The Characteristics of Buddhist Logic Shown in the Negation Method of Wonhyo- Implicative Negation and Apoha in Focus

2018 ◽  
Vol 47 ◽  
pp. 69-96
Author(s):  
Tae soo Kim
Keyword(s):  
Buddhist Logic

Dharmakīrti (c.600–60)

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ernst Steinkellner
Keyword(s):  
Buddhist Epistemology ◽  
Buddhist Logic ◽  
Indian Buddhism ◽  
Strong Emphasis ◽  
Indian Thought ◽  
Late Works

Dharmakīrti represents the philosophical apex of the Buddhist contribution to Indian thought of the post-systematic period. On the basis of Dignāga’s late works he developed a system of epistemology with a strong emphasis on logic, propounding it both as an explanation and defence of Dignāga’s thought. His logic, particularly, was new; in order to create a system of Buddhist logic proper, it clearly established the general Indian idea that logical relations are founded in reality. Buddhist epistemology as shaped by Dharmakīrti became a strong and influential rational tradition in late Indian Buddhism and has been studied and continued in Tibet up to the present time.

Buddhist Logic before Diṅnāga

1929 ◽  
Vol 61 (4) ◽  
pp. 870-871
Author(s):  
G. Tucci
Keyword(s):  
Buddhist Logic

Notes on the Nyāya-praveśa by Śaṅikarasvāmin

1931 ◽  
Vol 63 (2) ◽  
pp. 381-413 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giuseppe Tucci
Keyword(s):  
The Other ◽  
Indian Logic ◽  
Buddhist Logic

The Nyāya-praveśa by Śaṅkarasvāmin, recently printed in the Gaekwad's Oriental Series of Baroda, is a text of great interest for the study of Indian logic; in fact, in spite of its conciseness it contains an extremely clear exposition of the Buddhist logic as it was taught in India, at least among some particular schools, as those of the Yogācāras and the Sautrāntikas in that lapse of time which separates Diṅnāga from Dharmakīrti. That the book was written after Diṅnāga, but before Dharmakīrti, is proved by its peculiarities, which in many a point differentiate the theories held by the author from those maintained by the other two great logicians already quoted.

scholarly journals Ontology of the three worlds in the context of Buddhist philosophy

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-14
Author(s):  
Petr Dmitrievich Abramov
Keyword(s):  
Third World ◽  
Quantum Physics ◽  
Thought Experiment ◽  
The Other ◽  
Dalai Lama ◽  
Buddhist Logic ◽  
The Third ◽  
The One ◽  
The Third World ◽  
Energy Processes

Dalai Lama notes that the Buddhist system of the objects of the realm largely coincides with such developed by Karl Popper. The subject of this article is ontology of the three worlds. The goal lies in analysis of the components of this ontology, demonstration of its prospects and advantages over dualism. First come matter or physical objects; second come mind, subjective reality; third come abstract concepts. Any object of reality is reduced to one of the three worlds and is refracted in a peculiar way in the other two. The third world is the mediator between others worlds; and the autonomous sphere that is not fully conditioned by them. We experience through representations, rather than directly, which is depicted in Buddhism as the image of a gloved hand. The knowledge concentrated in the third world contribute to development of consciousness. A thought experiment with the central and peripheral atoms reveal that there are no indivisible elements and everything exists in mutually dependent, while Buddhist logic substantiates that love and compassion can develop boundlessly. The concept of interdependent existence and non-substantiality of things draws Buddhism and quantum physics closer together. On the one hand, consciousness cannot be naturalized, reduced to matter; and on the other hand, it is inextricable from the energy processes. The conclusion is made that the three fundamental attributes of consciousness in Buddhism outlined by Thubten Gyats (13th Dalai Lama) – subjectivity, intentionality, and reflexivity, can be complemented by another two –  ability to continuously develop virtues, positive traits, and t interdependence between consciousness and subtle forms of matter. The three realms of Buddhism are such only on the phenomenal level; however, on the noumenal level, which unlike Buddhism is not recognized by Popper, is not the trinity, but the unity.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document