Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

History, Philology, and the Philosophical Study of Sanskrit Texts

Jonardon Ganeri’s Philosophy in Classical India

  • Published:
Journal of Indian Philosophy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper is a critical review of Jonardan Ganeri’s Philosophy in Classical India.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

ATV:

Ātmatattvaviveka (Udayana) in Dvivedin and Dravida (1986)

AVS:

Antarvyāptisamarthana (Ratnākaraśānti) in Kajiyama (1999)

DhPr:

Dharmottarapradīpa (Durvekamiśra) in Malvania (1971)

HB:

Hetubindu (Dharmakīrti) in Steinkellner (1967)

JNA:

Jn͂ānaśrīmitranibandhāvali (Jn͂ānaśrīmitra) in Thakur (1987)

NB:

Nyāyabindu(Dharmakīrti) in DhPr

NK:

Nyāyakaṇḍali (Srīdhara) in Jha (1977)

NKu:

Nyāyakusumān͂jali (Udayana) in Upādhyāya and Subrahmanya Sāstri (1957).

NP:

Nyāyapraveśa (Saṅkarasvāmin) in Tachikawa (1971).

NR:

Nyāyaratna(Maṇikaṇṭha) in Śāstri and Krishnamacharya (1953).

NSu:

Nyāyasūtra (Gautama) in NBh

NBh:

Nyāyabhāṣya (Vātsyāyana) in Thakur (1997a, b).

NM:

Nyāyamukha (Dignāga) in Tucci (1930), and Katsura (1977, 1978, 1979a, b, 1981a, b, 1984, 1987).

NV:

Nyāyavārttika (Uddyotakara) in Thakur (1997a, b).

NVTT:

Nyāyavārttikatātparyaṭīkā(Vācaspatimiśra) in Thakur (1994).

NVTTP:

Nyāyavārttikatātparyaṭīkāpariśuddhi(Udayana) in Thakur (1996).

PCI:

Philosophy in Classical India

PBh:

Praśastapādabhāṣyam (Praśastapāda) in Jha (1977)

PS:

Pramāṇasamuccaya(Dignāga) in Suzuki (1955–1961).

PSV:

Pramāṇasamuccayavṛtti (Dignāga) in Suzuki (1955–1961).

PV 1:

Pramāṇavārttika, Svārthānumāna (Dharmakīrti) in Gnoli (1960).

PV 4:

Pramāṇavārttika, Parārthānumāna (Dharmakīrti) in Miyasaka (1971/1972), Tillemans (2000).

PVin 1:

Pramāṇaviniścaya (Dharmakīrti) in Vetter (1966).

PVSV:

Pramāṇavārttikasvavṛtti(Dharmakīrti) in Gnoli (1960).

SP:

Sambandhaparīkṣā (Dharmakīrti) in Frauwallner (1934).

TCM:

Tattvacintāmaṇi (Gaṅgeśa) in Tatacharya 1972 (Perception), 1982 (Inference, part 1), 1991 (Inference, part 2)

VC:

Vyāpticarcā (Jn͂ānaśrīmitra) in JNA

VN:

Vādanyāya (Dharmakīrti) in Much (1991).

WSTB:

Wiener Studien zur Tibetologie und Buddhismuskunde

WZKS:

Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde Südasiens

WZKSO:

Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde Süd- und Ostasiens

References

  • Bagchi, S. (1953). Inductive reasoning: A study of Tarka and its role in Indian logic. Calcutta: Munishchandra Sinha.

  • Balcerowicz, P. D. (2001). Jaina epistemology in historical and comparative perspective: Critical edition and English translation of logical-epistemological treatises: Nyay âvatara, Nyay âvatara-vivrti and Nyay âvat âra-tippana with introduction and notes. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag.

  • Bronkhorst J. (1989). A review of "‘Ich’ und das Ich: Analytische Untersuchungen zur buddistisch-brahmanischen ātmankontroverse". WZKS 33: 223–225

    Google Scholar 

  • Chakraborty K. (1978a). Definitions of Vyāpti (Pervasion) in Navya-Nyāya: A critical survey. Journal of Indian Philosophy 5: 209–236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chakraborty K. (1978b). The Nyāya concept of Svābhāvika Sambandha: A historical retrospect. Journal of Indian Philosophy 5: 385–392

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunne J.D. (2004). Foundations of Dharmakīrti’s philosophy. Wisdom Publications, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Dvivedin, V. P., & Dravida, L. S. (1986). Ātmatattvaviveka: With the commentaries of śaṅkara Miśra, Bhagīratha Thakkura, and Raghunātha Tārkikaśiromaṇī. Calcutta: Asiatic Society.

  • Franco, E. (1987). Perception, knowledge and disbelief: A study of Jayarāśi’s scepticism. Alt- und Neu-Indische Studien 35. Wiesbaden.

  • Franco E. (1990). Valid reason, true sign. WZKS 34: 189–208

    Google Scholar 

  • Franco E. (1997). Distortion at the price of comprehensibility. Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 20: 109–132

    Google Scholar 

  • Frauwallner E. (1933). Zu den Fragmenten buddhistischer Logiker im Nyāyavārttikam. WZKS 40: 281–304

    Google Scholar 

  • Frauwallner E. (1934). Dharmakīrti’s Sambandhaparīkṣā. Text und übersetzung. WZKM 41: 261–300

    Google Scholar 

  • Frauwallner E. (1957). Vasubandhu’s Vādaviddhi. WZKSO 1: 104–146

    Google Scholar 

  • Frauwallner E. (1959). Dignāga, sein werk und seine Entwicklung. WZKSO 3: 83–164

    Google Scholar 

  • Frauwallner, E. (1970). Die Lehre von der zusatzlichen Bestimmung in Gangesa’s Tattvacintamanih. Wien, Köln, Graz: Böhlau.

  • Ganeri J. (2001a). Philosophy in classical India: An introduction and analysis. Routledge, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Ganeri J. (2001b). Indian logic: A reader. Curzon Press, Richmond, Surrey

    Google Scholar 

  • Ganeri J. (2003). Ancient Indian logic as a theory of case-based reasoning. Journal of Indian Philosophy 31: 34–45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gangopadhyaya, M. (1984). Indian logic in its sources on validity of inference. New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal.

  • Gillon, B. (1991). Dharmakīrti and the problem of induction. In E. Steinkellner (Ed.), Studies in the Buddhist epistemological tradition (pp. 53–58). Vienna, österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften: philosophisch-historischen Klasse, Denkschriften, 222. Band; Verlag der österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Wien.

  • Gillon B. (2003). Review of "philosophy in classical India". Mind 112: 707–711

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gnoli, R. (1960). The Pramāṇavārttikam of Dharmakīrti. Roma.

  • Goekoop, C. (1967). The logic of invariable concomitance in the Tattvacintāmaṇi: Gaṅgeśa’s Anumitinirūpaṇa and Vyāptivāda. Dordrecht, Holland: D. Reidel.

  • Gokhale P.P. (1992). Inference and fallacies discussed in ancient Indian logic. Sri Satguru Publication, Delhi

    Google Scholar 

  • Granoff, P. E. (1978). Philosophy and argument in late Vedānta: Śrī Harṣa’s Khaṇḍanakhaṇḍakhādya. Dordrecht, Holland, Boston: D. Reidel Pub. Co.

  • Hattori, M. (2000). Dignāga’s theory of meaning: An annotated translation of the Pramāṇasamuccayavṛtti: Chapter V: Anyāpoha-parīkṣa (I). In J. A. Silk (Ed.), Wisdom, compassion, and the search for understanding: The Buddhist studies legacy of Gadjin M. Nagao. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press.

  • Hayes R. (1980). Dignāga’s views on reasoning. Journal of Indian Philosophy 8: 219–277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes R.P. (1988). Dignāga on the interpretation of signs. Kluwer, Dordrecht, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Herzberger, R. (1986). Three systems of Buddhist logic. In B. K. Matilal & R. D. Evans (Eds.), Buddhist logic and epistemology: Studies in the Buddhist analysis of inference and language. Dordrecht, Holland: Boston, Hingham, MA, USA: D. Reidel.

  • Inami, M. (1999). On the determination of causality. In S. Katsura (Ed.), Dharmakirti’s thought and its impact on Indian and Tibetan philosophy: Proceedings of the third international Dharmakirti conference, Hiroshima, November 4–6, 1997. (pp. 131–155). Wien: Verlag der österreichischen Akademie der Wissenchaften.

  • Iwata T. (2003). An introduction of Dharmakīrti’s Svabhāva-hetu. Journal of Indian Philosophy 31(1–3): 61–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iwata, T. (2004). The negative concomitance (vyatireka) in the case of inconclusive (anaikāantika) reasons. In S. Katsura & E. Steinkellner (Ed.), The role of the example (dṛṣṭāna) in classical indian logic (pp. 91–134). Wien: Arbeitskreis für tibetische und buddhistische Studien, Universität Wien.

  • Jambuvijayaji, M. (1966). Dvādaśāraṃ Nayacakram of Ācārya Mallavādi Kṣamāśramaṇa. With the commentary Nyāyāgamānusāriṇī of Śrī Siṃhasūri Gaṇi Vādi Kṣamāśramaṇa. Śrī Ātmānand Jain Granthamālā 93. Bhavanagar.

  • Jha, D. (1977). Nyāyakandalī. Varanasi: Sampurnanand Sanskrit Vishvavidyalaya, Ganganatha Jha Granthamala.

  • Kajiyama, Y. (1999). The Antarvyāptisamarthana of Ratnākaraśānti. Bibliotheca Buddhica II. Tokyo: Soka University.

  • Katsura S. (1977). A study of the Nyāymukha (1) [Inmyō shōrimonron kenkū]. Bulletin of the Faculty of Letters of Hiroshima University 37: 106–127

    Google Scholar 

  • Katsura S. (1978). A study of the Nyāymukha (2) [Inmyō shōrimonron kenkū]. Bulletin of the Faculty of Letters of Hiroshima University 38: 110–130

    Google Scholar 

  • Katsura S. (1979a). The Apoha theory of Dignāga. Indogaku Bukkyogaku Kenkyū 28: 16–20

    Google Scholar 

  • Katsura S. (1979b). A study of the Nyāymukha (3) [Inmyō shōrimonron kenkū]. Bulletin of the Faculty of Letters of Hiroshima University 39: 63–82

    Google Scholar 

  • Katsura S. (1981). A study of the Nyāymukha (4) [Inmyō shōrimonron kenkū]. Bulletin of the Faculty of Letters of Hiroshima University 41: 62–83

    Google Scholar 

  • Katsura S. (1984a). Dharmakīrti’s theory of truth. Journal of Indian Philosophy 12: 215–235

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Katsura S. (1984b). A study of the Nyāymukha (6) [Inmyō shōrimonron kenkū]. Bulletin of the Faculty of Letters of Hiroshima University 44: 43–74

    Google Scholar 

  • Katsura S. (1985). On Trairūpya formulae. In K. S. H. Kunenkai (Ed.), Buddhism and its relation to other religions: Essays in honour of Dr. Shozen Kumai on his Seventienth birthday (pp. 161–172). Kyoto.

  • Katsura S. (1986a). On the origin and development of the concept of Vyāpti in Indian logic. Tetsugaku: The Journal of Hiroshima Philosophical Society XXXVII: 1–16

    Google Scholar 

  • Katsura, S. (1986b). Jn͂ānaśrīmitra on Apoha. In B. K. Matilal & R. D. Evans (Eds), Buddhist logic and epistemology: Studies in the Buddhist analysis of inference and language. Dordrecht, Holland, Boston, Hingham. M.A, USA: D. Reidel Pub. Co.

  • Katsura S. (1987). A study of the Nyāymukha (7) [Inmyō shōrimonron kenkū]. Bulletin of the Faculty of Letters of Hiroshima University 46: 46–85

    Google Scholar 

  • Katsura, S. (1991). Dignāga and Dharmakīrti on Apoha. In E. Steinkellner (Ed.), Studies in the Buddhist epistemological tradition (pp. 129–144). Vienna, österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften: philosophisch-historischen Klasse, Denkschriften, 222. Wien, Band; Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.

  • Katsura S. (1992). Dignāga and Dharmakīrti on Adarśanamātra and Anupalabdhi. Asiatische Studien/Etudes Asiatiques XLVI(1): 222–231

    Google Scholar 

  • Katsura, S. (2000). Dignāga on Trairūpya reconsidered. In A. Akamatsu (Ed.), Indo no bunka to ronri. Tosaki hiromasa hakase koki kinen ronbunshū (pp. 241–266). Fukuoka.

  • Katsura, S. (2004). The role of the dṛṣṭāna in Dignāga’s logic. In S. Katsura & E. Steinkellner (Eds), The role of the example (dṛṣṭāna) in classical Indian logic. Wien: Arbeitskreis für tibetische und buddhistische Studien, Universität Wien.

  • Katsura, S., & Steinkellner E. (2004). The role of the example (dṛṣṭāna) in classical Indian logic. Wien: Arbeitskreis für tibetische und buddhistische Studien, Universität Wien.

  • Lasic, H. (1999). Dharmakīrti and his successors on the determination of causality. In S. Katsura (Ed.), Dharmakīrti’s thought and its impact on Indian and Tibetan philosophy: Proceedings of the third international Dharmakīrti conference (pp. 233–242). Wien: Verlag der Österreeichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften: Beiträge zur Kultur - und Geistesgeschichte Asiens.

  • Lasic, H. (2000a). Jn͂ānaśrīmitras Vyāpticarcā: Sanskrittext, Übersetzung, analyse. Wien: Arbeitskreis für Tibetische und Buddhistische Studien. WSTB 48.

  • Lasic, H. (2000b). Ratnakīrtis Vyāptinirṇaya: Sanskrittext, Übersetzung, analyse. Wien, Arbeitskreis für Tibetische und Buddhistische Studien. WSTB 49.

  • Lasic H. (2003). On the utilisation of causality as a basis of inference: Dharmakīrti’s statements and their interpretation. Journal of Indian Philosophy 31: 185–197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malvania, D. (1971). Dharmottara-pradīpa. Paṇḍita Durveka Miśra’s Dharmottara-pradīpa [Being a sub-commentary on Dharmottara’s Nyāya-bindu-ṭīkā, a commentary on Dharmakīrti’s Nyāya-bindu.] Patna: Kashi Prasad Jayaswal.

  • Matilal B. K. (1972). The logic of invariable concomitance in the Tattvacintamani: Gangesa’s Anumitinirupana and Vyaptivada. Journal of the American Oriental Society 92(1): 169–173

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matilal B.K. (1985). Logic, language and reality: An introduction to Indian philosophical studies. Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi

    Google Scholar 

  • Matilal, B. K. (1998). The character of logic in India. Suny series in Indian thought, State University of New York Press.

  • Meuthrath, A. (1996). Untersuchungen zur kompositionsgechichte der Nyāyasūtras. Wurzburg, Altenberge.

  • Miyasaka Y. (1971/1972). Pramāṇa-vārttika-kārikā (Sanskrit and Tibetan), chapters 2,3,4. Acta Indologica 2: 1–206

    Google Scholar 

  • Much, M. (1991) Dharmakīrti’s Vādanyāyaḥ. Teil 1—Sanskrit text. Teil 2—Übersetzung und Anmerkungen. Wien.

  • Oberhammer G. (1964). Pakṣilasvāmin’s introduction to Nyāyabhāṣyam. Asian Studies 2: 302–322

    Google Scholar 

  • Oberhammer, G., Prets, E. et al. (1991). Terminologie der frühen philosophischen Scholastik in Indien: ein Begriffswörterbuch zur altindischen Dialektik, Erkenntnislehre und Methodologie. Band 1: A-I. Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.

  • Oetke, C. (1991). Svabhāvapratibandhaand the types of reasons in Dharmakīrti’s theory of inference. In E. Steinkellner (Ed.), Studies in the Buddhist epistemological tradition: Second international Dharmakīrti conference (pp. 243–268). Vienna, Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften: philosophisch-historischen Klasse, Denkschriften, 222. Wien, Band; Verlag der österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.

  • Oetke, C. (1993). Controverting the Ātman-controversy and the query of segregating philological and non-philosophical issues in studies on eastern philosophies and religions: Comments on some remarks of J. Bronkhorst.” Studien Zur Indologie Und Iranistik, 18, 191–212.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oetke, C. (1994). Studies on the doctrine of Trairūpya. Wien: Arbeitskreis für Tibetische und Buddhistische Studien Universität Wien. WSTB 33.

  • Oetke C. (1996). Ancient Indian logic as a theory of non-monotonic reasoning. Journal of Indian Philosophy 24: 447–539

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oetke C. (2003a). A review of "Philosophy in classical India: The proper work of reason. Indo-Iranian Journal 46(2): 135–155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oetke C. (2003b). Indian logic and Indian syllogism. Indo-Iranian Journal: 46(1): 53–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ono, M. (1999). Dharmakīrti on asādhāraṇānaikāntika. In S. Katsura (Ed.), Dharmakirti’s thought and its impact on Indian and Tibetan philosophy: Proceedings of the third international Dharmakirti conference, Hiroshima, November 4–6, 1997 (pp. 301–316). Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenchaften.

  • Ono, M. (2000). Pramāṇaviniścaya ni okeru fugūfuyōin setu [The asādhāraṇānaikāntika Theory in the Pramāṇaviniścaya]. In A. Akamatsu (Ed.), Indo no bunka to ronri. Tosaki hiromasa hakase koki kinen ronbunshū (pp. 241–266). Fukuoka.

  • Phillips, S. H. (1995). Classical Indian metaphysics: refutations of realism and the emergence of “New logic”. Chicago: Open Court.

  • Phillips, S. H., Ramanuja Tatacharya, N. S. (2002). Gaṅgeśa on the Upādhi, the “Inferential undercutting condition”: Introduction, translation, and explanation. New Delhi: Indian Council of Philosophical Research.

  • Potter, K. H., & Bhattacharyya, S. (1993). Indian philosophical analysis: Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika from Gaṅgeśa to Raghunātha śiromaṇi. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers.

  • Preisendanz K. and Franco E. (1995). A note on Bhavadāsa’s interpretation of Mīmāṃsāsūtra 1.1.4 and the date of the Nyāyabhāṣya. Berliner Indologische Studien 1995: 81–85

    Google Scholar 

  • Prets, E. (2004). Examples and exemplification in early Nyāya and Vaiśeṣika. In S. Katsura & E. Steinkellner (Eds.), The role of the example (dṛṣṭāna) in classical Indian logic (pp. 197–224). Wien: Arbeitskreis für tibetische und buddhistische Studien, Universität Wien.

  • Ruben, W. (1928). Die Nyayasūtra’s: Text, Übersetzung, Erläuterung und Glossar. Leipzig: Deutsche morgenländische gesellschaft.

  • Siderits M. (2003). Deductive, inductive, both or neither. Journal of Indian Philosophy 30: 303–321

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Solomon, E. A. (1976). Indian dialectics: Methods of philosophical discussion. Ahmedabad: B.J. Institute of Learning and Research.

  • Steinkellner, E. (1967). Dharmakīrtis? Hetubinduh. Graz, Wien, Köln: Bohlaus.

  • Steinkellner E. (1974). On interpretation of the Svabhāvahetu. WZKS 18: 117–129

    Google Scholar 

  • Steinkellner E. (1979). Miszellen zur erkenntnistheoretisch-logischen Schule des Buddhismus. Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde Südasiens und Archiv für indische Philosophie 23: 141

    Google Scholar 

  • Steinkellner E. (1984). Svabhāvapratibandha again. Acta Indologica 6: 457–476

    Google Scholar 

  • Steinkellner, E. (1991). On the logic of Svabhāvahetu in Dharmakīrti’s Vādanyāya. In E. Steinkellner (Ed.), Studies in the Buddhist pistemological tradition: Second international Dharmakīrti onference (pp. 311–324). Vienna, Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften: philosophisch-historischen Klasse, Denkschriften, 222. Wien, Band; Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.

  • Steinkellner, E. (1996). An explanation of Dharmakīrti’s Svabhāvahetu definitions. In F. Wilhelm (Ed.), Festschrift Dieter Schlingloff (pp. 257–268). Reinbek, Dr. Inge Wezler Verlag für Orientalistische Fachpublikationen.

  • Steinkellner, E. (2004). The early Dharmakīrti on the purpose of examples. In S. Katsura & E. Steinkellner (Eds.), The role of the example (dṛṣṭāna) in classical Indian logic (pp. 225–250). Wien: Arbeitskreis für tibetische und buddhistische Studien, Universität Wien.

  • Subrahmanya Śāstri, V., Krishnamacharya, V. (1953). Nyāyaratna with the commentary “Dyutimālikā” of Nṛsīhayajvan. Madras: Madras Government Oriental Manuscripts Library.

  • Taber J. (2001). Much ado about nothing: Kumarila, Santaraksita and Dharmakirti on the cognition of non-being. Journal of the American Oriental Society 121: 72–88

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taber J. (2004). Is Indian logic nonmonotonic. Philosophy East and West 54: 143–170

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tachikawa M. (1971). A sixth century manual of Indian logic. Journal of Indian Philosophy 1: 111–145

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Takenaka, T. (1994). The theory of Anumāna in Bhāṭṭa Mīmāṃsā: Niyama and the means to determine Niyama. In R. C. Dvivedi (Ed.), Studies in Mīmāṃsā. Dr. Mandan Mishra felicitation volume (pp. 105–115). Delhi.

  • Tatacharya, R. N. S. (1972). Tattvacintāmaṇi of Gaṅgeśa, vol 1, pratyakṣakhaṇḍa. With the Prakāśa commentary of Rucidatta Miśra and a subcommentary by Rāmakṛṣṇādhvarin. Kendriya Sanskrit Vidyapeetha Series 20. Tirupati.

  • Tatacharya, R. N. S. (1982). Tattvacintāmaṇi of Gaṅgeśa, vol 2, anumānakhaṇḍa. With the Prakāśa commentary of Rucidatta Miśra and a subcommentary by Dharmarājādhvarin. Rāṣṭrīyasaṃskṛtavidyāpīṭhaṃ Tirupati.

  • Tatacharya, R. N. S. (1992). Pratyakṣatattvacintāmaṇivimarśaḥ: Tattvacintamaṇeḥ Pratyakṣa khaṇḍasya tulanātmakamdhyayanam; Tattvacintamaṇeḥ Pratyakṣakhaṇḍasya śeṣaḥ. Rāṣṭrīyasaṃskṛtavidyāpīṭhaṃ Tirupati.

  • Thakur, A. (1987). Jn͂ānaśrīmitranibandhāvali. Patna: Kashi Prasad Jayaswal Research Institute.

  • Thakur, A. (1994). Nyāyavārttikatātparyaṭīkā. Delhi: Indian Council of Philosophical Research.

  • Thakur, A. (1996). Nyāyavārttikatātparyaṭīkāpariśuddhi. Delhi: Indian Council of Philosophical Research.

  • Thakur, A. (1997a). Nyāya-sūtra. Gautamīyanyāyadarśana with Bhāṣya of Vātsyāyama. Delhi: Indian Council of Philosophical Research.

  • Thakur, A. (1997b). Nyāyavārttika. Delhi: Indian Council of Philosophical Research.

  • Tillemans T.J.F. (1997). On a recent translation of the Samdhinirmocanasūtra. Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 20(1): 153–164

    Google Scholar 

  • Tillemans T.J.F. (1998). A note on Pramānavārttika, Pramānasamuccaya and Nyāyamukha. What is the svadharmin in Buddhist logic. Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 21(1): 111–124

    Google Scholar 

  • Tillemans T.J.F. (1999). Scripture, logic, language: Essays on Dharmakirti and his Tibetan successors. Wisdom Publications, Boston, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Tillemans, T. J. F. (2004a). Inductiveness, deductiveness and examples in Buddhist logic. In S. Katsura E. Steinkellner (Eds.), The role of the example (dṛṣṭāna) in classical Indian logic (pp. 251–275). Wien: Arbeitskreis für tibetische und buddhistische Studien, Universität Wien.

  • Tillemans, T. J. F. (2004b). Dharmakīrti’s Pramāṇavārttika: An annotated translation of the fourth chapter (parārthānumāna) Vol 1 (k. 1-148). Wien: Osterreichischen Akademie Der Wissenschaften.

  • Tucci, G. (1930). The Nyāyamukha of Dignāga: The oldest Buddhist text on logic, after Chinese and Tibetan materials. Heidelberg: In Kommission bei O. Harrassowitz Leipzig.

  • Upādhyāya, P., & Dhuṇḍirāja Śāstri, D. (1957). The Nyāyakusumān͂jali of Śri Udayanācārya with four commentaries—the Bodhanī, Prakāśa, Prakāśikā (Jalada), and Makaranda. Kashi Sanskrit Series 30. Varanasi.

  • Vetter T. (1964). Erkenntnisprobleme bei Dharmakīrti. Wien, H. Bölaus Nachf

    Google Scholar 

  • Wada T. (1990). Invariable Concomitance in Navya-Nyāya. Sri Satguru, Delhi

    Google Scholar 

  • Wada T. (1994). A source of Gaṅgeśa’s conclusive definition of Vyāpti. Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies XLVII(2): 1074–1080

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Study of Religion, Department of Sanskrit and Indian Studies, Harvard University, 12, Quincy street, Cambridge, MA, 02138, USA

    Parimal G. Patil

Authors
  1. Parimal G. Patil
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Parimal G. Patil.

Additional information

This is a review article of: Philosophy in Classical India: The Proper Work of Reason by Jonardon Ganeri, Routledge, 2001, p. 207. ISBN: 0-415-24035-2. This article was written in 2004 and reflects my views through the 2003–2004 academic year. Its publication at this time is timely, however, as Philosophy in Classical India was reprinted in 2009 by Motilal Banarsidass.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Patil, P.G. History, Philology, and the Philosophical Study of Sanskrit Texts. J Indian Philos 38, 163–202 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10781-010-9084-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10781-010-9084-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation