|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Book Review) Buddhisms and Deconstructions: New Frameworks for Continental Philosophy |
|
|
|
| Author |
Jiang, Tao
|
|---|
| Source |
Journal of the American Academy of Religion
|
|---|
| Volume | v.75 n.1 |
|---|
| Date | 2007.03 |
|---|
| Pages | 191 - 194 |
|---|
| Publisher | Oxford University Press |
|---|
| Publisher Url |
http://ukcatalogue.oup.com/
|
|---|
| Location | Oxford, UK [牛津, 英國] |
|---|
| Content type | 期刊論文=Journal Article; 書評=Book Review |
|---|
| Language | 英文=English |
|---|
| Note | Buddhisms and Deconstructions: New Frameworks for Continental Philosophy. By Jin Y. Park. . Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2006. 312 pages. $27.95. |
|---|
| Abstract | Edited volumes can easily suffer from inconsistency of entries and barely related contributions. Buddhisms and Deconstructions, edited by Jin Y. Park, skillfully avoids such potential traps. It brings together a set of very interesting pieces by Buddhist scholars in various traditions on the one side and Robert Magliola on the other, who is a known authority on continental philosophy, especially deconstructionism, and a pioneer in the engagement of Buddhism, Christianity as well as various strands of postmodern thought. Indeed, a unique feature of the volume is this very engagement between the two sides. Many of the essays are directly related to Magliola's own works while others deal more generally with deconstructionism, especially that of Jacques Derrida. Therefore my focus will be on the three pieces Magliola comments on or responds to in detail so as to highlight the unique aspect of this volume.
In his essay, “Deconstructive and Foundationalist Tendencies in Indian and Tibetan Buddhism,” Roger Jackson seeks to frame the engagement between Buddhism and deconstructionism by situating various strands of Buddhist philosophy on the continuum between the two poles of foundationalism and deconstructionism. Accordingly, he argues that within the Indo-Tibetan Buddhist tradition Nāgārjuna represents the deconstructive end, Dharmakīrti the foundationalist end, and other figures and schools somewhere in between. Furthermore, Jackson tries to make the case that even Nāgārjuna exhibits foundationalist tendencies and Dharmakīrti deconstructionist sentiments. In making his argument this way, Jackson cautions against any attempt to pigeonhole Buddhism too neatly into the deconstructive end. Instead he advocates that some balance needs to be maintained between the two poles in order to have a better understanding of Buddhism.
In his response, Magliola challenges Jackson's interpretations of the Buddhist traditions and, especially, the deconstructionist movement. According to Magliola, Jackson is … |
|---|
| ISSN | 00027189 (P); 14774585 (E) |
|---|
| Hits | 385 |
|---|
| Created date | 2014.12.04 |
|---|
| Modified date | 2020.01.10 |
|---|
 |
Best viewed with Chrome, Firefox, Safari(Mac) but not supported IE
|
|
|
