On Jun 24, 2024, at 2:16 AM, dmitry shevchenko <dima812000@yahoo.com> wrote:Dear Jeffery,In the Yogasūtra-bhāṣya, attributed to Vyāsa, there is a following argument, which is somewhat akin to the ontological argument. We observe in the world creatures with various cognitive capacities. Some perceive very small things, other very large things, some very remote things, etc. The fact that there are various degrees in cognitive capacities suggests that there must be the highest cognitive degree, i.e., omniscience. And the omniscient being is īśvara.It is not entirely clear whether the purpose of the argument is to prove the existence of God. I believe it is primarily meant to establish the possibility of omniscience, against which argue some Mīmāṃsakas. Nevertheless, it is based on a similar usage of the idea of "greatness" and on conceivability of its possession in the greatest measure...I'm attaching Larson's translation of this argument from the YSBh on the YS 1.25, with an elaboration by Vācaspati Miśra, who further atttempts to establish that omniscience can only be ascribed to God, and not to human teachers such as the Buddha and Mahāvīra.Best wishes,DimitryOn Monday, June 24, 2024 at 01:11:44 AM GMT+3, Jeffery Long via INDOLOGY <indology@list.indology.info> wrote:That is extremely helpful, Howard. Thank you!All the best,JeffOn Sunday, June 23, 2024, 6:07 PM, Howard Resnick <hr@ivs.edu> wrote:
Dear Jeff,There is a passage in the Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu by Rūpa Gosvāmī which is a sort of variation on Anselm’s argument. Anselm of course is making an ontological argument for the existence itself of God, whereas Rūpa argues that Kṛṣṇa must be the most complete form or conception of God, in comparison to Nārāyaṇa, Śīva etc, because he possesses the greatest number of divine qualities.What somehow connects Anselm and Rūpa, is that both assume that if God is infinitely great, then the greatest conception of God is closest to the truth. Anselm deploys this argument, of course, in assuming that existence itself is a positive attribute which must therefore be possessed by God.Rūpa assumes existence and then argues in terms of other attributes. But both share the assumption that if God is infinitely great, then then greatest conception is closest to the truth. That is what connects them, in my view.Thanks for the topic!Best wishes,HowardOn Jun 23, 2024, at 12:17 PM, Jeffery Long via INDOLOGY <indology@list.indology.info> wrote:Dear Colleagues,Forgive me if this question has already been raised at some point on this list.Are any of you aware of arguments developed in Indian philosophical systems akin to the ontological arguments for the existence of God raised by St. Anselm? The closest thing I can think of is Śaṅkara’s argument that existence is self-evident.With much gratitude in advance,JeffDr. Jeffery D. Long
Carl W. Zeigler Professor of Religion, Philosophy, & Asian Studies
School of Arts & Humanities
Elizabethtown College
Elizabethtown, PA
https://etown.academia.edu/JefferyLong
Series Editor, Explorations in Indic Traditions: Ethical, Philosophical, and Theological
Lexington Books
“One who makes a habit of prayer and meditation will easily overcome all difficulties and remain calm and unruffled in the midst of the trials of life.” (Holy Mother Sarada Devi)
“We are a way for the Cosmos to know itself.” (Carl Sagan)
_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY@list.indology.info
https://list.indology.info/mailman/listinfo/indology
_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY@list.indology.info
https://list.indology.info/mailman/listinfo/indology