[INDOLOGY] nyaya and regress

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Only   Svatahpraamaanya  with respect to Veda is a Meemaamsaka position.

  Svatahpraamaanya along with Paratahpraamaanya  with respect to Veda is a
Nyaaya position.

Vedanta discussions contain both these approaches.

Anavasthaa is considered to be a dosha and is dealt with in Nyaaya and is
used in Vedanta borrowed from Nyaaya.

On Tue, Jun 4, 2024 at 3:16 PM Matthew Kapstein via INDOLOGY <
indology at list.indology.info> wrote:

>
> Dear Howard,
>
> The questions you ask are large ones and a thorough answer would require
> reference to large swathes of work on the Indian logical and
> epistemological systems. For some broad indications that others may wish to
> fill in:
>
> The Nyāyakos'a, p. 29, has a short entry on anavasthā, which is usually
> treated as the technical designation for the regress. But in fact the
> problem is very frequently invoked in philosophical works of the Vedānta
> and Buddhist Madhyamaka traditions and elsewhere as well.
>
> The issue of foundations has been central to recent discussions of
> Madhyamaka critques of the nyāya schools, both Buddhist and non-Buddhist.
> But it has been raised explicitly using the term "foundationalism"
> primarily in work on Tibetan Madhyamaka. For a survey see here:
>
> https://www.academia.edu/109324532/Knowing_Illusion_Bringing_a_Tibetan_Debate_into_Contemporary_Discourse_Volume_I_A_Philosophical_History_of_the_Debate_and_Volume_II_Translations
>
> Finally, the issue of svataḥ pramāṇa has figured prominently in recent
> work on Mīmāṃsā, above all on Kumārila. I don't know what Caitanya's
> sources may have been, but he and his disciples were no doubt drawing on
> well-established philosophical currents.
>
> hope this is at least a start,
> Matthew
>
> > Dear Scholars,
> >
> > Does the nyāya system speak about the problem of an infinite regress of
> proofs? Aristotle famously identifies and then avoids this problem through
> the notion of a self-evident foundation or starting point of knowledge. In
> Western epistemology, this strategy is often called foundationalism.
> >
> > Is there anything at all similar or analagous in nyāya or other Indian
> schools? The Caitanya-caritāmṛta several times affirms that the Veda is
> ’self-evident’, svataḥ pramāṇa, but the term is not used there as a general
> or secular epistemic strategy. Is the CC simply repeating a well-known
> epistemic principle?
> >
> > All help will be greatly appreciated.
> >
> > Thanks!
> > Howard
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > INDOLOGY mailing list
> > INDOLOGY at list.indology.info
> > https://list.indology.info/mailman/listinfo/indology
>
> _______________________________________________
> INDOLOGY mailing list
> INDOLOGY at list.indology.info
> https://list.indology.info/mailman/listinfo/indology
>


-- 
Nagaraj Paturi

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.
Dean, IndicA
BoS, MIT School of Vedic Sciences, Pune, Maharashtra
BoS Kavikulaguru Kalidasa Sanskrit University, Ramtek, Maharashtra
BoS Veda Vijnana Gurukula, Bengaluru.
Member, Advisory Council, Veda Vijnana Shodha Samsthanam, Bengaluru
Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies,
FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of  Liberal Education,
Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://list.indology.info/pipermail/indology/attachments/20240604/e206f15d/attachment.htm>