Ana Asthana => anavasthaa Sorry for auto correction.
— Amba Sent from Gmail Mobile On Fri, 7 Jun 2024 at 10:18 AM, Amba Kulkarni <[email protected]> wrote: > Ana Asthana is considered to be one of the 6 conditions mentioned as > jaati-baadhaka in the Nyaaya text. Jati baadhakas are the conditions for > considering a property to be an universal. > > Best > Amba Kulkarni > > Sent from Gmail Mobile > > > On Thu, 6 Jun 2024 at 1:43 AM, Brendan S. Gillon, Prof. via INDOLOGY < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Dear colleagues, >> >> I am travelling now and so cannot check this, however, I have a note to >> the effect that `anavasthaa' is mentioned as a fault in Pata~njali's >> Mahaabhaa.sya to A 2.1.1. My source is Esther Solomon's Indian >> Dialectics 1976 p. 29. (I failed to note whether the page is in the >> first volume or in the second.) >> >> Best wishes, >> Brendan >> >> >> On 2024-06-04 06:18, Franco via INDOLOGY wrote: >> > Dear Howard, >> > The earliest surviving example is probably in the Vigrahavyavartani, >> where the possibility of pramanas being proved by other pramanas is >> rejected because this would lead to an infinite regress. Most scholars >> think that Nagarjuna argues there agains the Nyaya, but I take the opponent >> to be an Abhidharmika. >> > Best wishes, >> > Eli >> > >> > Sent from my iPad >> > >> >> On 04.06.2024, at 11:05, Howard Resnick via INDOLOGY < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> Dear Scholars, >> >> >> >> Does the nyāya system speak about the problem of an infinite regress >> of proofs? Aristotle famously identifies and then avoids this problem >> through the notion of a self-evident foundation or starting point of >> knowledge. In Western epistemology, this strategy is often called >> foundationalism. >> >> >> >> Is there anything at all similar or analagous in nyāya or other Indian >> schools? The Caitanya-caritāmṛta several times affirms that the Veda is >> ’self-evident’, svataḥ pramāṇa, but the term is not used there as a general >> or secular epistemic strategy. Is the CC simply repeating a well-known >> epistemic principle? >> >> >> >> All help will be greatly appreciated. >> >> >> >> Thanks! >> >> Howard >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> INDOLOGY mailing list >> >> [email protected] >> >> https://list.indology.info/mailman/listinfo/indology >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > INDOLOGY mailing list >> > [email protected] >> > https://list.indology.info/mailman/listinfo/indology >> >> >> -- >> >> Brendan S. Gillon email: [email protected] >> Department of Linguistics >> McGill University tel.: 001 514 398 4868 >> 1085, Avenue Docteur-Penfield >> Montreal, Quebec fax.: 001 514 398 7088 >> H3A 1A7 CANADA >> >> webpage: http://webpages.mcgill.ca/staff/group3/bgillo/web/ >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> INDOLOGY mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://list.indology.info/mailman/listinfo/indology >> >
_______________________________________________ INDOLOGY mailing list [email protected] https://list.indology.info/mailman/listinfo/indology
