ʾgyur) Based on the Type of the Logical Reason

  • Published:
Journal of Indian Philosophy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The Tibetan Buddhist logician Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge (1109–1169) devoted a large part of his discussion on argumentation to arguments by consequence (thal ʾgyur/thal ba). Phya pa distinguishes in his analysis arguments by consequence that merely refute the opponent and arguments by consequence that qualify as probative. The latter induce a correct direct proof which corresponds to the reverse form of the argument by consequence. This paper deals with Phya pa’s classification of probative consequences based on the type of the logical reason involved. I first establish the basis of Phya pa’s classification—the typology of logical reasons in inference-for-oneself—with a special attention to logical reasons consisting in the ‘apprehension of something incompatible [with the negandum]’ (ʾgal ba dmigs pa) and among them the specific case of the ‘apprehension of the cause of something incompatible [with the negandum]’ (ʾgal baʾi rgyu dmigs pa). The treatment of the latter is shown to be instrumental in Phya pa’s classification, as well as in explaining the divergences that occur in the models adopted by his successors, such as gTsang nag pa brTson ʾgrus seng ge (?–after 1195) and mTshur ston gZhon nu seng ge (ca. 1150–1210). Turning to Phya pa’s effective application of this typology when he resorts himself to arguments by consequence, I examine Phya pa’s rephrasing, in the form of four arguments by consequence, of the discussion on the relation between the two realities found in the Saṃdhinirmocanasūtra and relate it to a parallel discussion in an earlier Madhyamaka work by rGya dmar ba Byang chub grags. I compare the variant (at times divergent) versions of these four arguments in three Madhyamaka works of Phya pa and show that the differences pertaining to the identification of the type of the logical reason result from apparently insignificant variations in the formulation of each of the arguments. In the conclusion, I discuss the potential philosophical or practical interest of such a classification.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Tibetan Works

  • dKaʾ gnas rNgog Lo tsā ba Blo ldan shes rab, Tshad ma rnam nges kyi dkaʾ baʾi gnas rnam par bshad pa. Ed. by Sun Wenjing, Qinghai, 1994: Krung goʾi bod kyi shes rig dpe skrun khang.

  • bKaʼ gdams gsung ʾbum bKaʼ gdams gsung ʾbum phyogs bsgrigs thengs dang po/gnyis pa/gsum pa. Ed. dPal brtsegs bod yig dpe rnying zhib ʼjug khang. Vols. 1–30, Chengdu, 2006; vols. 31–60, Chengdu, 2007: vols. 61–90; Chengdu, 2009: Si khron mi rigs dpe skrun khang.

  • sGron ma mTshur ston gZhon nu seng ge, Tshad ma shes rab sgron ma. Ed. by P. Hugon. Vienna, 2004: Arbeitskreis für Tibetische und Buddhistische Studien (Wiener Studien zur Tibetologie und Buddhismuskunde 60).

  • sTong thun Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge, dBu ma de kho na nyid kyi snying po. A = In Phya pa chos kyi seṅ ge – dBu ma śar gsum gyi stoṅ thun. Ed. by H. Tauscher. Vienna, 1999: Arbeitskreis für Tibetische und Buddhistische Studien (Wiener Studien zur Tibetologie und Buddhismuskunde 43); B = In bKaʼ gdams gsung ʼbum, vol. 7, 15–129.

  • bDen gnyis ʾgrel ba Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge, dBu ma bden gnyis kyi ʾgrel ba / dBu ma bden pa gnyis rnam par bshad pa yi ge nyung ngus gzhung gsal bar byed pa. In bKaʾ gdams gsung ʾbum, vol. 6, 186–250.

  • bDen gnyis rnam bshad rGya dmar ba Byang chub grags, bDen gnyis rnam bshad ṭikka. In bKaʾ gdams gsung ʾbum, vol. 19, 247–316.

  • bsDus pa gTsang nag pa brTson ʾgrus seng ge, Tshad ma rnam par nges paʼi ṭi ka legs bshad bsdus pa. Otani University Tibetan Works Series, Volume II. Kyoto, 1989: Rinsen Book Co.

  • rNam rgyal Chu mig pa Seng ge dpal, gZhan gyi phyogs thams cad las rnam par rgyal ba. A = bKaʾ gdams gsung ʾbum, vol. 87, 315–448; B = bKaʼ gdams gsung ʼbum, vol. 45, 11–163.

  • sNang baʾi ʾgrel ba Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge, dBu ma snang baʾi ʾgrel pa rgya cher bshad pa (editorial title). In bKaʾ gdams gsung ʾbum, vol. 6, 265–428.

  • dBu maʾi de kho na nyid rGya dmar pa Byang chub grags, dBu ma’i de kho na nyid gtan la dbab pa/dBu maʾi de kho na nyid rnam par spyod pa. In bKaʼ gdams gsung ʼbum, vol. 31, 8–67.

  • Mun sel Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge, Tshad ma yid kyi mun pa sel pa. In bKaʼ gdams gsung ʼbum, vol. 8, 434–626.

  • Tshad bsdus Anonymous (attributed to Klong chen rab ʾbyams pa). Ed. by Padma tshul khrims. Chengdu, 2000: Si khron mi rigs dpe skrun khang.

  • ʾOd zer Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge, Tshad ma rnam par nges paʾi ʾgrel bshad yi ge dang rigs paʾi gnad la ʾjug paʾi shes rab kyi ʾod zer. In bKaʾ gdams gsung ʾbum, vol. 8, 35–427.

  • Rigs gter Sa skya Paṇḍita Kun dgaʾ rgyal mtshan, Tshad ma rigs paʾi gter and Tshad ma rigs paʾi gter gyi rang gi ʾgrel pa. Ed. by Nor brang o rgyan in Tshad ma rigs paʾi gter gyi rang gi ʾgrel pa. Lhasa, 1989: Bod ljongs mi dmangs dpe skrun khang.

  • Rigs gter nyi ma Glo bo mkhan chen bSod nams lhun grub, sDe bdun mdo dang bcas paʾi dgongs ʾgrel tshad ma rigs paʾi gter gyi ʾgrel paʾi rnam bshad rigs lam gsal baʾi nyi ma. Ed. by rDo rje rgyal po in Tshad ma rigs gter gyi ʾgrel pa. Qinghai, 1991: Krung goʾi bod kyi shes rig dpe skrun khang, 1–262.

  • Rigs gter pham byed gSer mdog paṇ chen Śākya mchog ldan, Tshad ma rigs paʾi gter dgongs rgyan lung dang rigs paʾi ʾkhor los lugs ngan pham byed. In The Complete Works (gSung ʾbum) of gSer mdog paṇ chen Śākya mchog ldan. Ed. Kunzang Tobgey, Timphu, 1975 [Reprint: Nagwang Topgyal, Delhi, 1988], vol. 9 (Ta).

  • Rigs pa grub pa ʾU yug pa rigs paʾi seng ge, bsTan bcos tshad ma rigs paʾi gter gyi rgyan rigs pa grub pa. In gSung ʾbum / ʾU yug pa rigs paʾi seng ge, vol. 1. Beijing, 2007: Krung goʾi bod rig pa dpe skrun khang.

  • gSal byed gTsang drug pa rDo rje ʾod zer, Yang dag rigs paʾi gsal byed sgron ma. In bKaʾ gdams gsung ʾbum, vol. 47, 11–165.

Indian Works

  • PVin 2 Dharmakīrti, Pramāṇaviniścaya, chapter 2. PVin 2-Skt = Sanscrit text ed. by E. Steinkellner in Dharmakīrti’s Pramāṇaviniścayaḥ, Chapters 1 and 2, Beijing-Vienna, 2007: China Tibetology Publishing House / Austrian Academy of Sciences Press (Sanskrit Texts from the Tibetan Autonomous Region No. 2). PVin2-Tib = Tibetan translation ed. by E. Steinkellner in Dharmakīrti’s Pramāṇaviniścayaḥ. Zweites Kapitel: Svārthānumānam. Teil I. Tibetischer Text und Sanskrittexte. Wien, 1973: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.

  • PVinṬ Dharmottara, Pramāṇaviniścayaṭīkā. PVinṬ-Skt = copy of the Sanscrit manuscript. PVinṬ-Tib. = Tibetan translation in D4227.

  • PVṬ Śaṅkaranandana, Pramāṇavārttikaṭīkā. Tib. in D4223.

  • Bālāvatāratarka Jitāri, Bālāvatāratarka. Tib. in D4263 Zhe 325b1–336b2.

  • MĀ Kamalaśīla, Madhyamakāloka. Tib. in D3887.

  • SNS Saṃdhinirmocanasūtra. L’Explication des Mystères. Ed. et trad. par E. Lamotte. Louvain, Paris, 1935: Bureaux du Recueil.

Modern Studies

  • Akahane, R. (2010). Three Tibetan Commentaries on dBu ma bden gnyis (in Japanese). Report of the Japanese Association for Tibetan Studies, 56, 77–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hugon, P. (2002). Le rTags kyi rnam gzhag rigs lam gsal baʾi sgron me de Glo bo mkhan chen bSod nams lhun grub. Un manuel tibétain d’introduction à la logique. Edition et traduction annotée. Wien: Arbeitskreis für Tibetische und Buddhistische Studien (Wiener Studien zur Tibetologie und Buddhismuskunde 55).

  • Hugon, P. (2013). Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge on argumentation by consequence (thal ’gyur): The nature, function, and form of consequence statements. Journal of Indian Philosophy, 41(6), 671–702. doi:10.1007/s10781-013-9205-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hugon, P. (forthcoming a). Universals, Demons’ Pots, and Demons’ permanent pots: Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge on unestablished subjects in arguments by consequence. In S. McClintock, H. Lasic, P. McAllister, & B. Kellner (Eds.), Proceedings of the fifth international Dharmakīrti conference held in Heidelberg, August 26–30, 2014.

  • Hugon, P. (forthcoming b). Translations that make sense. In K.-D. Mathes (Ed.), Proceedings of the translation workshop held in Vienna, Mai 21, 2014.

  • Hugon, P. (forthcoming c). Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge on Argumentation by Consequence (thal ’gyur) (2): The analysis of the correspondence between a consequence and its reverse form and the thirteenfold typology of consequences.

  • Iwata, T. (1991). On the classification of three kinds of reason in Pramāṇaviniścaya III—reduction of reasons to svabhāvahetu and kāryahetu. In E. Steinkellner (Ed.), Studies in the Buddhist Epistemological Tradition. Proceedings of the Second International Dharmakīrti Conference, Vienna, June 1116, 1989 (pp. 85–96). Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.

  • Kajiyama, Y. (1998). An introduction to Buddhist philosophy. An annotated translation of the Tarkabhāṣā of Mokṣākaragupta. Wien: Arbeitskreis für Tibetische und Buddhistische Studien (Wiener Studien zur Tibetologie und Buddhismuskunde 42).

  • Kellner, K. (1997). Types of incompatibility (ʾgal ba) and types of non-cognition (ma/mi dmigs) in early Tibetan tshad ma literature. In H. Krasser, M. T. Much, E. Steinkellner, & H. Tauscher (Eds.), Tibetan studies: Proceedings of the 7th seminar of the international association for Tibetan Studies, Graz 1995 (pp. 495–510). Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.

  • Moriyama, S. (2010). The relationship between the two truths, bDen pa gnyis, According to Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge, and the Influence of His Interpretation on the dGe lugs pa Tradition. In M. Kark & H. Lasic (Eds.), Studies in the philosophy and history of Tibet [PIATS 2006: Proceedings of the Eleventh Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies. Königswinter 2006] (pp. 131‒143). Halle: International Institute for Tibetan and Buddhist Studies GmbH.

  • Onoda, S. (1986). Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge’s classifications of Thal ʼgyur. Berliner Indologische Studien, 2, 65–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Onoda, S. (1992). Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge’s Theory of ʾgal ba. In Z. Yamaguchi & S. Ihara (Eds.), Buddhist philosophy and literature: Tibetan studies: Proceedings of the 5th seminar of the international association for Tibetan Studies, Narita 1989 (Vol. 1, pp. 197–202). Narita: Naritasan Shinshoji.

  • Onoda, S. (1994). Classifications of logical mark of non-cognition in Tibetan buddhism. In P. Kvaerne (Ed.), Tibetan studies: Proceedings of the 6th seminar of the international association for Tibetan Studies, Fagerness 1992 (Vol. 2, pp. 602–611). Oslo: Institute for Comparative Research in Human Culture.

  • Sørensen, P. K., & Hazod, G. in Cooperation with T. Gyalbo (2007). Rulers on the celestial plain. Ecclesiastic and secular Hegemony in Medieval Tibet. A study of Tshal Gung-thang. Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften (Denkschriften der philosophisch-historischen Klasse 361).

  • Steinkellner, E. (1981). Miszellen zur erkenntnistheoretisch-logischen Schule des Buddhismus: III. Zur Liste von sechzehn Arten der Nichtbeobachtung. Wiener Studien für die Kunde Südasiens, 25, 213–216.

  • Tauscher, H. (1999). Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge’s opinion on prasaṅga in his dBu ma’i shar gsum gyi stong thun. In Sh. Katsura (Ed.), Dharmakīrti’s thought and its impact on Indian and Tibetan philosophy (pp. 387–393). Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.

  • Tauscher, H. (2003). Phya pa chos kyi seng ge as a Svātantrika. In G. B. J. Dreyfus & S. L. McClintock (Eds.), The Svātantrika-Prāsaṅgika Distinction. What difference does a difference make? (pp. 207–255) Boston: Wisdom Publications.

  • Tauscher, H. (2009‒2010). Remarks on Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge and his Madhyamaka Treatises. The Tibet Journal, 34.3–4 and 35.1‒2, 1–35.

  • van der Kuijp, L. (2003). A treatise on Buddhist epistemology and logic attributed to Klong chen Rab ʼbyams pa (1308–1364) and its place in Indo-Tibetan intellectual history. Journal of Indian Philosophy, 31, 381–437.

Download references

Acknowledgments

The work on this paper has been generously supported by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) in the context of the project P23422-G15 “Early bKaʾ gdams pa scholasticism.” I wish to thank my colleague Horst Lasic for his careful reading of the paper and his relevant comments, as well as the two anonymous reviewers for their valuable suggestions. I would also like to express my gratitude to Ritsu Akahane and Jongbok Yi for sharing useful material for the study of rGya dmar ba and Phya pa’s Madhyamaka views.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pascale Hugon.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hugon, P. Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge and His Successors on the Classification of Arguments by Consequence (thal ʾgyur) Based on the Type of the Logical Reason. J Indian Philos 44, 883–938 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10781-015-9285-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10781-015-9285-4

Keywords

Navigation