Shifting Concepts: The Realignment of Dharmakīrti on Concepts and the Error of Subject/Object Duality in Pratyabhijñā Śaiva Thought

Prueitt, Catherine

doi:10.1007/s10781-016-9297-8

Cited by 13 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…975-1025 C.E. ), who build on Dharmakīrti, take this route and consider that the mere exclusion of subject from object, and vice-versa, makes the subject-object dualism a conceptual construction, this is not Dharmakīrti's view (Prueitt 2017). On the contrary, he maintains that the grasper-grasped duality is nonconceptual.…”

Section: Nonconceptual Awarenessmentioning

confidence: 99%

What’s in a Concept? Conceptualizing the Nonconceptual in Buddhist Philosophy and Cognitive Science

Thompson

2023

Sophia Studies in Cross-Cultural Philosophy of Traditions and Cultures

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

O]ne and the same philosophical issue can be a matter of contention in philosophical centers entirely distinct from each other, widely separated in time and space, and belonging to disparate cultures. And this in its turn provides a compelling argument for two things: first, for the genuine universality of some major philosophical problems; and, second, for the desirability of further comparative study of the respects in which the two philosophical traditions in question may illustrate this universality… (Strawson 1999: 327) A recurrent problem in the philosophical debates over whether there is or can be nonconceptual experience or whether all experience is conceptually structured, mediated, or dependent is the lack of a generally accepted account of what concepts are. Without a precise specification of what a concept is, the notion of nonconceptuality is equally ill defined. This problem cuts across contemporary philosophy and cognitive science as well as classical Indian philosophy (Siderits, Tillemans, and Chakrabarti 2011), and it affects how we go about philosophically "engaging Buddhism" (Garfield 2015) in particular. Buddhist philosophers generally argue that our everyday experience of the world is conceptually constructed. For example, they argue that what appear to us to be stable, enduring entities possessing properties and belonging to kinds are fictions created by the imposition of concepts onto the incessant flux of momentary events. At the same time, "nonconceptual cognition" (nirvikalpa jñāna) marks the limits of conceptuality.But what precisely do "conceptual" and "nonconceptual" mean? Consider that "concept" is routinely used to translate the Sanskrit term, vikalpa; nirvikalpa is accordingly rendered as "nonconceptual." But vikalpa has also been rendered as "imagination" (Matilal 1986: 312-315), "discriminative construction" (Urban and Griffiths 1994), "discursive thought" (Wayman 1992), and "discrimination" (Sharf 2018). Related terms, such as kalpanā (conceptualization/mental construction) and kalpanāpoḍha (devoid of conceptualization/mental construction), have also been rendered in various ways. Besides the question of how to translate these terms in any givenBuddhist philosophical text, how should we relate them to current philosophical or cognitive scientific uses of the term "concept"? More generally, given that the relationship between the conceptual and the nonconceptual has been one of the central and recurring issues for the

show abstract

Section: Nonconceptual Awarenessmentioning

confidence: 99%

What’s in a Concept? Conceptualizing the Nonconceptual in Buddhist Philosophy and Cognitive Science

Thompson

2023

Sophia Studies in Cross-Cultural Philosophy of Traditions and Cultures

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this sense, the world and individual's existence are preceded and led by the Xin. In fact, the environment (including each notion or concept) in Buddhist philosophy refers to the interplay of subjective Xin and objective reality [10].…”

Section: The Cognition Of One's Own Original Xinmentioning

confidence: 99%

On Huineng’s Xinxue of Ch’an and Its Realistic Value

Bing-quan¹

2019

HSS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this sense, it is able to be said that the world and all things in it in people's mind are made by Xin, and that people's Xin is noumenon and root and preexistence for people's existence and the world where they live [6] In fact, the environment that the whole Buddhism defines is the environment that includes subjective and objective factors. Any notion or concept also contains two aspects of the objective and subjective, which is the result of the interaction of both of the objective and subjective [9].…”

Section: The World Is Produced By Xinmentioning

confidence: 99%

On Hui-neng’s Ontology That Regards Xin as the Origin

Bing-quan¹,

Hai-xin²,

Zhang³

2019

IJP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hui-neng, the sixth patriarch of Chinese Ch'an (Zen), traced the origin of the world where human beings exist, and made the explanation with unique Chinese cultural characteristics. He put forward the ontological thought of Xin (mind or heart), which can be reduced to the following two aspects. (1) Human Xin creates the world, which means "the world where human being lives and everything in it are created by human mind." It does not mean that people's Xin create the universe, but creates the world in which they live or the universe in their mind. In other word, the world where everyone lives and all things in it are created by his Xin. Because everyone's Xin is unique, the world created by his Xin is particular. In other words, anyone has his own unique world. (2) "Human Xin is empty". Hui-neng took "Xin is Buddha, Buddha is empty" and "all dharmas are empty" as the core and foundation of his thought, and attributed the Xin down to emptiness. Because he attributed the world's origin to the Xin that was originally empty, the world's origin is able to be come down to emptiness at long last. It is the reason that Xin was empty, so that it is so large enough to hold (or accept) everything and produce everything. Because everything is empty, people do not have to pursue them, they are only external objects. Anyone who thinks in this way would not be troubled by external things. As the result, he keep his mind peaceful and ethereal.

show abstract

Shifting Concepts: The Realignment of Dharmakīrti on Concepts and the Error of Subject/Object Duality in Pratyabhijñā Śaiva Thought

Cited by 13 publications

References 17 publications

What’s in a Concept? Conceptualizing the Nonconceptual in Buddhist Philosophy and Cognitive Science

What’s in a Concept? Conceptualizing the Nonconceptual in Buddhist Philosophy and Cognitive Science

On Huineng’s Xinxue of Ch’an and Its Realistic Value

On Hui-neng’s Ontology That Regards Xin as the Origin

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About