Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-01T04:00:40.515Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Buddhist Logic before Diṅnāga (Asaṅga, Vasubandhu, Tarka-śāstras)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 March 2011

Guiseppe Tucci
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

We must admit that very little is known about the first development of Indian logic and particularly about Buddhist logic before Diṅnāga. If we take the best manuals of Indian logic now available, such as those by Suali, Vidyābhūṣāṇa, Keith, or the most comprehensive Histories of Indian philosophy like those of Dāsgupta and Rādhākrishna we shall easily recognize that the data contained therein are far from being satisfactory; more than that, they are also very often wrong. In fact, almost the only source from which their statements are derived is the book by Sugiura, who certainly had the merit of giving the first account of Indian logic as preserved in Chinese sources, but, being himself absolutely without knowledge of orthodox nyāya and of Sanscrit, is in his statements and in his translations very often misleading.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society , Volume 61 , Issue 3 , July 1929 , pp. 451 - 488
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Asiatic Society 1929

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 451 note 1 Hindu Logic as preserved in China and Japan, Philadelphia, 1900Google Scholar.

page 451 note 2 On the other hand, a great deal of information can be gathered from Ui's book on the Vaiśeṣika philosophy. Cf. also his Studies on Indian Philosophy, , Tokyō. The classical book of Stcherbatsky, Erkenntnistheorie und Logik nach der Lehre der späteren Buddhisten, deals chiefly with Dharmakīrti's thought.

page 452 note 1 On Ki Kia Ye (fifth century a.d.) see Chavannes, , Cinq cent contes, iii, n. 1Google Scholar, Démiéville, , BEFEO. xxiv, 1924, pp. 65–6, n. 4Google Scholar. We know from the K'ai yüan shih kiao lu, , that before Ki Kia Ye another translation of this work had been made by Buddhabhadra of the Eastern Tsin. Cf. Bagchi, , Canon Bouddhique en Chine, p. 346Google Scholar.

page 452 note 2 BEFEO. 1904, p. 3.

page 452 note 3 See Ui's, Studies in Indian Phil., vol. ii, p. 428Google Scholar.

page 453 note 1 On Sthiramati see Péri, in BEFEO. 1911, 348 and 378Google Scholar.

page 453 note 2 Notes on the Nyāya-praveśa in Bollettino della Scuola di Studâ Orientali, 1928.

page 453 note 3 This is called , usally quoted under the abridged form .

page 453 note 4 The Nyāya-muhha (not Nyāya-tarka-dvāra-śāstra; see JRAS. 1928, p. 7) has been translated into English by me and compared with the corresponding portions of the Pramāṇa-samuccaya. It will shortly be published in the Materialien zur Kunde des Buddhismus of Professor Walleser.

page 453 note 5 The Pramāṇna-samuccaya is preserved in Tibetan, together with two translations of the vṛtti of Diṅnāga himself (Bstan ạgyur, undo, ce, Cordier, , p. 434Google Scholar). I have used the copy of the University of Calcutta, which has been kindly put at my disposal by the authorities. This copy belongs to the Narthang edition.

page 463 note 1 Four cases are possible:— (a) the ātman has the characteristics of the skandhas; (b) it is in the skandhas; (c) it is in another place; (d) it is assumed without any relation to the skandhas.

(a) As the skandhas are not autonomous, but dependent on causes and conditions and subject to birth and destruction, the same implication would be necessary as far as the ātman is concerned; but this is contradictory to the common definition of the ātman.

(b) As the skandhas which are the basis (, āśraya or ādhāra) are non-eternal, the ātman which rests upon them (, ādheya) must be non-eternal.

(c) In this case the ātman would be without cause and therefore without function (, niṣkriya).

(d) In this case the ātman would be isolated and free; no need therefore to strive for its liberation.

page 464 note 1 The same arguments must be repeated here mutatis mutandis.

page 468 note 1 The numbers in brackets show the serial order that the various Nigraha-sthānas have in the actual list of the Caraka-saṃhitā.

page 470 note 1 For the Upāya-hṛdaya and the Vigraha I can refer to my forthcoming translation in the Baroda Sanscrit Series.

page 470 note 2 Three pramāṇas can be found also in the Commentary of Sthiramati upon the Triṃśaka-kārikā of Vasubandhu, , p. 26Google Scholar.

page 470 note 3 Or aparīkṣita; this expression is, in fact, in the Caraka-saṃhitā, Sūtrasthāna, , xi, 8Google Scholar.

page 470 note 4 The two terms are almost synonymous, and the Chinese as well as the Tibetan can be translated in both ways.

page 470 note 5 For the list given in the Śata-śāstra see my translation of this text in Studi e Materiali di Storia delle Religioni, 1925.

On the āvaraṇas, according to Patañjali and Caraka, see Strauss, , Mahābhāṣya ad Pāṇini, 4, 1, 3, in Aus Indiens Kultur, Festgabe Richard von Garbe, 1927, p. 84Google Scholar.

page 471 note 1 In fact, it is clear that all the various bhrāntis consist in assuming atasmin tad.

page 473 note 1 As I said before, we have two translations of the vṛtti of the Pramāṇa samuccaya, which do not always agree and seem to be very often defective. This fact increases the difficulty of the text, which is one of the most abstruse.

page 475 note 1 Xyl., byed.

page 475 note 2 Randle, , Fragments from Diṅnāga, p. 21Google Scholar.

page 478 note 1 N.V.T., p. 298 (Benares, ed.)Google Scholar, atra Vasubandhunā pratijñādayas trayo 'vayavā dur-vihitā Akṣapādalakṣaṇenety uktam; cf. N. V., p. 136.

page 479 note 1 K'uei Chi, chap, iii, Shên T'ai, chap. ii. Even for the Tarka-śāstra preserved in Chinese (see above, pp. 452 sqq.) the third lakṣaṇa of the hetu is vi-pakṣa-vyāvṛtti.

page 480 note 1 P.S.V. a, chap, iii, 63b: de . la . re .žig . rtsod . pa . sgrub . pa . nas . ma grub. pa . daṅ . ma . ṅes . pa . daṅ . ạgal . bai . don . ni . gtan . ts'igs . ltar . snaṅ . ba'o . žes . zer . ro . de . la . ma . grub . pa . la . sogs. pa. ni. dper . brjod . nas. mts'an . ñid . ma . yin . te . dper . na . mig . gi[s] . gzuṅ . bya . yin . pai . p'yir . mi . rtag . go . žes . bya . ba . ma . grub . pa . daṅ . lus . can . ma . yin . pai . p'yir . rtag . go . žes . bya . ba . ma . ṅes . pa . daṅ . bye . brag . rnams . kyi . dbaṅ . po . las . byuṅ . bai . p'yir . mi. ratg . go . žes . bya . ba . ạgal . ba . gcig . daṅ . graṅ . can . pai . rgyu . la . ạbras . bu . yod . pa . yin . te . yod . pa . skye . pai . p'yir . ro . žes . bya . ba . ạgal . ba . gñis . pa'o.

P.S.V. b, fol. 146a: re . žig . rtsod . pa . bsgrub . par . ni . ma . grub . pa . daṅ . ma . ṅes . pa . daṅ. ạgal . ba . ni . don . ñid . gtan . ts'igs . hyi. skyon . yin .te.de.la. ma . grub .pa .la . sogs . pa . rnams . hyi . mts'an . ñid . ma . bšad . par . dpe . rnams . bšad . pa . ni . dper . na . ma . grub .pa.ni. sgra . mi . rtag . ste . mig . gis . gzuṅ . bai . p'yir . žes . bya . ba . daṅ . ma . ṅes . pa . ni . lus . can . ma . yin . pai . p'yir . rtag . go . žes . bya . ba . lta . bu'o . bye . brag . par . rnams . kyi . dbaṅ . pos . gzuṅ . bar . bya . yin . pai . p'yir . mi . rtag . go . žes . bya . bai . ạgal . ba . gcig . daṅ . graṅs . can . gyi . ạbras . bu . rgyu . la . yod . pa . yin . te . skye . bai . p'yir . ro . žes .pa.ni. ạgal . ba . gñis . pa . yin . no.

P.S.V. a, 46, chap, iii, b: rtsod . par . sgrub . par . ni . ạdi . ạgal. bai. gtan . ts'igs . ltar . snaṅ. ba . ñid . kyi . k'oṅ . du . bsdus . te . mts'an. ñid . de . lta. bu . las . ni. ạgal. ba . daṅ . ldan . min . de . ni . ạgal. bar . rnam . pa . gñis . su . bstan . te . dam . bca' . bai . don . daṅ . ạgal . ba . daṅ . grub . pai . daṅ . ạgal. ba'o.

P.S.V. b, chap, iii, fol. 129a: rtsod . pa . sgrub . pai . yaṅ . ạdi . ạgal. bai . gtan. ts'igs. ñid. du. ạdus. pa. yin. gyi. dei. mts'an. ñid . k'o . nas . de . ni . ạgal. ldan . min . der . ni . ạgal. ba . rnam . pa . gñis . bstan . te . dam . bca' . ba. daṅ . ạgal. ba . daṅ . grub . pa . mt'a'. daṅ. ạgal, ba'o.

page 482 note 1 See my Notes on the fragments from Dinnāga, , JRAS. 1928, 379–90Google Scholar.

page 483 note 1 On the see Ui's, Studies in Indian Philosophy, vol. i, 222Google Scholar.

page 483 note 2 The commentary written by Paramārtha, was called . Cf. BEFEO. 1911, p. 351, nGoogle Scholar. It is lost.

page 484 note 1 Left out in the xyl.

page 487 note 1 Nyāyāvatāra 20: antar-vyāptyaiva sādhyasya siddher bahirudāhṛtih |

vyarthā syāt tad a-sad-bhāve 'py evam nyāya-vido

viduḥ

that is, a syllogism like this, “on the hill there is fire, because there is smoke,” is perfectly valid, as there is an inner indissoluble connection between the major and the middle term and therefore the example “as in the kitchen” (bahir-vyāpti) is not necessary. This theory cannot be attributed to Vasubandhu, as suggested by Vidyābhūṣaṇa, , History of Indian Logic, p. 268, nGoogle Scholar. (and in his edition of the Nyāyāvatāra, Calcutta, 1909, p. 17)Google Scholar. That Vasubandhu formulated the syllogism in three members is proved by what we already said and by the clear statements of K'uei Chi and Vācaspati Miśra.