Skip to main content

Part of the book series: Studies of Classical India ((STCI,volume 9))

  • 114 Accesses

Abstract

Diṅnāga was an Indian Buddhist philosopher who most probably wrote in the first half of the sixth century of the Common Era and who devoted a great deal of his literary career to investigating various issues in epistemology, the science devoted to the nature of knowledge and its limits. As a specific part of this larger concern, Diṅnāga (whose name is frequently encountered in its alternative spelling of Diṅnāga) was interested in the nature and limitations of information that is gained through the interpretation of signs. The interpretation of natural signs, that is, of properties such as smoke that can be understood as signifying the presence of fire, was investigated under the general heading of inference or reasoning (anunāna), or more specifically, reasoning for oneself (svārthānumāna). The interpretation of conventional signs, that is, of the words and sentences of human language and other systems of deliberately contrived symbols whose usage is governed by human-made conventions, was investigated separately as a subject unto itself, although Diṅnāga explicitly regarded the interpretation of deliberately contrived symbols as no more than a special application of the principles of inference in general. The principal purpose of this book is to come to an understanding of Diṅnāga’s views on the interpretation of signs, both natural and conventional.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. Stcherbatsky 1932:39–46.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Stcherbatsky 1932:40.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Stcherbatsky 1932:46.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Stcherbatsky 1932:46.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Stcherbatsky 1932:37.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Van der Kuijp 1979:6.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Conze 1962:264.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Conze 1962:265.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Wayman 1958:40.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Conze 1962:10.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Steinkellner 1982:11.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Hayes 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Warder 1971:1.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Warder 1970:448.

    Google Scholar 

  15. A complete list of Diṅnāga’s works appears in Hattori 1968:6–11.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Malvania 1967:390.

    Google Scholar 

  17. J.W. de Jong (1986:128) argues that it is a mistake not only to rely too heavily on later sources when piecing together the history of Indian Buddhist thought, but also to try to study later Tibetan thought without a profound knowledge of its Indian antecedents. His observation is so obviously true that it is a little surprising that relatively few modern scholars have done research directly with Diṅnāga’s works in their proper historical context.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Vidyābhūṣaṇa 1905:218.

    Google Scholar 

  19. See Vidyābhūṣaṇa 1921:277–288.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Vidyābhūṣaṇa 1909:78–101.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Stcherbatsky 1932:10.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Stcherbatsky 1932:12.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Stcherbatsky 1932:24.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Stcherbatsky 1932:26–27.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Stcherbatsky describes the realm of particulars in 1932:79–118. Of especial importance are pp. 81–86 and pp. 106–108.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Stcherbatsky’s outline of the realm of judgement, concepts and other related matters is given its most precise formulation in 1932:204–220.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Stcherbatsky 1932:181–190.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Mookerjee 1935:xxxv.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Mookerjee 1935:xliv.

    Google Scholar 

  30. My position on this matter is outlined more fully in Hayes 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Mookerjee 1935:xxxviii.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Mookerjee 1935:xxxvii.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Mookerjee 1935:100.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Mookerjee 1935:106.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Mookerjee 1935:108 and 109. Frauwallner (1935:101) reports that this argument was used by Dharmakīrti.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Mookerjee 1935:108.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Mookerjee 1935:116.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Mookerjee 1935:116.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Mookerjee 1935:117. 4L Dravid 1972:339.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Dravid 1972:117

    Google Scholar 

  41. These articles appeared in the following issues of Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde des Morgenlandes: Vol. 37 (1930) pp. 259–283; Vol. 39 (1932) pp. 247–285; Vol. 40 (1933) pp. 51–94; Vol. 42 (1935) pp. 93–102; Vol. 44 (1937) pp. 233–287.

    Google Scholar 

  42. The numbering of the verses in modern editions of Sanskrit texts is often problematic, and it is not unusual to find different numberings by different editors of the same text. Thus verses 42–187 in Frauwallner’s edition correspond to verses 40–185 in Gnoli’s 1960 edition of the Sanskrit text of the entire svārthānumāna chapter of Pramāṇavārttika.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Frauwallner 1930:259.

    Google Scholar 

  44. See Frauwallner 1935:93 and 101. In the latter place this doctrine is spelled out especially clearly: “…die Einzelding augenblichlich sind und sofort nach ihrem Enstehen wieder vergehen…” (Particulars are momentary and disappear again immediately after their coming into being.)

    Google Scholar 

  45. Frauwallner 1935:95–96.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Frauwallner 1959b: 135–136.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Frauwallner 1959b:107–116 and 145–152. Further discussions of Bhartrhari’s influence on Dinnâga are to be found in Hattori 1977:50–52 and R. Herzberger 1986. See section 1.2.6 below.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Frauwallner 1959b: 103.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Frauwallner 1959b:101–103.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Frauwallner 1959b: 104–105.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Frauwallner 1959b: 105.

    Google Scholar 

  52. In the Wade-Giles system of romanization, the title is Ch’ü-yin-chia-she-lun, and the translator’s name is I-chirig. So they appear in Kitagawa 1965 and in Hattori 1968.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Hattori 1968:8.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Kitagawa 1965:436.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Hattori 1968:12.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Hattori 1968:12.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Hattori 1968:12–13.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Hattori 1968:14.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Hattori 1968:15.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Hattori 1977:47.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Hattori 1978:47. According to Hattori an example of a particular for Diṅnāga would be an individual such as a particular cow, which is “an indivisible unity of various aspects.” Whether or not this observation is accurate is a question that should be left open for the time being. I shall present an alternative account of what a svalakṣaṇa might be below in chapter five.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Hattori 1977:48.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Hattori 1977:49.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Hattori 1977:50.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Hattori 1980:61–64.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Hattori 1977:52.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Katsura 1977, 1978, 1979a, 1981, 1982 and 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  68. R. Herzberger 1986:xvii.

    Google Scholar 

  69. R. Herzberger 1986:xviii.

    Google Scholar 

  70. R. Herzberger 1986:241.

    Google Scholar 

  71. R. Herzberger 1986:24. The Sanskrit for this vārttika is given, along with a translation and brief discussion, in Hayes (1983:715 n.20). The Sanskrit reads: “Yasya gunasya bhāvād dravye sabdaniveéas tadabhidhāne tvatalau.” My translation: “The suffixes -tva and -ta are used to denote that characteristic on account of the presence of which in an object a given word is applied to it.”

    Google Scholar 

  72. R. Herzberger 1986:110.

    Google Scholar 

  73. R. Herzberger 1986:110.

    Google Scholar 

  74. R. Herzberger 1986:30–31.

    Google Scholar 

  75. R. Herzberger 1986:111.

    Google Scholar 

  76. R. Herzberger 1986:112.

    Google Scholar 

  77. R. Herzberger 1986:115.

    Google Scholar 

  78. R. Herzberger 1986:213.

    Google Scholar 

  79. R. Herzberger 1986:106.

    Google Scholar 

  80. Otto 1923:38–39.

    Google Scholar 

  81. Knitter (1985:128–131) offers a neat summary of Karl Rahner’s concept of the anonymous Christian, the purpose of which is in Knitter’s words “to broaden and engender more ‘optimistic’ Christian attitudes toward other believers. In showing that other believers can be called ‘Christians without a name,’ Rahner tries to break through Christian exclusivism.”

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1988 Kluwer Academic Publishers

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Hayes, R.P. (1988). Preliminaries. In: Dignaga on the Interpretation of Signs. Studies of Classical India, vol 9. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-2899-2_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-2899-2_1

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-010-7806-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-009-2899-2

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics