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.
|Published (Last):||14 May 2011|
|PDF File Size:||8.10 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||6.35 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
As such, the opponent argues, they should be intrinsically meritorious and therefore not empty. The Dispeller of Disputes: University Press Scholarship Online. This speech does not exist substantially, therefore there is no destruction of my position.
Dispeller of Disputes: Nagarjuna’s Vigrahavyavartani – Oxford Scholarship
But this fact has to be established by some epistemic instruments, too. Fortunately, contemporary scholars, unlike Yamaguchi and Tucci, do not have to rely exclusively on either of these translations any more.
No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior permission of Oxford University Press. It is therefore hard to see how the opponent who takes his premisses from a Buddhist background can accept both the idea of dependent origination and the view that certain key items of the Buddhist worldview are not so originated.
In the same way in which for him simple terms are guaranteed to refer, simple perceptions can never be erroneous. The method which has been indicated with reference to the auspicious things is just the same for the inauspicious, for the indeterminate, for those leading to liberation, and so forth. 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.
This point requires some explanation. Supposing that the negation is earlier, and the negated later fails to be successful.
Dispeller of Disputes
What could this argument be? There is no substantial existence of that sound because it is dependently arisen. Sign in to use this feature. Let there be twins of identical height, one of whom wears a horizontally striped dress, the other one a vertically striped one.
And as the speech of mine is empty because of the lack of substance, so all things are also dis;utes because of the lack of substance. But in this case he is in the curious position of using knowledge of the objects in order to dispfller which epistemic practices are epistemic instruments. These are not just off or good because we think them to be that way, but they have these qualities by their very nature, and exist independent of anything else.
The Dispeller of Disputes: Nagarjuna’s Vigrahavyavartani
Given the problems of the alternative picture he provides, this is in fact the preferable option. After the list of auspicious things, the commentary continues by noting that in the same way as auspicious mental events are intrinsically auspicious, the inauspicious ones are also inauspicious by nature.
See also Nagel You might rather think: Because the Blessed One said that all compounded things are impermanent. Print Save Cite Email Share.
They are not epistemic objects that need to be established. In the passage from the Vaidalyaprakaran.
See, for example, Kajiyama English Choose a language for shopping. Even though a chariot is dependently originated, being existentially dependent on its parts, and causally dependent on whatever brought the parts into dispelle, this does not mean that one cannot use it to transport wood or other goods.
ISBN ; pbk. This reply is immune from the objection just made, that an unconnected illumination would illuminate all darkness whatsoever.
Because those epistemic instruments are established by other epistemic instruments, and so in turn for these other epistemic instruments. There is no darkness in the blazing, nor in something else in which there is blazing.
We remember xispeller in verse 12 the opponent asserted that if it is the negation of a non-existent object we are concerned with, it is not necessary to establish it using language, since the things negated are not real possibilities we are ever likely to encounter. In the same way, considering the two horns of a cow, which have arisen simultaneously, it is clearly not the djsputes that the right one is the cause of the left or the left the cause of the right.
But if two objects are different substances or composites of different substances, it should be possible to give a clear analysis of their identity or difference: Then we dispelled come up with an account of how they work, their inner nature, and so forth.