Religious Studies 18 (2):151-158 (1982)

Frank J. Hoffman
West Chester University
In what follows I argue for two interrelated theses: that early Buddhism is not a form of empiricism, and that consequently there is no basis for an early Buddhist apologetic which contrasts an empirical early Buddhism with either a metaphysical Hinduism on the one hand, or with a baseless Christianity on the other
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1017/S0034412500013743
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 64,262
External links

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.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Buddhist Functionalism—Instrumentality Reaffirmed.David Scott - 1995 - Asian Philosophy 5 (2):127 – 149.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

The Buddhist Empiricism Thesis.Frank J. Hoffman - 1982 - Religious Studies 18 (2):151 - 158.
Buddhist Belief ‘In’.F. J. Hoffman - 1985 - Religious Studies 21 (3):381-387.
Rethinking Experience in Early Buddhism.Frank J. Hoffman - 2003 - In Mahinda Deegalle (ed.), Pali Buddhism. Jain Publishing Co..
Rationality and Mind in Early Buddhism.Frank J. Hoffman - 1987, 1992, 2002 - Motilal Banarsidass.
On Nagarjuna.Frank J. Hoffman - 1976 - Middle Way: Journal of the London Buddhist Society (3).
“Contemporary Buddhist Philosophy”.Frank J. Hoffman - 1997 - In Brian Carr and Indira Mahalingam (ed.), Companion Encyclopedia of Asian Philosophy. Routledge.


Added to PP index

Total views
18 ( #590,731 of 2,455,622 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
4 ( #179,379 of 2,455,622 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes