The Background of Indian Philosophy

Transcription

1 The Background of Indian Philosophy Vedic Period Śramaṇa Hinduism Indian philosophy can be divided as three stages. 1. Vedic period. Indian culture and civilization originated with the arrival of the Aryans from central Asia (circa 1750 BCE). Around 800 BCE, ārya moved to east from north. Around 600 BCE, Upaniśad thought was formed, in which there are

2 three theories: 1. Inquiring into Self (ātman) 2. Discovering of transmigration 3. Karma theory In the early Vedic literature, karma meant ritual performance. Later, its definition was changed as "good/bad." 2. Śramaṇa period (ascetics). Śramaṇa was a new religious movement such as Buddha (Gautama, Siddhārtha) and Mahāvīra, the founder of Jainism, and the six systems: 1) Mīmāṃsā 2) Vedānta, 3) Sāṃkhya, 4) Yoga 5) Vaiśeṣika 6) Nyāya. Saṃkhya, Vaiśeṣika and Nyāya appeared before

3 Śramaṇa period. Brahmanic religion mainly concerns with rituals. All leaders of the Śramaṇa claim that they have solutions about the problem of transmigration with the exception of Lokāyata, cārvāka (materialists). For the Upaniśads, ātman and brahman are unity. Ātman is called Individual Soul, Brahman is called the Universe. Vedic tradition believes in polytheism. They believe Brahmā, vāc, Indra, vanṃa, later they believe Srahmā only. Hinduism Hinduism believes in one god śiva (viṣṇu), monotheistic, or Tantric characteristics. In Tantric

4 religion, the practice and study are only limited to the relevant people. It is sacred. Buddhism Early Buddhism -> Sectarian Buddhism (Abhidarmics, Nīkaya/Buddhist Schools, Hinayāna)==>Madhyamaka 1. Early Buddhism: from the enlightenment of the Buddha up to the 100 years passing way of the Buddha (the second council); those doctrines represented in the Pāli nikāya and Āgamas. 2. Abhidharmics: The contrary interpretation of the Buddha s doctrine gave rise to a schism occurring at the Second Council in Vaiśālī, one hundred years after the death of the Buddha. Sthaviravādins and Mahāsāṃghikas was divided. Sthaviravādins further

5 gave arise to Sarvāstivāda school, emphasized the reality of the constituents (dharmas) of the world. Later it becomes so called 18 Buddhist schools. 3. The theory of a person (pudgala) held by Vātsīputrīya and the notion of the existence of all dharmas of Sarvāstivāda paved the way for the arising of Madhyamaka. Madhyamaka criticized Abhidharmic theory of dharmas. By teaching that dharmas are devoid of (śūnya) intrinsic nature (svabhāva). Brief History of Madhyamaka 1. The Early Period This period is marked by two great figures,

6 Nāgārjuna Āryadeva, 2. The Middle Period Tradition reports that eight Indian scholars wrote commentaries on the MMK: 1. Nāgārjuna himself (Akutobhayā, Tib.); 2. Piṅgala (Zhong-lun, Chin.); 3. Buddhapālita (c ; Buddhapālita- Mūlamadhyamakavṛtti, Tib.); 4. Candrakīrti (c ; Prasannapadā, Skt., Tib.); 5. Devaśarman (fifth to six centuries; Dkar-po 'char-ba, Tib. fragment); 6. Guṇamati (fifth to sixth centuries, Tib. fragment); 7. Sthiramati (c ; Ta-sheng chung-kuan shih-lun,

7 Chin.); and 8. Bhavya (Bhāvaviveka; c ; Prajñāpradīpa, Tib. Ch.). Philosophers of the middle period of Indian Mādhyamikas can be characterized as follows: 1. they wrote their own commentaries on the MMK; 2. they were divided into the Prāsaṅgika and the Svātantrika, according to whether they adopted either prasaṅga (reductio ad absurdum) or svatantra-anumāna (independent syllogism) as a means for establishing the truth of the Madhyamaka philosophy; and they regarded the Yogācāra school as their opponent and criticized its philosophy.

8 3. The Last Period Philosophers of the last period were influenced by Dharmakīrti, almost all of them belonged to the lineage of the Svātantrika by Tibetans. In contrast, the later Tibetan scholars called Bhāvaviveka a Sautrāntika-Mādhamika-Svātantrika, as he adopted the Sautrāntika theory of the imperceptible but real external world from the standpoint of truth on the conventional level (saṃvṛrti). China and Japan. It was Kumārajīva ( ) who introduced Nāgārjuna s philosophy into China by translating the

9 MMK, Twelve Gates Treatise and Hundred Treatise, and Da-zhi-du-lun (Prajñāpāramitā upadeśa). Chi-tsang ( ) of the Sui dynasty, regarding the thoughts of Nāgārjuna and Āryadeva as the core of Buddhist doctrine, founded the San-lun tradition. He propagated the Middle Way and the eight kinds of negation that appear in the solution verse of the MMK. The tradition flourished during the early T ang period but began to decline after Hsuan-tsang s transmission of the works of the Yogācāra school to China. Ekan, a Korean monk, introduced the San-lun doctrine to Japan, where, as the Sanronshū, it enjoyed a brief efflorescence as one of the six schools of the Nara period (seventh century).

10 Madhyamaka Basic Doctrines According to Nagao, there are two main themes in Madhyamaka: Madhyamaka is the identification of dependent coarising with emptiness. Its salient feature is not merely a discourse on emptiness; nor is it simply an explanation of dependent co-arising. The unique achievement of Madhyamaka lies in its unification and synthesis of both these elements. Madhyamaka understanding of two truths of the highest meaning and worldly convention reflects the identification of the above theme and therefore must

11 be included as central to our consideration of Madhyamaka philosophy. Śūnyatā All dharmas are empty of svabhāva; they do not have any essence or substance. But this is not a case of nihilism (nāstivāda) which denies everything, but a clarification of dependent co-arising. Nāgārjuna reclaimed the doctrine of dependent coarising as a doctrine of emptiness. In the early Buddhism, dharmas were not empty.

12 Middle Path 1. Philosophic ==> Kaccāyanagotta sutta Avoid Two extremes: 1. existence (atthitā) (Vedas) 2. non-existence (natthitā) (Materialists) Middle Path => Right view ==> not attached to the view of the I. ==> avoid two extremes (everything exists, everything does not exist) ==> dependent arising. (Kalupahana, p. 10) 2. Practical ==> Dhammacakkappavattana sutta Avoid Two extremes: 1. self-indulgence (kāmasukhallikānuyoga)

13 2. self-mortification (attakilamathānyoga) Middle Path => The Noble eightfold path (ario aṭṭaṅgiko maggo) Nāgārjuna s philosophy is a mere restatement of the empiricist and pragmatic philosophy of the Buddha, the form of Buddhism introduced into China would also be the same as the original teachings of the Buddha with no paradigm changes. (Kalupahana, p. 8) 250 years after the Buddha and 300 years before Nāgārjuna, Moggalīputtatissa just like Nāgārjuna did not accept the interpretation of Buddha s teaching by Sarvāstivāda and Sautrāntika. --The Points of Controversy (Kathāvatthu) (Kalupahana, 23, 24)

14 Kalupahana s interpretation of MMK does not follow Candrakirti who emphasized the reduction ad absurdum (prāsaṅgika) method, but be more sympathetic to the interpretations offered by Bhāvaviveka. (Kalupahana, 26) David J. Kalupahana Candrakīrti ==> Vedāntic Nāgārjuna ==> Buddha