Advertisement

Dignāga on the Causality of Object-Support (Ālambana) and Śubhagupta’s Refutation

  • Yufan MaoEmail author
Article
  • 7 Downloads

Abstract

To answer the question about an internal object serving as a cause of cognition, in his Ālambanaparīkṣāvṛtti, Dignāga elaborates two types of causality in the significance of object-support (ālambana): simultaneous causality and successive causality. Simultaneous causality is characterized as invariably concomitant (avyabhicārin), which refers to the inevitable co-existence of an object and its cognition. Successive causality is characterized as resemblance (anurūpa), which refers to a definite causal relationship between the immediate previous consciousness and its subsequent consciousness. That is, the preceding consciousness remains a potential power that transmits gradually to the subsequent consciousness. The potential power is carried with an object appearance in the stream of consciousness and becomes an actual internal object similar to the previous object in the subsequent consciousness. There are two alternatives of Dignāga’s ambiguous interpretation: either the internal object of the previous consciousness or the potential power can be regarded as an object-support for the subsequent consciousness. However, in his Bāhyārthasiddhikārikā, Śubhagupta criticizes both alternatives, writing that neither of these two serves as an object-support because neither appears in the subsequent consciousness. Therefore, they fail to fulfil the first requirement of an object-support even though they could fulfil the second requirement of an object-support. In addition, Śubhagupta argues that the causal relationship between the preceding consciousness and its subsequent consciousness is not necessary.

Keywords

Object-support (ālambanaCausality Dignāga Śubhagupta 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The author declares that there is no conflict of interest.

References

Primary Sources and Abbreviations

  1. ĀPV   Ālambanaparīkṣāvṛtti: Frauwallner, E. (1930) Dignāgas Ālambanaparīkṣā, Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde Morgenlandes, 37, 174–194.Google Scholar
  2. ĀPṬ   Ālambanaparīkṣāṭīkā: Duckworth, D. et al. (2016), Dignāna’s Investigation of the Percept, Oxford University Press, pp. 227–258.Google Scholar
  3. BASK   Bāhyārthasiddhikārikā: Mikogami, E. (1986). Śubhagupta no Bāhyārthasiddhikārikā. Ryūkoku Daigaku Ronshū, 429, 2–44.Google Scholar
  4. NP   Nyāyapraveśa: Dhruva, B., (Ed.), 1930, The Nyāyapraveśa, Part I, Sanskrit Text with Commentaries, Baroda.Google Scholar
  5. NR   Nyāyaratnākara: Śāstrī, S. D. (Ed.). 1978, Ślokavārttika of Śrī Kumārila Bhaṭṭa with the commentary Nyāyaratnākara of Śrī Pārthasārathimiśra. Varanasi.Google Scholar
  6. T   Taishō Shinshu Daizōkyō (The Tripiṭaka in Chinese, 2014), Chinese Buddhist Electronic Text Association, Taipei.Google Scholar
  7. TSP,B   Tattvasaṅgraha/-pañjikā: Shastri, S. D. (Ed.). 1968, Tattvasaṅgraha of Ācārya Shāntarakṣita: With the Commentary ‘Pañjikā’ of Shrī Kamalashīla, in two volumes. Vol.2, Bauddha Bharati, Varanasi.Google Scholar
  8. TSP,G   Tattvasaṅgraha/-pañjikā: Krishnamacharya, E. (Ed.). 1984, Tattvasaṃgraha of Śāntarakṣita with the commentary of Kamalaśīla, Gaekwad ’s Oriental Series No. 30, 31, Baroda.Google Scholar
  9. VŚ   Viṃśikā: Sylvain Lévi (Ed.). 1925, Vijñaptimātratāsiddhiḥ Deux Traités de Vasubandhu: Viṃśatikā et Triṃśikā, Paris: Libraire Ancienne Honoré Champion.Google Scholar

Secondary Sources

  1. Chu, J. (2006[2008]). On Dignāga’s theory of the object of cognition as presented in PS(V)1, Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies, 29, 211–235.Google Scholar
  2. Cox, C. (1988). On the possibility of a nonexistent object of consciousness: Sarvāstivādin and Dārṣṭāntika theories. Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies, 11(1), 31–87.Google Scholar
  3. Dhammajoti, K. L. (2007). Abhidharma doctrines and controversies on perception. Hongkong: Centre of Buddhist Studies, University of Hong Kong.Google Scholar
  4. Deleanu, F. (2006). The Chapter on the Mundane Path (Laukikamārga) in the Śrāvakabhūmi: A Trilingual Edition (Sanskrit, Tibetan, Chinese). Annotated Translation, and Introductory Study. 2 volumes. Studia Philologica Buddhica, Monograph Series XX. Tokyo: The International Institute for Buddhist Studies of the International College for Postgraduate Buddhist Studies.Google Scholar
  5. Duckworth, D., Eckel, M. D., Garfield, J. L., & Powers, J. (2016). Dignāna’s investigation of the percept. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Eckel, M. D. (2008). Bhāviveka and his Buddhist opponents: Chapters 4 and 5 of Bhāviveka’s Madhyamakahṛdayakārikaḥ with Tarkajvāla commentary. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Frauwallner, E. (1961). Landmarks in the history of Indian logic. Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde Süd- und Ostasiens, 5, 125–148.Google Scholar
  8. Hattori, M. (1960). Bāhyārthasiddhikārikā of Śubhagupta. Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies, 8(1), 395–400.Google Scholar
  9. Hattori, M. (1968). Dignāna on perception, being the Pratyakṣapariccheada of Dignāna’s Pramāṇasamuccaya form the Sanskrit fragments and Tibetan versions. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Hoornaert, P. (2000). An annotated translation of Madhyamakahṛdayakārikā/ Tarkajvālā V. 8–26. Studies and Essays Behavioral Science and Philosophy, 20, 75–111.Google Scholar
  11. Ichigō, M. (1985). Chūganshōgonron no Kenkyū [in Japanese]. Kyoto: Buneido.Google Scholar
  12. Kellner, B., & Taber, J. (2014). Studies in Yogācāra-Vijñānavāda Idealism I: The interpretation of Vasubandhu’s Viṃśikā. Asiatiche Studien/Études Asiatiques, 68(3), 709–756.Google Scholar
  13. Kazuo, K. (2008). Two short glosses on Yogācāra texts by Vairocanarakṣita: Viṃśikāṭīkāvivṛti and *Dharma-dharmatāvibhāgavivṛti. In F. Sferra (Ed.), Manuscripta Buddhica I—sanskrit texts from Giuseppe Tucci’s collection Part I (pp. 343–380). Roma: Istituto Italiano per l’Africa e l’Oriente.Google Scholar
  14. Lin, C. (2007[2009]). Object of cognition in Dignāga’s Ālambanaparīkṣāvṛttii: On the controversial passages in Paramārtha’s and Xuanzang’s translations, Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies, 30, 117–138.Google Scholar
  15. Matilal, B. K. (1986). Perception: An essay on classical Indian theories of knowledge. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  16. Matsuoka, H. (2013). Śāntarakṣita in defence of the Ālambanaparīkṣā v. 2ab. Journal of Indianand Buddhist Studies, 61(3), 183–189.Google Scholar
  17. Mikogami, E. (1982a). Śubhagupta no jikke (vāsanā) riron hihan [in Japanese]. Bukkyōgaku Kenkyū, 38, 28–51.Google Scholar
  18. Mikogami, E. (1982b). Śubhagupta no yuishikisetsu hihan [in Japanese]. Nanto Bukkyō, 48, 1–27.Google Scholar
  19. Mikogami, E. (1983). Śubhagupta no gokumi setsu no yōgo [in Japanese]. Ryūkoku Daigaku Bukkyō Bunka KenkyūshoKiyō, 21, 1–17.Google Scholar
  20. Mikogami, E. (1987). Śubhagupta ni yuishiki setstu hihan: ninshiki taishō (ālambana) o megutte [in Japanese]. Bukkyōgaku Kenkyū, 43, 481–460 (=66–87).Google Scholar
  21. Mikogami, E. (1989a). Bāhyārthasiddhikārikā ni okeru abhrānta to saṃvādin [in Japanese]. Ryūkoku Daigaku Ronshū, 433, 74–92.Google Scholar
  22. Mikogami, E. (1989b). Śubhagupta’s criticism of Vāsanā theory: Disputes between realists and the Vijñānavādins. Ryūkoku Daigaku Ronshū, 434–435, 31–46.Google Scholar
  23. Moriyama, S. (2014). A comparison between the Indian and Chinese interpretations of the antinomic reason (Viruddhāvyabhicārin). In C. Lin & M. Radich (Eds.), A distant mirror: Articulating indic ideas in sixth and seventh century Chinese Buddhism (pp. 121–150). Hamburg: Hamburg University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Ōta, S. (1968). An examination about the cognition of external object: An annotated translation of Tattvasaṁgraha, Bahirarthaparīkṣā(I) [in Japanese]. Journal of Saga Ryukoku Junior College, 14, 45–63.Google Scholar
  25. Ōta, S. (1970). An examination about the cognition of external object: An annotated translation of Tattvasaṁgraha, Bahirarthaparīkṣā(II) [in Japanese]. Journal of Saga Ryukoku Junior College, 17, 26–44.Google Scholar
  26. Saccone, M. S. (2014). Śubhagupta on the cognitive process. Journal of Indian Philosophy, 42, 377–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Saccone, M. S. (2015). The conception of atoms as substantially existing in Śubhagupta. Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies, 38, 109–139.Google Scholar
  28. Tzohar, R. (2017). Imagine being a Preta : Early Indian Yogācāra approaches to intersubjectivity. Sophia, 56(2), 337–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Tola, F., & Dragonetti, C. (2004). Being as consciousness. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.Google Scholar
  30. Yamaguchi, S. (1964). Bukkyō ni okeru mu to u to no tairon [in Japanese]. Tōkyō: Sankibō Busshorin.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Philosophy, Division of Social SciencesShanghai UniversityShanghaiChina

Personalised recommendations