How to Refer to a Thing by a Word: Another Difference Between Dignāga’s and Kumārila’s Theories of Denotation
- Kiyotaka Yoshimizu
- … show all 1 hide
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.Get Access
In studies of Indian theories of meaning it has been standard procedure to examine their relevance to the ontological issues between Brahmin realism about universals and Buddhist nominalism (or conceptualism). It is true that Kumārila makes efforts to secure the real existence of a generic property (jāti) denoted by a word by criticizing Dignāga, who declares that the real world consists of absolutely unique individuals (svalakṣaṇa). The present paper, however, concentrates on the linguistic approaches Dignāga and Kumārila adopt to deny or to prove the existence of universals. It turns out that in spite of adopting contrasting approaches they equally distinguish between the semantic denotation of a word and its pragmatic reference to a thing in the physical world. From a purely semantic viewpoint, Dignāga considers the exclusion (apoha) of others by a word as the result of a conceptual accumulation of the sense-components accepted in the totality of worldly discourse. Among the three characteristics Dignāga held must be met by universals, Kumārila attaches special importance to their entire inherence in each individual (pratyekaparisamāpti / pratyekasamavāya). This is because he pragmatically pays attention to the use of a word in the discourse given in a particular context (prakaraṇa) by analyzing a sentence into a topic and a comment.
- Brown, G., & Yule, G. (2003). Discourse analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (1st edition: 1983).
- Caland, W., & RaghuVira. (Eds.). (1971). Vārāha-śrauta-sūtra. Delhi: Meherchand Lachhmandas (1st edition: Lahore 1933).
- Hattori, M. (1973/1975). Mīmāṃsāślokavārttika, Apohavāda sho no kenkyu [A study of the chapter on ‘apoha’ of the Mīmāṃsāślokavārttika I & II]. Memoirs of the Department of Literature, Kyoto University, 14, 1–44; 15, 1–63.
- Hattori M. (1977) The Sautrāntika background of the Apoha theory. In: Kawamura L.S., Scott K. (eds) Buddhist thought and Asian civilization. Essays in honor of Herbert V. Guenther on his sixtieth birthday. Dharma Press, Emeryville, CA, pp 47–58
- Hattori, M. (1980). Nyāyavārttika, II. 2. 66 ni okeru apoha setsu hihan [Uddyotakara’s criticism on the Apoha-theory in the Nyāyavārttika, II. 2. 66]. In Esoteric Buddhism and Indian thought: A Festschrift for Prof. Gikai Matsuo (pp. 15–30). Kyoto: Shuchiin University.
- Hattori M. (ed) (1982). Pramāṇasamuccayavṛtti of Dignāga with Jinendrabuddhi’s commentary: Chapter five: Anyāpoha-parīkṣā. Memoirs of the Faculty of Letters, Kyoto University, 21, 103–224
- Hayes R.P. (1988) Dignāga on the interpretation of signs. Studies of classical India. Kluwer, Dordrecht
- Herzberger R. (1986) Bhartṛhari and the Buddhists. Studies of classical India. Kluwer, Dordrecht
- Katsura S. (1979) The apoha theory of Dignāga. Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies 28(1): 489–493
- Katsura S. (1991) Dignāga and Dharmakīrti on Apoha. In: Steinkellner E. (ed) Studies in the Buddhist epistemological tradition, proceedings of the second international Dharmakirti conference. Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Vienna, pp 129–146
- Kitagawa, H. (1965). Indo koten ronrigaku no kenkyū. Jinna no taikei [A study on classical Indian logic. Dignāga’s system]. Tokyo: Suzuki Gakujutsu Shuppan.
- Lyons, J. (2002). Linguistic semantics. An introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (first edition: 1995).
- Much M.T. (1994) Uddyotakaras Kritik der Apoha-Lehre. Wiener Zeitschrift für Kunde Südasiens, 38: 351–366
- Olivelle P. (2002) Food for thought. Dietary rules and social organization in ancient India. Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences, Amsterdam
- Pind, O. H. (1999). Dharmakīrti’s interpretation of Pramāṇāsamuccayavṛtti V 36: śabdo ’rthāntaranivṛttiviśiṣṭān eva bhāvān āha. In S. Katsura (Ed.), Dharmakīrti’s thought and its impact on Indian and Tibetan philosophy. Proceedings of the third international Dharmakīrti conference (pp. 317–332). Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.
- Pind, O. H. (2009). Dignāga’s philosophy of language—Dignāga on anyāpoha. Pramāṇasamuccaya V. Texts, translation, and annotation. Dissertation, Universität Wien, Philologisch-Kulturwissenschaftliche Fakultät. Hochschulschriften-Service, Universitäts Bibliothek, E-Theses. http://othes.univie.ac.at/8283/.
- Scharf P.M. (1996) The denotation of generic terms in ancient Indian philosophy: Grammar, Nyāya, and Mīmāṃsā. American Philosophical Society, Philadelphia
- Takenaka T. (1972) Sāsnādiviśiṣṭākṛtiḥ (Śābarabhāṣya ad MS I-I-5) no kaishaku ni tsuite [A note on the Sāsnādiviśiṣṭākṛtiḥ]. Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies, 21(1): 420–428
- Takenaka T. (1974) Indo jitsuzai-ron gakuha no huhen-ron [The theory of the universal in Indian realism]. Tōhōgaku (Eastern Studies), 48: 82–97
- Yoshimizu, K. (2006). The theorem of the singleness of a goblet (graha-ekatva-nyāya): A Mīmāṃsā analysis of meaning and context. In M. Hattori (Ed.), Word and meaning in Indian philosophy, Acta Asiatica (Bulletin of the Institute of Eastern Culture) (Vol. 90, pp. 15–38).
- How to Refer to a Thing by a Word: Another Difference Between Dignāga’s and Kumārila’s Theories of Denotation
Journal of Indian Philosophy
Volume 39, Issue 4-5 , pp 571-587
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer Netherlands
- Additional Links
- Topic and Comment
- Author Affiliations
- 1. Department of Indology and History of Indian Buddhism, Faculty of Arts and Letters, Tohoku University, Kawauchi 27-1, Aoba Ward, 980-8576, Sendai, Japan