Argumentation

, Volume 22, Issue 1, pp 15–25 | Cite as

An Early Buddhist Text on Logic: Fang Bian Xin Lun

Article

Abstract

The Fang Bian Xin Lun is a text on Buddhist logic which is thought to be the earliest one still to be extant. It appears in Chinese only (T1632). The great Italian indologist Giuseppe Tucci, believing that the text was originally a Sanskrit text, translated it into Sanskrit and gave it the title Upāyahṛdaya. The paper provides the historical background of the development of logic in Classical India up to the time of this text, summarizes its content and translates its first section.

Keywords

Buddhist logic Chinese logic Debate Fang Bian Xin Lun Upāyahṛdaya Giuseppe Tucci 

References

  1. Franco, Eli. 2003. The oldest philosophical manuscript in Sanskrit. Journal of Indian Philosophy 31: 21–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Frauwallner, Erich. 1957. Vasubandhu’s Vādavidhiḥ. Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde Süd—und Ostasiens 1: 104–146.Google Scholar
  3. Funayama, Toru. 1999. Kamalaśīla’s interpretation of ‘non-erroneous’ in the definition of direct perception and related problems. In Dharmakīrti’s thought and its impact on Indian and Tibetan philosophy. Proceedings of the Third International Dharmakīrti Conference (Hiroshima, 4–6 November, 1997). Beiträge zur Kultur- und Geistesgeschichte Asiens: n. 32; Denkschriften/Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-Historische Klasse: v. 281. ed. Shoryu Katsura, 73–100. Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.Google Scholar
  4. Kajiyama, Yuichi. 1991. On the authorship of the Upāya-hṛdaya. In Studies in the Buddhist epistemological tradition. Proceedings of the Second International Dharmakīrti Conference (Vienna, 11–16 June, 1989). ed. Ernst Steinkellner, 107–118. Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.Google Scholar
  5. Katsura, Shoryu. 1986a. ‘On Trairūpya formulae,’ in Buddhism and its relation to other religions: Essays in honour of Dr. Shozen Kumoi on his seventieth birthday, Kyoto, 161–172.Google Scholar
  6. Katsura, Shoryu. 1986b. On the origin and development of the concept of vyāpti in Indian Logic, Tetsugaku 38, Hiroshima Tetsugakkai, Hiroshima University, 1–16.Google Scholar
  7. Lamotte, Étienne. 1935. Saṃdhinirmocana-sūtra: l’explication des mystères. Texte tibétain édité et traduit. Louvain: Université de Louvain.Google Scholar
  8. Lindtner, Christian. 1987. Nāgārjuniana: Studies in the writings and philosophy of Nāgārjuna, Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi.Google Scholar
  9. Manné, Joy. 1992. The Digha Nikāya debates. Buddhist Studies Review 9(2): 117–136.Google Scholar
  10. Nakamura, H. 1977. A survey of Mahāyāna Buddhism with bibliographical notes. The Journal of Intercultural Studies, 3–4.Google Scholar
  11. Oberhammer, G., et al. 1991, 1996, 2006. Terminologie der frühen philosophischen Scholastik in Indien: ein Begriffswörterbuch zur altindischen Dialektik, Erkenntnislehre und Methodologie, vol. 3. Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akadamie der Wissenschaften.Google Scholar
  12. Potter, K. 1983. Encyclopedia of Indian philosophies, vol. 1, bibliography, compiled by K. Potter, Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi, 2nd edition.Google Scholar
  13. Solomon, Esther A. 1976. Indian dialectics: Methods of philosophical discussion, vol. 2. Ahmedabad: B. J. Institute of Learning and Research.Google Scholar
  14. Tucci, Giuseppe. 1929. Pre-Diṅnāga texts on logic from Chinese sources, Gaekwad oriental series, no. 49, Baroda, India.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of LinguisticsMcGill UniversityMontrealCanada

Personalised recommendations