Journal of Indian Philosophy

, Volume 40, Issue 5, pp 553–591 | Cite as

The Deceptive Simplicity of Nāgārjuna's Arguments Against Motion: Another Look at Mūlamadhyamakakārikā Chapter 2

Article

Abstract

This article—which includes a complete translation of Mūlamadhyamakakārikā chapter 2 together with Candrakīrti's commentary thereon—argues that notwithstanding the many different and often arcane interpretations that have been offered of Nāgārjuna's arguments against motion, there is really just one straightforward kind of argument on offer in this vexed chapter. It is further argued that this basic argument can be understood as a philosophically interesting one if it is kept in mind that the argument essentially has to do with whether a personal level of description will admit of an exhaustively impersonal explanation.

Keywords

Nāgārjuna Madhyamaka Metaphysics 

References

  1. Abhyankar, K. V. (1961). A dictionary of Sanskrit grammar. Gaekwad's Oriental Series, no. 134. Baroda: Oriental Institute.Google Scholar
  2. Apte, V. S. (1957/1992). The practical Sanskrit-English dictionary. Revised and enlarged edition, P. K. Gode & C. G. Garve (Eds.) (1st rev. and enlarged ed.: Poona: Prasad Prakashan; 1992 reprint, Kyoto: Rinsen).Google Scholar
  3. Arnold, D. (2005). Buddhists, Brahmins, and belief: Epistemology in South Asian philosophy of religion. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Arnold, D. (2010). Nāgārjuna's ‘middle way': A non-eliminative understanding of selflessness. Revue Internationale de Philosophie, 64(253, no. 3), 367–395.Google Scholar
  5. Arnold, D. (2012). Brains, Buddhas, and believing: The problem of intentionality in classical Buddhist and cognitive-scientific philosophy of mind. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Bhattacharya, K. (1980). Nāgārjuna's arguments against motion: Their grammatical basis. In A. L. Basham, et al. (Eds.), Corpus of Indian studies: Essays in honour of Professor Gaurinath Sastri (pp. 85–95). Calcutta: Sanskrit Pustak Bhandar.Google Scholar
  7. Bhattacharya, K. (1980–1981). The grammatical basis of Nāgārjuna's arguments: Some further considerations. Indological Taurenensia, 8–9, 35–43.Google Scholar
  8. Bhattacharya, K. (1985). Nāgārjuna's arguments against motion. Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies, 8, 7–15.Google Scholar
  9. Bhattacharya, K. (1994–1995). Back to Nāgārjuna and grammar. Adyar Library Bulletin, 58–59, 178–189.Google Scholar
  10. Cardona, G. (1991). A path still taken: Some early Indian arguments concerning time. Journal of the American Oriental Society, 111(3), 456–461.Google Scholar
  11. Carpenter, A. (forthcoming). Persons keeping their karma together: The reasons for the Pudgalavāda in early Buddhism. In G. Priest, J. Garfield, & K. Tanaka (Eds.), Analytic philosophy and ancient thought (ms.).Google Scholar
  12. de Jong, J. W. (1978). Textcritical Notes on the Prasannapadā. Indo-Iranian Journal, 20(1/2), 25–59, and (3/4), 217–252.Google Scholar
  13. de Jong, J. W. (Ed.) 2004. Nāgārjunīyā Mūlamadhyamakakārikā Prajñā nāma = Nāgārjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā Prajñā nāma (2nd ed., revised by Christian Lindtner). Chennai: Adyar Library and Research Centre.Google Scholar
  14. Galloway, B. (1987). Notes on Nāgārjuna and Zeno on motion. Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies, 10, 81–87.Google Scholar
  15. Garfield, J. L. (1995). The fundamental wisdom of the middle way: Nāgārjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Ingalls, D. H. H. (1954). The comparison of Indian and Western Philosophy. Journal of Oriental Research, Madras, 22, 1–11.Google Scholar
  17. La Vallée Poussin, L. de (Ed.). (1970). Mūlamadhyamakakārikās (Mādhyamikasūtras) de Nāgārjuna, avec la Prasannapadā Commentaire de Candrakīrti. Bibliotheca Buddhica IV. Osnabrück: Biblio Verlag. (Reprint; first published in St. Petersburg, 1903–1913.)Google Scholar
  18. Mabbett, I. (1984). Nāgārjuna and Zeno on motion. Philosophy East & West, 34(4), 401–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Matilal, B. K. (1990). The word and the world: India's contribution to the study of language. Delhi: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  20. May, J. (1959). Candrakīrti Prasannapadā Madhyamakavṛtti: Douze chapitres traduits du sanscrit et du tibétain, accompagnés d'une introduction, de notes et d'une édition critique de la version tibétaine. Collection Jean Przyluski (Vol. 2). Paris: Adrien-Maisonneuve.Google Scholar
  21. McCrea, L. J., & Patil, P. G. (2010). Buddhist philosophy of language in India: Jñānaśrīmitra on exclusion. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  22. McDowell, J. (1998). Having the world in view: Sellars, Kant, and intentionality. Journal of Philosophy, 95(9), 431–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. McDowell, J. (2009). Having the world in view: Essays on Kant, Hegel, and Sellars. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Monier-Williams, M. (1970). A Sanskrit dictionary (New ed.). Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  25. Oetke, C. (1988). Die metaphysische Lehre Nāgārjunas. Conceptus, XXII(56), 47–64.Google Scholar
  26. Oetke, C. (2007). On MMK 24.18. Journal of Indian Philosophy, 35, 1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Oetke, C. (2011). Two investigations on the Madhyamakakārikās and the Vigrahavyāvartanī. Journal of Indian Philosophy, 39, 245–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Patil, P. (2009). Without brackets: A minimally annotated translation of Ratnakīrti's demonstration of exclusion. (Available online, in connection with Patil P. (2009). Against a Hindu God: Buddhist Philosophy of Religion in India. New York: Columbia University Press. http://www.cup.columbia.edu/media/7285/side15360_patil.pdf).
  29. Rödl, S. (2012). Categories of the temporal: An inquiry into the forms of the finite intellect. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Saito, A. (1995). Problems in translating the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā as cited in its commentaries. In D. Tulku (Ed.), Buddhist translations: Problems and perspectives (pp. 87–96). Delhi: Tibet House/Manohar.Google Scholar
  31. Schayer, S. (1929–1930). Feur und Brennstoff: Ein Kapitel aus dem Mādhyamika-Śāstra des Nāgārjuna mit der Vṛtti des Candrakīrti. Rocznik Orjentalistyczny, 7, 26–52.Google Scholar
  32. Siderits, M. (2009). Is reductionism expressible? In M. D'Amato, J. Garfield, & T. Tillemans (Eds.), Pointing at the Moon: Buddhism, Logic, analytic philosophy (pp. 57–69). New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Siderits, M, & Katsura, S. (Trans.). (2006). Mūlamadhyamakakārikā I–X. Indogakuchibettogaku Kenkyū (= Journal of Indian and Tibetan Studies), 9(10), 129–185.Google Scholar
  34. Siderits, M., & O'Brien, J. D. (1976). Zeno and Nāgārjuna on motion. Philosophy East & West, 26(3), 281–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sprung, M. (Trans.) (in collaboration with T. R. V. Murti & U. S. Vyas). (1979). Lucid Exposition of the Middle Way: The Essential Chapters from the Prasannapadā of Candrakīrti. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  36. Staal, J. F. (1965). Euclid and Pāṇini. Philosophy East & West, 15, 99–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Steinkellner, E. (1982). Review of Mervyn Sprung, Lucid exposition of the middle way. Journal of the American Oriental Society, 102, 411–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Vetter, T. (1982). Zum Problem der Person in Nāgārjunas Mūla-Madhyamaka-Kārikās. In W. Strolz & Sh. Ueda (Eds.), Offenbarung als Heilserfahrung im Christentum, Hinduismus und Buddhismus (pp. 167–185). Freiburg: Herder.Google Scholar
  39. Vetter, T. (1992). On the authenticity of the Ratnāvalī. Asiatische Studien/Études Asiatiques, 46(1), 492–506.Google Scholar
  40. Westerhoff, J. (2009). Nāgārjuna's Madhyamaka: A philosophical introduction. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Ye, S. (Ed.). (2011). Zhong lun song: Fan Zang Han he jiao, dao du, yi zhu [Mūlamadhyamakakārikā: New Editions of the Sanskrit, Tibetan and Chinese Versions, with Commentary and a Modern Chinese Translation; ISBN 978-7-5475-0239-6]. Shanghai: Zhongxi Book Company.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of ChicagoChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations