Herbert V. Guenther points out John Hosper’s suggestion that one
should replace the term “idealism” in philosophy, which is a misnomer, by
“Idea-ism,” or, by “Mentalism” (as suggested by C. D. Broad). “Idealism” is
said to be “the doctrine that the nature of the Universe is such that those
characteristics which are ‘highest’ and most valuable must either be manifested
eternally or must be
manifested in greater and greater intensity, and in wider and wider extent as
time goes on.” According to Guenther, if we understand “Idealism” in this
sense, all Buddhists have been idealists. See Guenther 1989: 169, n. 14.
(Personal blog of Dorji Wangchuk (Kuliśeśvara) for philosophical reflection, speculation, and deliberation)
Saturday, May 12, 2012
Sunday, April 29, 2012
Mahāyāna Perfectionism?
It is perhaps undeniable that the theories and practices of Mahāyāna Buddhism center around the so-called six or ten perfections (pāramitā: pha rol tu phyin pa) and hence I am wondering if the philosophy of the Pāramitāyāna or Pāramitānaya can be called “Mahāyāna Perfectionism.” We are told that in psychology, Perfectionism “is a personality disposition characterized by a striving for flawlessness and setting excessively high performance standards, accompanied by overly critical self-evaluations and concerns regarding others’ evaluations.” In the Mahāyānic context, Perfectionism may be defined as “a religio-philosophical system characterized by the assumption that the best means of exploiting the best within oneself and others is to become a fully awakened being (i.e. a buddha) and the only means for doing so is by perfecting the so-called six perfections (i.e. the perfection of generosity or giving, of ethical-spiritual self-discipline, of the psychological and intellectual capacity to confront the state of affairs or reality, of diligence, of concentration, and of insight).
Dayal 1932 still remains a good source for the study of pāramitās.
Dayal 1932 still remains a good source for the study of pāramitās.
Monday, January 16, 2012
Vaibhāṣika Atomism
According to
the Tibetan doxographical literature, Vaibhāṣika is said maintain that the
atoms (rdul phra rab) of sense-faculties (dbang po) and objects (don)
to be substantially existent (rdzas su yod pa), conditioned phenomena to
be without Self (bdag med) and transient (mi rtag pa),
and conditioned phenomena such as nirvāṇa to be
static (rtag pa). See, for example, the dKon mchog ’grel (p.
44.16–23).
Sunday, January 15, 2012
(Buddhist) Idealism
Customarily Idealism in Buddhism is often ascribed only to
Vijñānavāda/Vijñaptimātra(tā)vāda/Cittamātravāda school by modern and some
traditional Tibetan scholars. In my view, Eric Frauwallner, however, has made a
very significant statement, that is, to the effect that Buddhism is
essentially (and philosophically) “Idealism.” See the following (Frauwallner
1956: xii): “Als die sich um 500 v. u.Z. entwickelnde neue Religion nahm
der Buddhismus wichtige volkstümliche Elemente in sich auf. Er griff das
Ständewesen an und lehrte die natürliche Gleichheit aller Menschen. Er wandte
sich aber nicht nur gegen den Materialismus, sondern auch insofern gegen den
Upaniṣadidealismus, als er bestritt, daß es ein ewiges brahman oder eine ewige
Seele gebe; er verfocht demgegenüber den Gedanken eines ständigen Werdens in
allen natürlichen und geistigen Erscheinungen. Das war eine großartige, wenn
auch naive Dialektik. Dessenungeachtet aber war der Buddhismus selbst
wesentlich Religion und Idealismus, in dem er die Welt und das Werden letztlich
aus einer Verblendung, oder aus einem Wahn avidyā, wörtlich „Nichtwissen,“
also von etwas Geistigem, herleitete.”
In the Tibetan traditions, two kinds of Idealism have been
proposed or presupposed, (a) no-external-entities cittamātra (phyi don med pa’i
sems tsam) and (b) no-creator-other-than-mind cittamātra (byed pa po gzhan
med pa’i sems tsam). Not all Buddhist philosophical systems may endorse
both kinds of idealism, but every Buddhist philosophical system would
endorse at least one of them. According to the Tibetan polymath Mi-pham
(1846–1912), Buddhism typically accepts Idealism, that is, in the same sense,
indicated by Frauwallner above.
Upaniṣadic Idealism
Er [i.e. der Buddhismus]
wandte sich aber nicht nur gegen den Materialismus, sondern auch insofern gegen
den Upaniṣadidealismus, als er bestritt, daß es ein ewiges brahman oder eine
ewige Seele gebe; er verfocht demgegenüber den Gedanken eines ständigen Werdens
in allen natürlichen und geistigen Erscheinungen. Das war eine großartige, wenn
auch naive Dialektik (Frauwallner 1956: xii).
But this is not found in the revised edition.
Udālaka’s Hylozoism
Udālaka’s Hylozoism (i.e. “the doctrine that nature is imbued by life even in the apparently inert and lifeless”) is said to be the first form of (Indian) Materialism. See Frauwallner 1956: xi.
Jaina Atomism
“Neben dem Buddhismus entwickelten Ideologen der handeltreibenden
Schicht den Jinismus als Religion mit einer eigenen Philosophie (Atomismus)”
(Frauwallner 1956: xii).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)