The 8th International Conference Buddhism & Australia
Chinese Buddhist Encyclopedia Illustrations
|Articles by alphabetic order|
Indian and Tibetan philosophy
|Please consider making little donation to help us expand the encyclopedia Donate Enjoy your readings here and have a wonderful day|
The people of South Asia have been grappling with philosophical issues, and writing down their thoughts, for at least as long as the Europeans and the Chinese. When Hellenistic philosophers accompanied Alexander the Great on his military campaigns into the Indus valley, on the western edge of what is now the Republic of India, they expressed delight and amazement upon encountering Indians who thought as they thought and lived the sort of reflective life that they recommended living.
Nearly all philosophical contributions in India were made by people writing (or speaking) commentaries on already existing texts; to be a philosopher was to interpret a text and to be part of a more or less well-defined textual tradition.
It is common, therefore, when speaking of Indian philosophers, to identify them as belonging to one school or another. To belong to a school of philosophy was a matter of having an interpretation of the principal texts that defined that school.
Jaina philosophy). In addition to these three schools, all of which were in some sense religious, there was a more secular school in the classical period, whose tenets were materialistic and hedonistic (see Materialism, Indian school of).
The end of the classical period in Indian philosophy is customarily marked by the arrival of Muslims from Turkey and Persia at the close of the first millennium. The contributions of Indian Muslims added to the richness of Indian philosophy during the medieval period (see Islamic philosophy ).
Writing was introduced into Tibet not long after the arrival of Buddhism from India in the seventh century. The earliest literature of Tibet was made up mostly of Buddhist texts, translated from Indian languages and from Chinese.
Eventually, ideas associated with Bon, the indigenous religion of Tibet, were also written down. Tibetan philosophers followed the habit of Indians in that they made their principal contributions by writing commentaries on earlier texts (see Tibetan philosophy).
Key Buddhist philosophers from Tibet are Sa skya Paṇḍita (1182–1251), Tsong kha pa Blo bzang grags pa (1357–1419), rGyal tshab dar ma rin chen (1364–1432), mKhas grub dge legs dpal bzang po (1385–1438) and Mi bskyod rdo rje (1507– 54).
The philosophical schools associated with what we now call Hinduism all had in common respect for the authority of the Veda (‘Knowledge’), scriptures accepted as a revealed body of wisdom, cosmological information and codes of societal obligations.
The textual schools that systematized disciplines derived from the Veda were the Mīmāṃsā, the Nyāya, the Vaiśeṣika, the Sāṅkhya and the various Vedānta schools (see Mīmāṃsā; Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika; Sāṅkhya; Vedānta).
Concerned as all these schools were with correct interpretation of the Veda, it is natural that questions of language were of paramount importance in Indian philosophy (see Language, Indian theories of; Meaning, Indian theories of).
The two most important sources of knowledge that Indian philosophers discussed were sensation and inference, the theory of inference being important to the development of logic in India (see Sense perception, Indian views of; Inference, Indian theories of).
Because of the importance of scriptures and religious teachers, epistemologists in India discussed the issue of the authority of texts and the question of the reliability of information conveyed through human language (see Testimony in Indian philosophy).
The questions associated with epistemology are in Indian philosophy often closely connected with questions of human psychology (see Awareness in Indian thought; Error and illusion, Indian conceptions of ).
Many posited a personal creator god or an impersonal godhead (see God, Indian conceptions of; Brahman; Monism, Indian). Just how particular things come into being through creative agency or through impersonal natural laws was a matter of considerable debate (see Causation, Indian theories of;
Indian thinkers also debated the precise nature of matter, the ontological status of universals, and how potentials become actualities (see Matter, Indian conceptions of; Universals, Indian theories of; Potentiality, Indian theories of ).
In addition to epistemology and metaphysics, a third area that Indian systematic philosophers nearly always commented upon were issues concerning the nature of the human being (see Self, Indian theories of; Mind, Indian philosophy of).
This included thoughts on a variety of ethical questions and the rewards for living an ethical life (see Duty and virtue, Indian conceptions of; Karma and rebirth, Indian conceptions of; Fatalism, Indian; Heaven, Indian conceptions of).
The Hindu tradition produced a number of important individual philosophers. Among the earliest extant philosophers from India are the political theorist Kauṭilya (fourth century bc) and the grammarian and philosopher of language Patañjali (second century bc).
The philosopher of language Bhartṛhari (fifth century) developed the intriguing idea that the basic stuff of which all the universe is made is an intelligence in the form of a readiness to use language. Vātsyāyana (fifth century) and Uddyotakara (sixth century) were both commentators on Gautama.
The work of the logician Gaṅgeśa (fourteenth century), who revised the classical system of logic and epistemology, became the foundation for an important new school of thought, Navya-Nyāya (‘New Nyāya’).
Mādhava (fourteenth century) and Vallabhācārya (fifteenth–sixteenth century) made important contributions to Vedāntin philosophy. Gadādhara (seventeenth century) continued making advances in logical theory by building on the work of Gaṅgeśa.
Finally, there were several thinkers and movements in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, a period during which Indian intellectuals struggled to reconcile traditional Indian ways of thinking with European and especially British influences (see Aurobindo Ghose; Gandhi, M.K.; Radhakrishnan, S.; Tagore, R.; Arya Samaj; Brahmo Samaj; Ramakrishna Movement ).
As was the case for Hindu philosophy, Buddhist and Jaina Philosophy in India tended to proceed through commentaries on already existing texts. Jainism was founded by Mahāvīra and is best known for its method of seeing every issue from every possible point of view (see Manifoldness, Jaina theory of).
The principal Buddhist traditions that incorporated significant philosophical discussions were those that tried to systematize doctrines contained in various corpora of texts believed to be the words of the Buddha (see Buddhism, Ābhidharmika schools of; Buddhism, Mādhyamika: India and Tibet; Buddhism, Yogācāra school of).
An important issue for Buddhist thinkers, as for most Indian philosophers, was analyzing the causes of discontent and suggesting a method for eliminating unhappiness, the cessation of suffering being a condition known as nirvāṇa (see Suffering, Buddhist views of origination of; Nirvāṇa).
Buddhism disappeared from northern India in the twelfth century and from southern India a few centuries later. In the twentieth century, there has been an effort to revive it, especially among the community formerly known as ‘untouchables’.
3 Pronunciation of Sanskrit words
These consonants are represented by single letters in Indian scripts but by two-letter combinations in roman script; thus ‘kh’ is pronounced as the ‘k’ in English ‘kill’, ‘th’ as ‘t’ in ‘tame’ (never as ‘th’ in ‘thin’ or ‘there’), ‘dh’ as in ‘mudhouse’, and ‘ph’ as ‘p’ in ‘pat’ (never as ‘ph’ in ‘philosophy’).
Vowels with a macron over them (ā, ī and ū) are pronounced for twice as much time as their unmarked equivalents.
The spelling of Tibetan words was fixed over a millennium ago and has not changed since. Pronunciation, however, has shifted.
Unfortunately, it has not shifted in exactly the same way in every region of Tibet, with the result that the same written word may be pronounced quite differently in the east of Tibet from the way it is pronounced in the west and the central region.
Given all these changes, the pronunciation of some Tibetan words can be surprisingly different from what one might expect from their spelling.
Many single letters and combinations are pronounced about as in Sanskrit, as described above; so k, kh, g, ṅ, c, j, ñ, t, th, d, n, p, ph, b, m, y, r, l, s and h can be pronounced as described there.
The pairs of letters ‘ts’ and ‘dz’ represent single letters in the Tibetan alphabet and are pronounced as they would be in English ‘cats’ and ‘adze’ respectively.
Some combinations of Tibetan letters are no longer pronounced as they were when spelling was fixed.
Examples of this are ‘kr’, ‘tr’ and ‘pr’, all of which are now pronounced the same way, approximately as the ‘tr’ in ‘trick’.
Similarly, ‘gr’, ‘dr’ and ‘br’ are all pronounced about like ‘dr’ in ‘drink’. When the letters ‘g’, ‘b’, ‘m’, ‘r’, ‘l’ and ‘s’ occur at the beginning of a syllable and are followed immediately by any consonant other than ‘r’ or ‘l’, they are usually silent.
Thus ‘bsdigs’ is pronounced somewhere between English ‘dig’ and ‘dick’.
To the English ear attuned to hearing aspiration about midway between that used in Tibetan consonants, Tibetan ‘t’ can sound like English ‘d’ and vice versa. Similarly, Tibetan ‘k’ and ‘p’ can sound like English ‘g’ and ‘b’ respectively.