Encyclopaedia of Indian Religions, Vol. I, “Buddhism and Jainism” Eds.: K. T. S. Sarao, Jeffery D. Long , 2017
Atheism: Buddhism
Pradeep P. Gokhale
Adjunct Professor, Deptt. of Pali and Buddhist Studies
S. P.... more Atheism: Buddhism Pradeep P. Gokhale Adjunct Professor, Deptt. of Pali and Buddhist Studies S. P. Phule Pune University, Pune Two streams in the Orthodox Vedic tradition are known for their theistic position: (a) Vedas, particularly Upanişads present theistic ideas mixed with idealistic metaphysics. Upanişadic philosophy through different interpretations developed into different schools of Vedānta, most of which identify Brahman, the ultimate reality of the Upanişads, with God. (b) Nyāya and Vaiśeşika, which later on developed as a twin system called Nyāya-Vaiśeşika system, do not exhibit the explicit signs of theistic orientation in their early aphorismic texts, but they developed through commentaries and sub-commentaries as representing philosophical theism. The paper makes a survey of the Buddhist critical approaches to both the streams: (I) to the popular conception of god as the creator of everything and (II) to the more systematic Nyāya-Vaiśeşika conception of God.
In Pali Buddhism which is generally called Theravāda Buddhism, the religious education focused mo... more In Pali Buddhism which is generally called Theravāda Buddhism, the religious education focused more on moral-spiritual development of life. Due to the advent of Mahāyāna Buddhism at the hands of the philosophers like Nāgārjuna, Asaṅga and Vasubandhu, the focus of Buddhist education changed to metaphysical knowledge of non-essentialist and idealist kind. Similarly when Buddhism had interaction with other philosophical systems, the philosophers like Diṅnāga and Dharmakīrti brought logico-epistemological discussions at the centre of the Buddhist education. The first part of the note will be concerned with understanding the notion of Buddhist education from Pali sources. The second part will be concerned with the Mahāyānist and logico-epistemological turn the Buddhist education took. In the third part I will hint at the challenges posed by modernity before Buddhist education.
RUDN Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 28, No. 1,, pp. 37-46, 2024
The study deals with some of the central issues concerning the notion of death as discussed in Th... more The study deals with some of the central issues concerning the notion of death as discussed in Theravāda (Pāli Buddhism) as well as Mahāyāna Buddhism. What is the sense that death is regarded as an instance of duḥkha (Sanskrit) or dukkha (Pāli)? The research claims that here, firstly, the word duḥkha/dukkha is used as an adjective (which means 'unsatisfactory') rather than a noun (which means 'pain' or 'suffering'). Secondly, by death, the Buddha did not mean the act of dying but the experience of someone's death or the idea of death. The Buddha also talked about deathlessness as the goal. Here, deathlessness does not amount to accepting something eternal but developing a proper perspective towards death by meditations such as that on impurity (аśubhabhāvanā) and contemplation on death (maraṇānussati). If the cessation of the cycle of rebirths and re-deaths (punarmṛtyu) is the ultimate goal that the arhat (Sanskrit), or arahant (Pāli), achieves, then the same should apply to Tathāgata. In that case, the problem suggests itself: how could the question of Tathāgata's existence after death be accounted for as an unanswerable (avyākṛta)? The study opines that the reason behind this is the profound, immeasurable, unfathomable nature attributed to Tathāgata. The research also discusses the basic difference between the attitudes on death in Śrāvakayāna and Mahāyāna. Lastly, it deals with the question of whether termination of one's own life is permissible in Buddhism under certain conditions.
In the paper, the author addresses the question of Dharmakīrti’s philosophical identity afresh. W... more In the paper, the author addresses the question of Dharmakīrti’s philosophical identity afresh. While acknowledging both the elements, external realism of Sautrāintika and idealism of Yogācāra, the author does disagree with the claim which is sometimes made, that Dharmakīrti’s idealism as his ultimate position and accepts realism only at conventional level. The author shows how Dharmakīrti in Pramāṇavārttika oscillates between the two positions and that he must have been attracted to both the positions for different reasons. He was attracted to idealism from critical point of view, when he was critical about the limitations of Sautrāntika realism (which itself can be called critical realism). He was attracted to realism for its capacity to explain the diverse phenomena and lead human beings to their goals. The author denies the claim made by some scholars that Dharmakīrti’s idealism can be called just an epistemic one. He argues that it did have a metaphysical dimension which is har...
Omniscience means knowledge of everything, direct awareness of everything or capacity to know eve... more Omniscience means knowledge of everything, direct awareness of everything or capacity to know everything. By ‘everything’ is meant either each and every thing or everything worth knowing. Omniscience as a quality is said to belong to God, or to a liberated being.Religions and philosophical systems which accept God as the creator, sustainer and destroyer of the universe, accept Him as omniscient because knowledge of everything is required for controlling everything. But religions or religious-philosophical systems which do not accept creator God also tend to accept certain authority as omniscient. . Generally all the religious-philosophical systems of Indian philosophy accept omniscience as a possibility or actuality in some form or the other with the notable exception of Pūrvamīmaṁsā which explicitly rejects the authority of the so-called omniscient being.The paper discusses different conceptions of Omniscience held by different systems in Indian Philosophy and also the arguments for and against omniscience advanced by them.
International Journal for the Study of Skepticism, Vol.12 (2022) pp. 27–45, 2022
This paper provides a study of the three most famous skeptical thinkers of classical India, exami... more This paper provides a study of the three most famous skeptical thinkers of classical India, examining both their commonalities and unique differences. Adepts of the controversial debate methodology called vitaṇḍā, "negative debate," these thinkers manage to challenge the very possibility of knowledge, while espousing (at least nominal) allegiance to distinct schools of thought. They also pass negative judgement on the possibility of certainty while appealing to rational persuasion. This paper explores these paradoxes and possible contradictions, with a culminating reflection of the role of the "two truths," ultimate vs. everyday perspectives.
: Madhyabhāratī, Dr. Harisingh Gaur University, Saugar, Vol. 72, Jan.-June 2017, pp. 27-32, 2017
Rahul Sankrityayan’s Vision of Indian Philosophy: Some Features (Hindi)
Pradeep P. Gokhale
In thi... more Rahul Sankrityayan’s Vision of Indian Philosophy: Some Features (Hindi) Pradeep P. Gokhale In this Hindi article the author discusses the perspective of the Marxist Indologist Rahul Sankrityayan on Indian Philosophy with reference to his Hindi work, “Darśana-Digdarśana”. Rahul ji in this work locates the rise and development of Indian philosophy in Global context. He argued that Indian Philosophy can develop today only if it is associated with art and science and not if it is associated with religion. In this book he understands the major conflict in Indian philosophy as that between Brahmanical and Non-Brahmanical systems and stands in support of the latter. He attaches greatest importance to Buddhism. However, His approach to Buddhism is not that of uncritical acceptance. His criticism of Buddhism is influenced by his Marxist, materialist approach.
Included in Pursuit of Happiness: The Path of Philosophy and Counselling , Edited by Dr. Mrs. Sucitra Naik, and Prof. Vedavati Paranjape Surve, (Proceedings of the International Conference organised by Joshi- Bedekar College, Thane (India) in January 2019), 2020, pp. XV-XXVII, 2020
Abstract
PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS: A HUMANIST INDIAN PERSPECTIVE
Pradeep P. Gokhale
The paper disti... more Abstract PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS: A HUMANIST INDIAN PERSPECTIVE
Pradeep P. Gokhale
The paper distinguishes between pleasure, conditional happiness and unconditional happiness. For convenience the paper refers to unconditional happiness as HAPPINESS. It discusses five models of pursuing HAPPINESS which can be followed commonly by both believers and non-believers. (1) The model of integral moral spiritual development (2) Puruṣārtha approach (3) Control over passions and cessation of cravings (4) Living in the present and (5) The model of brahmavihāras. The paper tries to show in the light of these models that HAPPINESS which is the happiness of the cessation of all cravings (tṛṣṇākṣayasukha ) is the goal which can be pursued within human-centric framework, without transcendental metaphysical beliefs like those in Brahman, God and Rebirth..
Journal of World Philosophies 5 (Winter 2020): 61–72, 2020
The rivalry among the philosophical schools in India was not purely intellectual, but had far-rea... more The rivalry among the philosophical schools in India was not purely intellectual, but had far-reaching social implications. The rivalry between vedic and non-vedic schools had a socio-political dimension. This paper claims that commentaries of the source texts of schools on both sides played an important role in development of interdarśana politics. This paper deals with some of the interpretative moves made by Vācaspatimiśra in his two famous commentaries: (1) Sāṅkhyatattvakaumudī, the commentary on Sāṅkhyakārikā of Īśvarakṛṣṇa, and (2) Nyāyavārtikatātparyaṭīkā, the commentary on Nyāyavārtika of Udyotakara. The paper argues that some of Vācaspatimiśra's interpretative moves in these commentaries can be called "political moves." The paper shows how these interpretative moves deviate from the natural or unforced meanings of the texts. It argues that these deviations aim at strengthening the orthodox ("āstika") front of Indian philosophy.
Abstract
K. J. Shah’s (1926-1993) Holistic Perspective in Philosophy (Marathi)
Professor K. J Sha... more Abstract K. J. Shah’s (1926-1993) Holistic Perspective in Philosophy (Marathi) Professor K. J Shah was a well-known academic philosopher of 20th century India. The author in this paper gives a sketch of Shah’s career and philosophical perspective. He discusses his philosophical position with respect to three themes (1) Holism in his thought vis a vis his approach to four puruṣārthas , (2) His approach to the nature of language vis a vis Wittgenstein and Bhartṛhari and (3) His interpretation of Gandhian thought.
Buddhist Approaches to Impermanence: Phenomenal
and Naumenal
Pradeep P. Gokhale
__________
Abstra... more Buddhist Approaches to Impermanence: Phenomenal and Naumenal Pradeep P. Gokhale __________ Abstract: The doctrine of impermanence can be called the most salient feature of the Buddha’s teaching. The early Buddhist doctrine of impermanence can be understood in four different but interrelated contexts: Buddha’s empiricism, the notion of conditioned/constituted objects, the idea of dependent arising, and the practical context of suffering and emancipation. While asserting the impermanence of all phenomena, the Buddha was silent on the questions of the so-called transcendent entities and truths. Moreover, though the Buddha described Nibbāna as a ‘deathless state’, it does not imply eternality in a metaphysical sense. Whereas the early Buddhist approach to impermanence can be called ‘phenomenal’, the post-Buddhist approach was concerned with naumena (things in themselves). Hence, Sarvāstivāda (along with Pudgalavāda) is marked by absolutism in the form of the doctrines of substantial continuity, atomism, momentariness, and personalism. The paper also deals with the approaches to impermanence of Dharmakīrti and Nāgārjuna, which can be called naumenal rather than strictly phenomenal. For Dharmakīrti, noneternality was in fact momentariness and it was not a matter of experience but derivable conceptually or analytically from the concept of real. Nāgārjuna stood not for impermanence, but emptiness (śūnyatā), the concept which transcended both impermanence and permanence, substantiality and non-substantiality.
The paper published in Mohit Tandon (Ed.) Identity and Difference: Perspectives in Classical Indian Philosophy, Pune, Indian Philosophical Quarterly Publication, August 2020 , 2020
Abstract
Undecidability Approach to Identity and Difference: from Nāgārjuna to Jñānaśrīmitra
P... more Abstract Undecidability Approach to Identity and Difference: from Nāgārjuna to Jñānaśrīmitra
Pradeep Gokhale In this paper the author considers scepticism as a kind of undecidability approach to some basic questions concerning reality and knowledge. He claims that Nāgārjuna’s doctrine of ‘emptiness’ (śūnyatā) or essence-less-ness (niḥsvabhāvatā) is such an undecidability approach which he developed within the framework of the Buddha’s teachings. Nāgārjuna developed this approach mainly by drawing attention to the interrelated and interdependent complexes which lead to the insuperable issues of circularity and dilemmas of identity and difference and oneness and many-ness. The paper tries to sketch out how Buddhist theory of reality and knowledge which starts its journey from Nāgārjuna’s skepticism, makes a U-turn to it in Jñānaśrī’s Sākārasiddhi.
Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Vol No. XCVIII, 2017 (Published in 2022) , 2022
Abstract
Transition of the Buddhist theory of inference from Diṅnāga to Dharmakīrti
Pradeep P. G... more Abstract Transition of the Buddhist theory of inference from Diṅnāga to Dharmakīrti Pradeep P. Gokhale Diṅnāga and Dharmakīrti are the two pioneering figures of the Buddhist logic. Dharmakīrti is said to belong to the Teacher-disciple tradition of Diṅnāga. A question can arise, as to whether Dharmakīrti simply continued the tradition of Diṅnāga or made some alterations in it. The author discusses this question with regard to Diṅnāga’s theories of inference for oneself and inference for others. He argues that Dharmakīrti did not simply clarify or elaborate Diṅnāga’s frame of inference nor did he differ from it at peripheral level, but he deviated from Diṅnāga’s theory at fundamental level.
Encyclopaedia of Indian Religions, Vol. I, “Buddhism and Jainism” Eds.: K. T. S. Sarao, Jeffery D. Long , 2017
Atheism: Buddhism
Pradeep P. Gokhale
Adjunct Professor, Deptt. of Pali and Buddhist Studies
S. P.... more Atheism: Buddhism Pradeep P. Gokhale Adjunct Professor, Deptt. of Pali and Buddhist Studies S. P. Phule Pune University, Pune Two streams in the Orthodox Vedic tradition are known for their theistic position: (a) Vedas, particularly Upanişads present theistic ideas mixed with idealistic metaphysics. Upanişadic philosophy through different interpretations developed into different schools of Vedānta, most of which identify Brahman, the ultimate reality of the Upanişads, with God. (b) Nyāya and Vaiśeşika, which later on developed as a twin system called Nyāya-Vaiśeşika system, do not exhibit the explicit signs of theistic orientation in their early aphorismic texts, but they developed through commentaries and sub-commentaries as representing philosophical theism. The paper makes a survey of the Buddhist critical approaches to both the streams: (I) to the popular conception of god as the creator of everything and (II) to the more systematic Nyāya-Vaiśeşika conception of God.
In Pali Buddhism which is generally called Theravāda Buddhism, the religious education focused mo... more In Pali Buddhism which is generally called Theravāda Buddhism, the religious education focused more on moral-spiritual development of life. Due to the advent of Mahāyāna Buddhism at the hands of the philosophers like Nāgārjuna, Asaṅga and Vasubandhu, the focus of Buddhist education changed to metaphysical knowledge of non-essentialist and idealist kind. Similarly when Buddhism had interaction with other philosophical systems, the philosophers like Diṅnāga and Dharmakīrti brought logico-epistemological discussions at the centre of the Buddhist education. The first part of the note will be concerned with understanding the notion of Buddhist education from Pali sources. The second part will be concerned with the Mahāyānist and logico-epistemological turn the Buddhist education took. In the third part I will hint at the challenges posed by modernity before Buddhist education.
RUDN Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 28, No. 1,, pp. 37-46, 2024
The study deals with some of the central issues concerning the notion of death as discussed in Th... more The study deals with some of the central issues concerning the notion of death as discussed in Theravāda (Pāli Buddhism) as well as Mahāyāna Buddhism. What is the sense that death is regarded as an instance of duḥkha (Sanskrit) or dukkha (Pāli)? The research claims that here, firstly, the word duḥkha/dukkha is used as an adjective (which means 'unsatisfactory') rather than a noun (which means 'pain' or 'suffering'). Secondly, by death, the Buddha did not mean the act of dying but the experience of someone's death or the idea of death. The Buddha also talked about deathlessness as the goal. Here, deathlessness does not amount to accepting something eternal but developing a proper perspective towards death by meditations such as that on impurity (аśubhabhāvanā) and contemplation on death (maraṇānussati). If the cessation of the cycle of rebirths and re-deaths (punarmṛtyu) is the ultimate goal that the arhat (Sanskrit), or arahant (Pāli), achieves, then the same should apply to Tathāgata. In that case, the problem suggests itself: how could the question of Tathāgata's existence after death be accounted for as an unanswerable (avyākṛta)? The study opines that the reason behind this is the profound, immeasurable, unfathomable nature attributed to Tathāgata. The research also discusses the basic difference between the attitudes on death in Śrāvakayāna and Mahāyāna. Lastly, it deals with the question of whether termination of one's own life is permissible in Buddhism under certain conditions.
In the paper, the author addresses the question of Dharmakīrti’s philosophical identity afresh. W... more In the paper, the author addresses the question of Dharmakīrti’s philosophical identity afresh. While acknowledging both the elements, external realism of Sautrāintika and idealism of Yogācāra, the author does disagree with the claim which is sometimes made, that Dharmakīrti’s idealism as his ultimate position and accepts realism only at conventional level. The author shows how Dharmakīrti in Pramāṇavārttika oscillates between the two positions and that he must have been attracted to both the positions for different reasons. He was attracted to idealism from critical point of view, when he was critical about the limitations of Sautrāntika realism (which itself can be called critical realism). He was attracted to realism for its capacity to explain the diverse phenomena and lead human beings to their goals. The author denies the claim made by some scholars that Dharmakīrti’s idealism can be called just an epistemic one. He argues that it did have a metaphysical dimension which is har...
Omniscience means knowledge of everything, direct awareness of everything or capacity to know eve... more Omniscience means knowledge of everything, direct awareness of everything or capacity to know everything. By ‘everything’ is meant either each and every thing or everything worth knowing. Omniscience as a quality is said to belong to God, or to a liberated being.Religions and philosophical systems which accept God as the creator, sustainer and destroyer of the universe, accept Him as omniscient because knowledge of everything is required for controlling everything. But religions or religious-philosophical systems which do not accept creator God also tend to accept certain authority as omniscient. . Generally all the religious-philosophical systems of Indian philosophy accept omniscience as a possibility or actuality in some form or the other with the notable exception of Pūrvamīmaṁsā which explicitly rejects the authority of the so-called omniscient being.The paper discusses different conceptions of Omniscience held by different systems in Indian Philosophy and also the arguments for and against omniscience advanced by them.
International Journal for the Study of Skepticism, Vol.12 (2022) pp. 27–45, 2022
This paper provides a study of the three most famous skeptical thinkers of classical India, exami... more This paper provides a study of the three most famous skeptical thinkers of classical India, examining both their commonalities and unique differences. Adepts of the controversial debate methodology called vitaṇḍā, "negative debate," these thinkers manage to challenge the very possibility of knowledge, while espousing (at least nominal) allegiance to distinct schools of thought. They also pass negative judgement on the possibility of certainty while appealing to rational persuasion. This paper explores these paradoxes and possible contradictions, with a culminating reflection of the role of the "two truths," ultimate vs. everyday perspectives.
: Madhyabhāratī, Dr. Harisingh Gaur University, Saugar, Vol. 72, Jan.-June 2017, pp. 27-32, 2017
Rahul Sankrityayan’s Vision of Indian Philosophy: Some Features (Hindi)
Pradeep P. Gokhale
In thi... more Rahul Sankrityayan’s Vision of Indian Philosophy: Some Features (Hindi) Pradeep P. Gokhale In this Hindi article the author discusses the perspective of the Marxist Indologist Rahul Sankrityayan on Indian Philosophy with reference to his Hindi work, “Darśana-Digdarśana”. Rahul ji in this work locates the rise and development of Indian philosophy in Global context. He argued that Indian Philosophy can develop today only if it is associated with art and science and not if it is associated with religion. In this book he understands the major conflict in Indian philosophy as that between Brahmanical and Non-Brahmanical systems and stands in support of the latter. He attaches greatest importance to Buddhism. However, His approach to Buddhism is not that of uncritical acceptance. His criticism of Buddhism is influenced by his Marxist, materialist approach.
Included in Pursuit of Happiness: The Path of Philosophy and Counselling , Edited by Dr. Mrs. Sucitra Naik, and Prof. Vedavati Paranjape Surve, (Proceedings of the International Conference organised by Joshi- Bedekar College, Thane (India) in January 2019), 2020, pp. XV-XXVII, 2020
Abstract
PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS: A HUMANIST INDIAN PERSPECTIVE
Pradeep P. Gokhale
The paper disti... more Abstract PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS: A HUMANIST INDIAN PERSPECTIVE
Pradeep P. Gokhale
The paper distinguishes between pleasure, conditional happiness and unconditional happiness. For convenience the paper refers to unconditional happiness as HAPPINESS. It discusses five models of pursuing HAPPINESS which can be followed commonly by both believers and non-believers. (1) The model of integral moral spiritual development (2) Puruṣārtha approach (3) Control over passions and cessation of cravings (4) Living in the present and (5) The model of brahmavihāras. The paper tries to show in the light of these models that HAPPINESS which is the happiness of the cessation of all cravings (tṛṣṇākṣayasukha ) is the goal which can be pursued within human-centric framework, without transcendental metaphysical beliefs like those in Brahman, God and Rebirth..
Journal of World Philosophies 5 (Winter 2020): 61–72, 2020
The rivalry among the philosophical schools in India was not purely intellectual, but had far-rea... more The rivalry among the philosophical schools in India was not purely intellectual, but had far-reaching social implications. The rivalry between vedic and non-vedic schools had a socio-political dimension. This paper claims that commentaries of the source texts of schools on both sides played an important role in development of interdarśana politics. This paper deals with some of the interpretative moves made by Vācaspatimiśra in his two famous commentaries: (1) Sāṅkhyatattvakaumudī, the commentary on Sāṅkhyakārikā of Īśvarakṛṣṇa, and (2) Nyāyavārtikatātparyaṭīkā, the commentary on Nyāyavārtika of Udyotakara. The paper argues that some of Vācaspatimiśra's interpretative moves in these commentaries can be called "political moves." The paper shows how these interpretative moves deviate from the natural or unforced meanings of the texts. It argues that these deviations aim at strengthening the orthodox ("āstika") front of Indian philosophy.
Abstract
K. J. Shah’s (1926-1993) Holistic Perspective in Philosophy (Marathi)
Professor K. J Sha... more Abstract K. J. Shah’s (1926-1993) Holistic Perspective in Philosophy (Marathi) Professor K. J Shah was a well-known academic philosopher of 20th century India. The author in this paper gives a sketch of Shah’s career and philosophical perspective. He discusses his philosophical position with respect to three themes (1) Holism in his thought vis a vis his approach to four puruṣārthas , (2) His approach to the nature of language vis a vis Wittgenstein and Bhartṛhari and (3) His interpretation of Gandhian thought.
Buddhist Approaches to Impermanence: Phenomenal
and Naumenal
Pradeep P. Gokhale
__________
Abstra... more Buddhist Approaches to Impermanence: Phenomenal and Naumenal Pradeep P. Gokhale __________ Abstract: The doctrine of impermanence can be called the most salient feature of the Buddha’s teaching. The early Buddhist doctrine of impermanence can be understood in four different but interrelated contexts: Buddha’s empiricism, the notion of conditioned/constituted objects, the idea of dependent arising, and the practical context of suffering and emancipation. While asserting the impermanence of all phenomena, the Buddha was silent on the questions of the so-called transcendent entities and truths. Moreover, though the Buddha described Nibbāna as a ‘deathless state’, it does not imply eternality in a metaphysical sense. Whereas the early Buddhist approach to impermanence can be called ‘phenomenal’, the post-Buddhist approach was concerned with naumena (things in themselves). Hence, Sarvāstivāda (along with Pudgalavāda) is marked by absolutism in the form of the doctrines of substantial continuity, atomism, momentariness, and personalism. The paper also deals with the approaches to impermanence of Dharmakīrti and Nāgārjuna, which can be called naumenal rather than strictly phenomenal. For Dharmakīrti, noneternality was in fact momentariness and it was not a matter of experience but derivable conceptually or analytically from the concept of real. Nāgārjuna stood not for impermanence, but emptiness (śūnyatā), the concept which transcended both impermanence and permanence, substantiality and non-substantiality.
The paper published in Mohit Tandon (Ed.) Identity and Difference: Perspectives in Classical Indian Philosophy, Pune, Indian Philosophical Quarterly Publication, August 2020 , 2020
Abstract
Undecidability Approach to Identity and Difference: from Nāgārjuna to Jñānaśrīmitra
P... more Abstract Undecidability Approach to Identity and Difference: from Nāgārjuna to Jñānaśrīmitra
Pradeep Gokhale In this paper the author considers scepticism as a kind of undecidability approach to some basic questions concerning reality and knowledge. He claims that Nāgārjuna’s doctrine of ‘emptiness’ (śūnyatā) or essence-less-ness (niḥsvabhāvatā) is such an undecidability approach which he developed within the framework of the Buddha’s teachings. Nāgārjuna developed this approach mainly by drawing attention to the interrelated and interdependent complexes which lead to the insuperable issues of circularity and dilemmas of identity and difference and oneness and many-ness. The paper tries to sketch out how Buddhist theory of reality and knowledge which starts its journey from Nāgārjuna’s skepticism, makes a U-turn to it in Jñānaśrī’s Sākārasiddhi.
Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Vol No. XCVIII, 2017 (Published in 2022) , 2022
Abstract
Transition of the Buddhist theory of inference from Diṅnāga to Dharmakīrti
Pradeep P. G... more Abstract Transition of the Buddhist theory of inference from Diṅnāga to Dharmakīrti Pradeep P. Gokhale Diṅnāga and Dharmakīrti are the two pioneering figures of the Buddhist logic. Dharmakīrti is said to belong to the Teacher-disciple tradition of Diṅnāga. A question can arise, as to whether Dharmakīrti simply continued the tradition of Diṅnāga or made some alterations in it. The author discusses this question with regard to Diṅnāga’s theories of inference for oneself and inference for others. He argues that Dharmakīrti did not simply clarify or elaborate Diṅnāga’s frame of inference nor did he differ from it at peripheral level, but he deviated from Diṅnāga’s theory at fundamental level.
Abstract:
Can one be a Buddhist without believing in rebirth? A question before Engaged Buddhist... more Abstract: Can one be a Buddhist without believing in rebirth? A question before Engaged Buddhist thought - P. P. Gokhale, Central University of Tibetan studies, Sarnath The author in this paper questions the necessary relation between ‘being a Buddhist’ and ‘accepting the doctrine of rebirth’. One may believe in rebirth doctrine or one may not. One can still be a Buddhist by following other doctrines which are more internally related to the essence of Buddhism. The author tries to show how this is possible with reference to Engaged Buddhism. He also suggests the way this is possible in the context of Classical Buddhism. The author does this by making a brief and selective survey of engaged Buddhist approaches in terms of three categories: (1) Unconditional acceptance of rebirth doctrine (2) Unconditional rejection of the traditional rebirth doctrine and (3) Accepting rebirth doctrine at belief level, but allowing non-belief at the level of Buddhist practice.
Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Pune, VOLUME XCIV, 2013 (Published in 2017), 2017
Abstract
Book Review: PERIODIZATION AND HISTORIOGRAPHY OF INDIAN PHILOSOPHY, edited by Eli FRANCO... more Abstract Book Review: PERIODIZATION AND HISTORIOGRAPHY OF INDIAN PHILOSOPHY, edited by Eli FRANCO Because of the belief in the authenticity (prāmāṇya) of some texts and in the eternality (sanātanatva) of the thought contained in them, traditional Indian philosophy was almost devoid of a historical sense. Hence writing a history of Indian philosophy by periodizing it becomes a challenge. The authors of this volume come to terms with this challenge from diverse perspectives. The volume edited by Eli FRANCO, apart from having a lot of informative value, is full of important observations, perspectives and insights which modern scholars of Indian philosophy have to take seriously. Particularly, it is a must-read for those who are ready to approach Indian philosophy without dogmatism and blind beliefs
Uploads
Pradeep P. Gokhale
Adjunct Professor, Deptt. of Pali and Buddhist Studies
S. P. Phule Pune University, Pune
Two streams in the Orthodox Vedic tradition are known for their theistic position:
(a) Vedas, particularly Upanişads present theistic ideas mixed with idealistic metaphysics. Upanişadic philosophy through different interpretations developed into different schools of Vedānta, most of which identify Brahman, the ultimate reality of the Upanişads, with God.
(b) Nyāya and Vaiśeşika, which later on developed as a twin system called Nyāya-Vaiśeşika system, do not exhibit the explicit signs of theistic orientation in their early aphorismic texts, but they developed through commentaries and sub-commentaries as representing philosophical theism.
The paper makes a survey of the Buddhist critical approaches to both the streams: (I) to the popular conception of god as the creator of everything and (II) to the more systematic Nyāya-Vaiśeşika conception of God.
Pradeep P. Gokhale
In this Hindi article the author discusses the perspective of the Marxist Indologist Rahul Sankrityayan on Indian Philosophy with reference to his Hindi work, “Darśana-Digdarśana”. Rahul ji in this work locates the rise and development of Indian philosophy in Global context. He argued that Indian Philosophy can develop today only if it is associated with art and science and not if it is associated with religion. In this book he understands the major conflict in Indian philosophy as that between Brahmanical and Non-Brahmanical systems and stands in support of the latter. He attaches greatest importance to Buddhism. However, His approach to Buddhism is not that of uncritical acceptance. His criticism of Buddhism is influenced by his Marxist, materialist approach.
PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS: A HUMANIST INDIAN PERSPECTIVE
Pradeep P. Gokhale
The paper distinguishes between pleasure, conditional happiness and unconditional happiness. For convenience the paper refers to unconditional happiness as HAPPINESS. It discusses five models of pursuing HAPPINESS which can be followed commonly by both believers and non-believers. (1) The model of integral moral spiritual development (2) Puruṣārtha approach (3) Control over passions and cessation of cravings (4) Living in the present and (5) The model of brahmavihāras.
The paper tries to show in the light of these models that HAPPINESS which is the happiness of the cessation of all cravings (tṛṣṇākṣayasukha ) is the goal which can be pursued within human-centric framework, without transcendental metaphysical beliefs like those in Brahman, God and Rebirth..
K. J. Shah’s (1926-1993) Holistic Perspective in Philosophy (Marathi)
Professor K. J Shah was a well-known academic philosopher of 20th century India. The author in this paper gives a sketch of Shah’s career and philosophical perspective. He discusses his philosophical position with respect to three themes (1) Holism in his thought vis a vis his approach to four puruṣārthas , (2) His approach to the nature of language vis a vis Wittgenstein and Bhartṛhari and (3) His interpretation of Gandhian thought.
and Naumenal
Pradeep P. Gokhale
__________
Abstract: The doctrine of impermanence can be called the most salient feature of the Buddha’s teaching. The early Buddhist doctrine of impermanence can be understood in four different but interrelated contexts: Buddha’s empiricism, the notion of conditioned/constituted objects, the idea of dependent arising, and the practical context of suffering and emancipation. While asserting the impermanence of all phenomena, the Buddha was silent on the questions of the so-called transcendent entities and truths. Moreover, though the Buddha described Nibbāna as a ‘deathless state’, it does not imply eternality in a metaphysical sense. Whereas the early Buddhist approach to impermanence can be called ‘phenomenal’, the post-Buddhist approach was concerned with naumena (things in themselves). Hence, Sarvāstivāda (along with Pudgalavāda) is marked by absolutism in the form of the doctrines of substantial continuity, atomism, momentariness, and personalism. The paper also deals with the approaches to impermanence of Dharmakīrti and Nāgārjuna, which can be called naumenal rather than strictly phenomenal. For Dharmakīrti, noneternality was in fact momentariness and it was not a matter of experience but derivable conceptually or analytically from the concept of real. Nāgārjuna stood not for impermanence, but emptiness (śūnyatā), the concept which transcended both impermanence and permanence, substantiality and non-substantiality.
Undecidability Approach to Identity and Difference: from Nāgārjuna to Jñānaśrīmitra
Pradeep Gokhale
In this paper the author considers scepticism as a kind of undecidability approach to some basic questions concerning reality and knowledge. He claims that Nāgārjuna’s doctrine of ‘emptiness’ (śūnyatā) or essence-less-ness (niḥsvabhāvatā) is such an undecidability approach which he developed within the framework of the Buddha’s teachings. Nāgārjuna developed this approach mainly by drawing attention to the interrelated and interdependent complexes which lead to the insuperable issues of circularity and dilemmas of identity and difference and oneness and many-ness.
The paper tries to sketch out how Buddhist theory of reality and knowledge which starts its journey from Nāgārjuna’s skepticism, makes a U-turn to it in Jñānaśrī’s Sākārasiddhi.
Transition of the Buddhist theory of inference from Diṅnāga to Dharmakīrti
Pradeep P. Gokhale
Diṅnāga and Dharmakīrti are the two pioneering figures of the Buddhist logic. Dharmakīrti is said to belong to the Teacher-disciple tradition of Diṅnāga. A question can arise, as to whether Dharmakīrti simply continued the tradition of Diṅnāga or made some alterations in it. The author discusses this question with regard to Diṅnāga’s theories of inference for oneself and inference for others. He argues that Dharmakīrti did not simply clarify or elaborate Diṅnāga’s frame of inference nor did he differ from it at peripheral level, but he deviated from Diṅnāga’s theory at fundamental level.
Pradeep P. Gokhale
Adjunct Professor, Deptt. of Pali and Buddhist Studies
S. P. Phule Pune University, Pune
Two streams in the Orthodox Vedic tradition are known for their theistic position:
(a) Vedas, particularly Upanişads present theistic ideas mixed with idealistic metaphysics. Upanişadic philosophy through different interpretations developed into different schools of Vedānta, most of which identify Brahman, the ultimate reality of the Upanişads, with God.
(b) Nyāya and Vaiśeşika, which later on developed as a twin system called Nyāya-Vaiśeşika system, do not exhibit the explicit signs of theistic orientation in their early aphorismic texts, but they developed through commentaries and sub-commentaries as representing philosophical theism.
The paper makes a survey of the Buddhist critical approaches to both the streams: (I) to the popular conception of god as the creator of everything and (II) to the more systematic Nyāya-Vaiśeşika conception of God.
Pradeep P. Gokhale
In this Hindi article the author discusses the perspective of the Marxist Indologist Rahul Sankrityayan on Indian Philosophy with reference to his Hindi work, “Darśana-Digdarśana”. Rahul ji in this work locates the rise and development of Indian philosophy in Global context. He argued that Indian Philosophy can develop today only if it is associated with art and science and not if it is associated with religion. In this book he understands the major conflict in Indian philosophy as that between Brahmanical and Non-Brahmanical systems and stands in support of the latter. He attaches greatest importance to Buddhism. However, His approach to Buddhism is not that of uncritical acceptance. His criticism of Buddhism is influenced by his Marxist, materialist approach.
PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS: A HUMANIST INDIAN PERSPECTIVE
Pradeep P. Gokhale
The paper distinguishes between pleasure, conditional happiness and unconditional happiness. For convenience the paper refers to unconditional happiness as HAPPINESS. It discusses five models of pursuing HAPPINESS which can be followed commonly by both believers and non-believers. (1) The model of integral moral spiritual development (2) Puruṣārtha approach (3) Control over passions and cessation of cravings (4) Living in the present and (5) The model of brahmavihāras.
The paper tries to show in the light of these models that HAPPINESS which is the happiness of the cessation of all cravings (tṛṣṇākṣayasukha ) is the goal which can be pursued within human-centric framework, without transcendental metaphysical beliefs like those in Brahman, God and Rebirth..
K. J. Shah’s (1926-1993) Holistic Perspective in Philosophy (Marathi)
Professor K. J Shah was a well-known academic philosopher of 20th century India. The author in this paper gives a sketch of Shah’s career and philosophical perspective. He discusses his philosophical position with respect to three themes (1) Holism in his thought vis a vis his approach to four puruṣārthas , (2) His approach to the nature of language vis a vis Wittgenstein and Bhartṛhari and (3) His interpretation of Gandhian thought.
and Naumenal
Pradeep P. Gokhale
__________
Abstract: The doctrine of impermanence can be called the most salient feature of the Buddha’s teaching. The early Buddhist doctrine of impermanence can be understood in four different but interrelated contexts: Buddha’s empiricism, the notion of conditioned/constituted objects, the idea of dependent arising, and the practical context of suffering and emancipation. While asserting the impermanence of all phenomena, the Buddha was silent on the questions of the so-called transcendent entities and truths. Moreover, though the Buddha described Nibbāna as a ‘deathless state’, it does not imply eternality in a metaphysical sense. Whereas the early Buddhist approach to impermanence can be called ‘phenomenal’, the post-Buddhist approach was concerned with naumena (things in themselves). Hence, Sarvāstivāda (along with Pudgalavāda) is marked by absolutism in the form of the doctrines of substantial continuity, atomism, momentariness, and personalism. The paper also deals with the approaches to impermanence of Dharmakīrti and Nāgārjuna, which can be called naumenal rather than strictly phenomenal. For Dharmakīrti, noneternality was in fact momentariness and it was not a matter of experience but derivable conceptually or analytically from the concept of real. Nāgārjuna stood not for impermanence, but emptiness (śūnyatā), the concept which transcended both impermanence and permanence, substantiality and non-substantiality.
Undecidability Approach to Identity and Difference: from Nāgārjuna to Jñānaśrīmitra
Pradeep Gokhale
In this paper the author considers scepticism as a kind of undecidability approach to some basic questions concerning reality and knowledge. He claims that Nāgārjuna’s doctrine of ‘emptiness’ (śūnyatā) or essence-less-ness (niḥsvabhāvatā) is such an undecidability approach which he developed within the framework of the Buddha’s teachings. Nāgārjuna developed this approach mainly by drawing attention to the interrelated and interdependent complexes which lead to the insuperable issues of circularity and dilemmas of identity and difference and oneness and many-ness.
The paper tries to sketch out how Buddhist theory of reality and knowledge which starts its journey from Nāgārjuna’s skepticism, makes a U-turn to it in Jñānaśrī’s Sākārasiddhi.
Transition of the Buddhist theory of inference from Diṅnāga to Dharmakīrti
Pradeep P. Gokhale
Diṅnāga and Dharmakīrti are the two pioneering figures of the Buddhist logic. Dharmakīrti is said to belong to the Teacher-disciple tradition of Diṅnāga. A question can arise, as to whether Dharmakīrti simply continued the tradition of Diṅnāga or made some alterations in it. The author discusses this question with regard to Diṅnāga’s theories of inference for oneself and inference for others. He argues that Dharmakīrti did not simply clarify or elaborate Diṅnāga’s frame of inference nor did he differ from it at peripheral level, but he deviated from Diṅnāga’s theory at fundamental level.
Can one be a Buddhist without believing in rebirth? A question before Engaged Buddhist thought
- P. P. Gokhale, Central University of Tibetan studies, Sarnath
The author in this paper questions the necessary relation between ‘being a Buddhist’ and ‘accepting the doctrine of rebirth’. One may believe in rebirth doctrine or one may not. One can still be a Buddhist by following other doctrines which are more internally related to the essence of Buddhism. The author tries to show how this is possible with reference to Engaged Buddhism. He also suggests the way this is possible in the context of Classical Buddhism.
The author does this by making a brief and selective survey of engaged Buddhist approaches in terms of three categories: (1) Unconditional acceptance of rebirth doctrine (2) Unconditional rejection of the traditional rebirth doctrine and (3) Accepting rebirth doctrine at belief level, but allowing non-belief at the level of Buddhist practice.
Book Review: PERIODIZATION AND HISTORIOGRAPHY OF INDIAN PHILOSOPHY, edited by Eli FRANCO
Because of the belief in the authenticity (prāmāṇya) of some texts and in the eternality (sanātanatva) of the thought contained in them, traditional Indian philosophy was almost devoid of a historical sense. Hence writing a history of Indian philosophy by periodizing it becomes a challenge. The authors of this volume come to terms with this challenge from diverse perspectives.
The volume edited by Eli FRANCO, apart from having a lot of informative value, is full of important observations, perspectives and insights which modern scholars of Indian philosophy have to take seriously. Particularly, it is a must-read for those who are ready to approach Indian philosophy without dogmatism and blind beliefs