By John Taber
It is a translation of the bankruptcy on conception of Kumarilabhatta's magnum opus, the Slokavarttika, one of many imperative texts of the Hindu reaction to the feedback of the logical-epistemological institution of Buddhist idea. In an in depth observation, the writer explains the process the argument from verse to verse and alludes to different theories of classical Indian philosophy and different technical issues. Notes to the interpretation and statement cross extra into the old and philosophical history of Kumarila's rules. The publication presents an advent to the background and the improvement of Indian epistemology, a synopsis of Kumarila's paintings and an research of its argument.
Read Online or Download A Hindu Critique of Buddhist Epistemology: Kumarila on Perception: The “Determination of Perception” chapter of Kumarila Bhatta’s Slokavarttika: Translation and commentary PDF
Best nonfiction_12 books
The 1984 category of the finite-dimensional limited uncomplicated Lie algebras over an algebraically closed box of attribute $p>7$ supplied the impetus for a unique yr of Lie Algebras, held on the collage of Wisconsin, Madison, in the course of 1987-88. paintings performed in the course of the distinct 12 months and later on positioned researchers a lot nearer towards an answer of the long-standing challenge of making a choice on the finite-dimensional uncomplicated Lie algebras over an algebraically closed box of attribute $p>7$.
- Patriarch and Folk: The Emergence of Nicaragua, 1798-1858
- Algebraic Invariants of Links
- The Revolution Will Not Be Downloaded. Dissent in the Digital Age
- Festschrift in Honor of Peter Schmidt: Econometric Methods and Applications
- Bridging and Relevance
Additional resources for A Hindu Critique of Buddhist Epistemology: Kumarila on Perception: The “Determination of Perception” chapter of Kumarila Bhatta’s Slokavarttika: Translation and commentary
The result of the function of that cognition qua means of knowledge is that same cognition as the awareness of that form. a and phala, Kum¯arila argues, violates the fundamental distinction of means and result established throughout all experience. The axe by means of which I chop down a tree is different from the felling of the tree; the stick the potter uses to shape a pot is different from the shaping of the pot, and so on. 68 However, the erasing of the distinction between means and result is too great a price to pay for this advantage.
In fact, however, Kum¯arila argues, such cognitions represent things exactly as they are, for property and property-bearer are in fact identical. This is confirmed by the sorts of perceptions we have of objects with properties: we cognize the property-bearer as having the form of the property; that is to say, we cognize property and property-bearer as somehow fused and inseparable. The identifying judgement that the pot is blue is certainly different from the identifying judgement that a crystal is the piece of lac that has been placed next to it and is reflected in it.
The answer to this question presupposes some idea of what, precisely, its function is and, more importantly, what the result, or phala (literally, fruit) of its functioning is. a – just as the felling of the tree is something distinct from the axe. However, the Buddhists believed that means and result could be the same thing seen from different perspectives. a, that is, strictly, the means of knowledge perception, in which case the cognition of the object is the result. a and the cognition of the object the result.
A Hindu Critique of Buddhist Epistemology: Kumarila on Perception: The “Determination of Perception” chapter of Kumarila Bhatta’s Slokavarttika: Translation and commentary by John Taber