[INDOLOGY] nyaya and regress

[Sohini Pillai]

________________________________________
From: INDOLOGY <indology-bounces at list.indology.info> on behalf of Howard Resnick via INDOLOGY <indology at list.indology.info>
Sent: Saturday, June 8, 2024 5:41:52 PM
To: Brendan S. Gillon, Prof.
Cc: Indology List
Subject: Re: [INDOLOGY] nyaya and regress

Thanks Brendan. That was my impression, regarding itaretarāśṛaya and anavasthā.

Interestingly, in recent Western epistemology, coherentism, which is essentially itaretarāśraya, has been put forward as perhaps the major challenger to various versions of foundationalism, the Aristotelian escape from an infinite regress of proofs, anavasthā, through a self-evident foundation, svataḥ pramāna, a notion found in various places in Indian philosophy.

Ironically, coherentists praise the itaretarāśraya as epistemically sufficient. They cite images like a spider’s web, or other networks, where all the parts, depending on each other, form a holistic truth system. This coherentist hallmark of “a system of mutually supporting beliefs," seems to literally translate itaretarāśraya.

It strikes me, though, that coherentism itself rests upon an obvious foundation -- the belief that coherence somehow indicates veracity.

As we know, many conceptual, dialectic, and analytic elements in Indian intellectual history have much to say to Western philosophy, in this case to epistemology.

Thanks again for the valuable help.
Best wishes,
Howard

On Jun 8, 2024, at 5:07 PM, Brendan S. Gillon, Prof. via INDOLOGY <indology at list.indology.info> wrote:

The quick answer is that itaretarāśṛaya is akin to circularity and anavasthā  to infinite regress.

Brendan Gillon

On 2024-06-08 12:02, Howard Resnick via INDOLOGY wrote:
Thank you Madhav for this information, and thank you for bringing to mind my first and much appreciated Sanskrit professor, Hartmut Scharfe, whom I studied with as an undergraduate  at UCLA.

Regarding itaretarāśṛaya, often taken to mean ‘mutual dependence’, can this be seen as an indirect or oblique indication of infinite regress, by way of an apratiṣṭhāna, foundationless, situation?

Thanks and best wishes!
Howard

On Jun 8, 2024, at 11:07 AM, Madhav Deshpande <mmdesh at umich.edu><mailto:mmdesh at umich.edu> wrote:

Another source for discussions of topics like Anavasthā and Itaretarāśraya may be Hartmut Scharfe's book: "Die Logik im Mahābhaāṣya," Berlin 1961.

Madhav M. Deshpande
Professor Emeritus, Sanskrit and Linguistics
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
Senior Fellow, Oxford Center for Hindu Studies
Adjunct Professor, National Institute of Advanced Studies, Bangalore, India

[Residence: Campbell, California, USA]


On Sat, Jun 8, 2024 at 6:47 AM Howard Resnick via INDOLOGY <indology at list.indology.info<mailto:indology at list.indology.info>> wrote:
Thank you Philipp. Very helpful.

All the best,
Howard

On Jun 8, 2024, at 3:00 AM, Philipp Maas via INDOLOGY <indology at list.indology.info<mailto:indology at list.indology.info>> wrote:

Dear Howard,
On anavasthā and related terms in various systems of thought, see also Oberhammer, G. (1991). Terminologie der frühen indischen Scholastik in Indien. Vol. 1. A-I. Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, p. 32f.

Best wishes,

Philipp
__________________________

Prof. Dr. Philipp A. Maas
Professor for Modern Indology
Institute of Indology and Tibetology
Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich
___________________________

https://spp1448.academia.edu/PhilippMaas


Am Di., 4. Juni 2024 um 11:05 Uhr schrieb Howard Resnick via INDOLOGY <indology at list.indology.info<mailto:indology at list.indology.info>>:
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<mailto:INDOLOGY at list.indology.info>
https://list.indology.info/mailman/listinfo/indology

_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY at list.indology.info<mailto:INDOLOGY at list.indology.info>
https://list.indology.info/mailman/listinfo/indology


_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY at list.indology.info<mailto:INDOLOGY at list.indology.info>
https://list.indology.info/mailman/listinfo/indology




_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY at list.indology.info<mailto:INDOLOGY at list.indology.info>
https://list.indology.info/mailman/listinfo/indology



--

Brendan S. Gillon                       email: brendan.gillon at mcgill.ca<mailto:brendan.gillon at mcgill.ca>
Department of Linguistics
McGill University                       tel.:  001 514 398 4868
1085, Avenue Docteur-Penfield
Montreal, Quebec                        fax.:  001 514 398 7088
H3A 1A7  CANADA

webpage: http://webpages.mcgill.ca/staff/group3/bgillo/web/


_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY at list.indology.info
https://list.indology.info/mailman/listinfo/indology