Site mapAbout usConsultative CommitteeAsk LibrarianContributionCopyrightCitation GuidelineDonationHome        

CatalogAuthor AuthorityGoogle
Search engineFulltextScripturesLanguage LessonsLinks
 


Extra service
Tools
Export
Mipam's Middle Way Through Yogācāra and Prāsangika
Author Duckworth, D. S.
Source Journal of Indian Philosophy
Volumev.38 n.4
Date2010.08
Pages431 - 439
PublisherSpringer
Publisher Url http://www.springer.com/gp/
LocationBerlin, Germany [柏林, 德國]
Content type期刊論文=Journal Article
Language英文=English
KeywordMadhyamaka; Yogācāra; Prāsa?gika; Mipam; Buddhism
AbstractIn Tibet, the negative dialectics of Madhyamaka are typically identified with Candrakīrti’s interpretation of Nāgārjuna, and systematic epistemology is associated with Dharmakīrti. These two figures are also held to be authoritative commentators on a univocal doctrine of Buddhism. Despite Candrakīrti’s explicit criticism of Buddhist epistemologists in his Prasannapadā, Buddhists in Tibet have integrated the theories of Candrakīrti and Dharmakīrti in unique ways. Within this integration, there is a tension between the epistemological system-building on the one hand, and “deconstructive” negative dialectics on the other. The integration of an epistemological system within Madhyamaka is an important part of Mipam’s (’ju mi pham rgya mtsho, 1846–1912) philosophical edifice, and is an important part of understanding the place of Yogācāra in his tradition. This paper explores the way that Mipam preserves a meaningful Svātantrika-Prāsa?gika distinction while claiming both Yogācāra and Prāsa?gika as legitimate expressions of Madhyamaka. Mipam represents Prāsa?gika-Madhyamaka as a discourse that emphasizes what transcends conceptuality. As such, he portrays Prāsa?gika as a radical discourse of denial. Since the mind cannot conceive the “content” of nonconceptual meditative equipoise, Prāsa?gika, as the representative discourse of meditative equipoise, negates any formulation of that state. In contrast, he positions Yogācāra as a discourse that situates the nonconceptual within a systematic (conceptual) structure. Rather than a discourse that re-presents the nonconceptual by enacting it (like Prāsa?gika), the discourse of Yogācāra represents the nonconceptual within an overarching system, a system (unlike Prāsa?gika) that distinguishes between the conceptual and the nonconceptual.
Table of contentsIntroduction
Ultimate Truth and Prasangika
Conventional Truth and Yogacara
Conclusion
ISSN00221791 (P); 15730395 (E)
Hits447
Created date2011.04.08
Modified date2019.07.30



Best viewed with Chrome, Firefox, Safari(Mac) but not supported IE

Notice

You are leaving our website for The full text resources provided by the above database or electronic journals may not be displayed due to the domain restrictions or fee-charging download problems.

Record correction

Please delete and correct directly in the form below, and click "Apply" at the bottom.
(When receiving your information, we will check and correct the mistake as soon as possible.)

Serial No.
376932

Search History (Only show 10 bibliography limited)
Search Criteria Field Codes
Search CriteriaBrowse