July 14, 2019 posted by

Editorial Reviews. Review. ” Westerhoff’s commentary is lucid, philosophically engaging, and included ample references for the serious student of Indian or. The Dispeller of Disputes This page intentionally left blank The Dispeller of Disputes N¯ag¯arjuna’s Vigrahavy¯avar. The Dispeller of Disputes – Nagarjuna’s Vigrahavyavartani — translated and commented by Jan Westerhoff · A short work by the.

Author: Kigazilkree Mezizshura
Country: Gabon
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Medical
Published (Last): 26 October 2014
Pages: 353
PDF File Size: 16.98 Mb
ePub File Size: 14.28 Mb
ISBN: 226-7-47632-169-1
Downloads: 91505
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Kigatilar

Because of the non-emptiness, the negation fails to be accomplished by this. For if off two establish each other mutually, this is exactly what we would expect: It has this quality intrinsically, in the same way as suffering is not only conventionally troublesome but has this property independent of what anybody thinks about suffering.

If the epistemic instruments are established dispelper on the epistemic objects, then in this case the epistemic objects are not established dependent on the epistemic instruments.

It is also not the case that each one—perception, inference, likeness, or testimony— is established by another perception, inference, likeness, or testimony. He supports this by an astrological example. AmazonGlobal Ship Orders Internationally. Jan Westerhoff Oxford University.

It is hard to understand the meaning of this passage as given in the Sankskrit, while the Tibetan just reiterates the argument formulated in the preceding point.

In the passage from the Vaidalyaprakaran.

Those which are not conducive to liberation have a substance not conducive to liberation, the limbs of enlightenment have a substance which is the limbs of enlightenment, those which are not the limbs of enlightenment have a substance which is not the limbs of enlightenment, the factors harmonious with enlightenment have a substance which is harmonious with enlightenment, 24 THE DISPELLER OF DISPUTES those which are not harmonious with enlightenment have a substance which is not harmonious with enlightenment.

For there is no name whatsoever without a referent. Since it does not exist anywhere among these, it is without substance. This is partly due to the corruptions in the Sanskrit text and the omissions in the Tibetan and Chinese dusputes neither of which actually lists items 76 and partly due to disphtes fact that until now it has been impossible to trace similar enumerations elsewhere.


Or do both derive from a common source of arguments and comparisons present in the Indian philosophical debate before either text was composed Oetke Emptiness and Reasons [17—19, 68] This objection is a variation on a now-familiar theme. An immediate problem with regarding auspicious phenomena of the type just mentioned as substantially auspicious is the fact that they are causally produced.

For whom there is no emptiness there is nothing whatsoever.

For the dilemma described there reduces to the simple charge of argumentational impotence once the second horn has been rejected. The object to which the thingless substance of the object belongs needs to be explained. If you deny objects after having apprehended them through perception, that perception by which the objects are perceived dispellsr not exist. Similarly, if we want to establish the role of certain epistemic practices as epistemic instruments, we cannot then dislutes our knowledge on whatever results the epistemic practices themselves produce.

Comparisons of all three lists and attempts to reconstruct the original version can be found in Tucci The introduction is dispwller by a synopsis which gives a brief survey of the contents of the ten sections into which I have divided the text.

Jan Westerhoff, The Dispeller of Disputes: Nagarjuna’s Vigrahavyavartani – PhilPapers

All explanatory notes, discussions of variant readings and so forth have been left to the commentary. Please try again later. But this only holds if we assume that everything is causally produced, an assumption the opponent need not share. Ethan Mills – – Asian Philosophy 25 4: If this list was well known enough for it to be recognizable but not detailed enough to serve as a basis for a treatise refuting it, the arrangement of the text might appear a bit more reasonable.

Unfortunately this does not present us with a general way of seeing how an instance of an epistemic instrument could be established by more instances of the same kind. As was said before, because it is not substantially established it is empty. Nagarjuna is never an easy read at the Nagarjuna’s Vigrahavyavartani is an essential work of Madhyamaka Buddhist philosophical literature.

It is the very same with your epistemic instruments and objects: The same holds for the remaining ones.

The Dispeller of Disputes: Nagarjuna’s Vigrahavyavartani – PDF Free Download

dkspeller The decompression program itself, however, usually comes to dizpeller in compressed format. A Philosophical Introduction, by Jan Westerhoff. In this way, if the negation of the lack of substance in things was brought about by a substanceless TEXT 29 speech, things would be endowed with substance because of this very negation of substancelessness.


Usually lack of spatial connection is a dispfller explanation for why one thing cannot act on another one: According to the opponent, this would mean that there is an epistemic instrument out there that has a particular property, namely, accurately representing the world. There must be somebody there who mistakes the perception of the bent light rays for water. But this fact has to be established by some epistemic instruments, too.

Because your assertion does not exist in the cause: This page intentionally left blank Contents 1. Having assumed this, however, diispeller empty assertion fails to accomplish the negation of the substance of all things.

That something exists only by force of convention does not mean that we can change or abolish it at will.

The autocommentary here lists yet more categories from Buddhist thought which are supposed to be counterexamples to the theory of universal emptiness. For if suffering is not part of the dispute network, disoutes can anything cause it to cease to exist?

For example, we read in Phan. Shopbop Designer Fashion Brands. The point of his negation is not to make something existent nonexistent, but to remove a mistaken superimposition of substance onto the world.

The Dispeller of Disputes

It appears that he rather wants to say that he does not do both: Negation and Temporal Relations [20, 69] 3. As far as according to your statement the negation is not achieved in the three times, the object of negation is like the negation.

We do not speak without assenting to the conventional truth. The emptiness of all things was presented here in detail by our earlier remarks. On the whole, the philosophical system presented is quite uniform.