Dear All

On the question of the extent to which the Vaibhāṣika view was 'direct realism', see footnote 5 of the attached article, referring to:
Sharf, R. H. (2018), “Knowing Blue: Early Buddhist Accounts of Non-Conceptual Sense,” Philosophy East and West, 68 (3): 826–70.

Yours
Alex 
--
Alex Watson
Professor of Indian Philosophy, Ashoka University

On Fri, Jun 14, 2024 at 1:05 PM Matthew Kapstein via INDOLOGY <indology@list.indology.info> wrote:
Dear Olena,

Your comment "the nirākāra-(jñāna-)vāda (advocated by the Naiyāyikas, the Mīmāṃsakas, the Jainas, and the Vaibhāṣika Buddhists) can be called direct realism" very well illustrates the point I was making. Although these schools "can be called direct realism," it is not at all clear that they all mean the same thing. For the Vaibhāṣika Buddhists, in particular, what we "directly" perceive are primitive phenomena - the dharmas of color, sound, odor, etc. - and the pots and pans of everyday life are constructed on the basis of these primitives. This doesn't look much like what philosophers are usually speaking of when they discuss "direct realism." I also ask whether the Vaibhāṣika in fact described their own view as  nirākāravāda, or whether that description was merely applied to them by later doxographers.

The doxographical categories, whether Indian (like nirākāra-(jñāna-)vāda) or Western (like "direct realism") may sometimes obscure more than they reveal.

Matthew T. Kapstein
Professor emeritus
Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes, PSL Research University, Paris

Associate
The University of Chicago Divinity School






Sent with Proton Mail secure email.

On Friday, June 14th, 2024 at 1:06 PM, Ołena Łucyszyna via INDOLOGY <indology@list.indology.info> wrote:
Dear Lee Ling,
 
the nirākāra-(jñāna-)vāda (advocated by the Naiyāyikas, the Mīmāṃsakas, the Jainas, and the Vaibhāṣika Buddhists) can be called direct realism. The earliest text that formulates the nirākāra standpoint and sparks the nirākāra—sākāra debate is probably Śabara’s Śābarabhāṣya (to be more precise, the Vṛttikāra’s commentary cited by Śabara in Śābarabhāṣya I, 1, 5). Śabara’s commentator Kumārila Bhaṭṭa presents well-developed argumentation for the nirākāra-vāda in his Ślokavārttika (V, 4, the Śūnyavāda section). These two sources belong to Mīmāṃsā. The Nyāya source advocating the nirākāra-vāda I am familiar with is Bhaṭṭa Jayanta’s Nyāyamañjarī. For Bhaṭṭa Jayanta’s defence of the nirākāra-vāda, see
 
Kataoka, K. (2003). Critical edition of the Vijñānādvaitavāda section of Bhaṭṭa Jayanta’s Nyāyamañjarī. https://www2.lit.kyushu-u.ac.jp/~kkataoka/Kataoka/NMvijR.pdf.
Watson, A., & Kataoka, K. (2010). Bhaṭṭa Jayanta’s refutation of the Yogācāra Buddhist doctrine of Vijñānavāda: Annotated translation and analysis. South Asian Classical Studies, 5, 285–352.
 
This is one of many valuable publications I can recommend: Sinha, J. (1938). Indian realism. Kegan Paul, Trench, Trübner & Co.
 
The nirākāra-vāda can be called direct realism, but the sākāra-vāda has no correspondence in Western philosophy. The sākāra-vāda encompasses two very different theories: indirect realism (representationalism) and phenomenalism.
 
With best regards,
Olena
--
of Mediterranean and Oriental Cultures
Polish Academy of Sciences
Nowy Świat 72
00-330 Warsaw




Od: INDOLOGY <indology-bounces@list.indology.info> w imieniu użytkownika Lee Ling Ting via INDOLOGY <indology@list.indology.info>
Wysłane: piątek, 14 czerwca 2024 10:06
Do: Indology List <indology@list.indology.info>
Temat: [INDOLOGY] Direct Realism of Nyāya
 
Dear members of the list, 

Greetings! 
I have a question to ask. 
What are some of the earliest Nyāya sources that explicitly spell out that Naiyāyikas uphold direct realism (not just realism)? I'd appreciate it if you could point me in the right direction. 
Thank you! 

Best regards,
Lee Ling 






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