Buddhist Texts · Cārvāka/Lokāyata

♦ Lokākṣa on causation: Avalokitavrata’s apparently discordant perspectives

In what follows, I  provide the English translation of some passages from Avalokitavrata’s Ṭīkā on Bhāviveka’s Prajñāpradīpa on Nāgārjuna’s Mūlamadhyamakakarika, from which some apparently discordant perspectives on the theory of causation of *Lokākṣa (’Jig rten mig), a mahārṣi among the Lokāyatas, are outlined. This is only a preliminary and incomplete collection (based only on the… Continue reading ♦ Lokākṣa on causation: Avalokitavrata’s apparently discordant perspectives

Buddhist Texts

♦ To conclude on Mūlamadhyamakakārika VIII, 4: philosophical notes

In a previous post I have taken into consideration Nāgārjuna’s Mūlamadhyamakakārikā VIII, 4 in its Sanskrit and Tibetan versions. The Sanskrit texts runs thus: hetāv asati kāryaṃ ca kāraṇaṃ ca na vidyate | tadabhāve kriyā kartā karaṇaṃ ca na vidyate || That is: If there is no cause, both effect and cause are not found;… Continue reading ♦ To conclude on Mūlamadhyamakakārika VIII, 4: philosophical notes

Buddhist Texts · indica lingua

♦ Again on Mūlamadhyamakakārikā VIII, 4 (in brief)

If we compare de Jong’s and de la Vallée Poussin’s editions of MMK, 4cd (we have already dealt with this kārikā here), we can notice the following difference: de Jong: hetāv asati kāryaṃ ca kāraṇaṃ ca na vidyate | tadabhāve kriyā kartā kāraṇaṃ ca na vidyate || de la Vallée Poussin: hetāv asati kāryaṃ ca… Continue reading ♦ Again on Mūlamadhyamakakārikā VIII, 4 (in brief)

Buddhist philosophy and psychology · Buddhist Texts · indica lingua · lingua tibetica

♦ Some open reflections on Mūlamadhyamakakārikā VIII, 4ab

Let us consider Mūlamadhyamakakārikā VIII, 4ab, where Nāgārjuna seems to accept a sort of “priority” of hetu on both pratyaya and utpanna: hetāv asati kāryaṃ ca kāraṇaṃ ca na vidyate | («when the [primary] cause does not exist, both the effect and the [secondary] cause are not evident»). Jacques May, reflecting on this half a… Continue reading ♦ Some open reflections on Mūlamadhyamakakārikā VIII, 4ab

Buddhist philosophy and psychology

♦ Nāgārjuna on cause/condition: moral implications

According to Nāgārjuna, only a modifiable (not permanently identical with, nor permanently different from, himself/herself) person can be a concrete enjoyer of good and bad results of his/her own actions. But to be modifiable means to lack svabhāvaḥ. Now, to avoid both the svabhāvaḥ and the parabhāvaḥ positions, Nāgārjuna prefers to adopt a “neither A,… Continue reading ♦ Nāgārjuna on cause/condition: moral implications

Buddhist philosophy and psychology

♦ Nāgārjuna on “cause” and “condition”: pars construens (2)

If it is true that both the Pāli Canon and Nāgārjuna consider the conditional relations on the basis of the positive and negative (α and β) twofold formulae (αβ.1 and αβ.2) (see Nāgārjuna on “cause” and “condition”: pars construens (1)), nonetheless between the two perspectives there is a crucial difference: although, according to SN I,… Continue reading ♦ Nāgārjuna on “cause” and “condition”: pars construens (2)