I agree with you. There is no level beyond the Buddha for A Buddhist. Madhav
On Sat, Jun 8, 2024 at 12:08 PM Matthew Kapstein <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear Madhav, > > I don’t think that Śāntideva supports a true anavasthā argument. One might > say that, for him, the buck stops with Buddha…. > > best, > Matthew > > Sent from Proton Mail <https://proton.me/mail/home> for iOS > > > On Sat, Jun 8, 2024 at 20:56, Madhav Deshpande via INDOLOGY < > [email protected] > <On+Sat,+Jun+8,+2024+at+20:56,+Madhav+Deshpande+via+INDOLOGY+%3C%3Ca+href=>> > wrote: > > Dear Howard, > > Glad to remind you of your teacher, Professor Scharfe. As his book is in > German, it has not drawn as much attention in the Anglophone world. > Itaretarāśraya is like a chicken and egg argument. Apratiṣṭhāna, as > brought up in the Brahmasūtra [tarkāpratiṣṭhānād anyathānumeyam iti ced > evam api avimokṣaprasaṅgaḥ] says that all Tarka is apratiṣṭhita, and hence > even if we bring up a superior Tarka, that superior Tarka can be shown to > be faulty by an even more superior Tarka. Thus, there is a resulting > Avimokṣa "no final solution." In an interesting way, this argument reminds > me of a line from Śāntideva's Bodhicaryāvatāra "bādhyante dhīviśeṣeṇa > yogino 'py uttarottaraiḥ" [this attribution is from my aging memory]. Here > the argument is that any Yogic experience can be superseded by a higher > level Yogic experience. This is also a sort of Anavasthā. > Many systems have placed arbitrary limits to avoid Anavasthā. For example, > according to the Nyāya-Vaiśrṣikas, there is a relationship of Saṃyoga > between the monkey and the branch upon which the monkey is sitting. Now the > Saṃyoga as a Guṇa relates to the monkey with the relation of Samavāya, and > the same Saṃyoga relates to the branch with another Samavāya. Fine, but > then what relation would connect the Samavāya to Saṃyoga? Does this need > another Samavāya? So there is an interesting regresso ad infinitum > situation. But the Nyāya-Vaiśeṣikas say that no further relation is needed > to connect a Samavāya to Saṃyoga. But this is quite arbitrary. > > Thanks for bringing up this topic. Best wishes, > > Madhav > > Madhav M. Deshpande > Professor Emeritus, Sanskrit and Linguistics > University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USAg > Senior Fellow, Oxford Center for Hindu Studies > Adjunct Professor, National Institute of Advanced Studies, Bangalore, India > > [Residence: Campbell, California, USA] > > > On Sat, Jun 8, 2024 at 9:03 AM Howard Resnick <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Thank you Madhav for this information, and thank you for bringing to mind >> my first and much appreciated Sanskrit professor, Hartmut Scharfe, whom I >> studied with as an undergraduate at UCLA. >> >> Regarding itaretarāśṛaya, often taken to mean ‘mutual dependence’, can >> this be seen as an indirect or oblique indication of infinite regress, by >> way of an apratiṣṭhāna, foundationless, situation? >> >> Thanks and best wishes! >> Howard >> >> On Jun 8, 2024, at 11:07 AM, Madhav Deshpande <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Another source for discussions of topics like Anavasthā and >> Itaretarāśraya may be Hartmut Scharfe's book: "Die Logik im Mahābhaāṣya," >> Berlin 1961. >> >> Madhav M. Deshpande >> Professor Emeritus, Sanskrit and Linguistics >> University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA >> Senior Fellow, Oxford Center for Hindu Studies >> Adjunct Professor, National Institute of Advanced Studies, Bangalore, >> India >> >> [Residence: Campbell, California, USA] >> >> >> On Sat, Jun 8, 2024 at 6:47 AM Howard Resnick via INDOLOGY < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Thank you Philipp. Very helpful. >>> >>> All the best, >>> Howard >>> >>> On Jun 8, 2024, at 3:00 AM, Philipp Maas via INDOLOGY < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Dear Howard, >>> On *anavasthā *and related terms in various systems of thought, see >>> also Oberhammer, G. (1991). *Terminologie der frühen indischen >>> Scholastik in Indien*. Vol. 1. A-I. Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen >>> Akademie der Wissenschaften, p. 32f. >>> >>> Best wishes, >>> >>> Philipp >>> __________________________ >>> >>> Prof. Dr. Philipp A. Maas >>> Professor for Modern Indology >>> Institute of Indology and Tibetology >>> Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich >>> ___________________________ >>> >>> https://spp1448.academia.edu/PhilippMaas >>> >>> >>> Am Di., 4. Juni 2024 um 11:05 Uhr schrieb Howard Resnick via INDOLOGY < >>> [email protected]>: >>> >>>> 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 >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> INDOLOGY mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://list.indology.info/mailman/listinfo/indology >>> >> >>
_______________________________________________ INDOLOGY mailing list [email protected] https://list.indology.info/mailman/listinfo/indology
