排序方式: 共有4条查询结果,搜索用时 31 毫秒
1
1.
2.
This paper challenges the notion that there is a complete continuity between the thought of Nāgārjuna and the thought of Candrakīrti.
It is shown that there is strong reason to doubt Candrakīrti’s gloss of Mūla-madhyamaka-kārikā (MMK) 2.1, and that Candrakīrti’s peculiar reading of this verse causes him to alter the context of the discussion in the
four cases in which Nāgārjuna quotes MMK 2.1 later in the text—MMK 3.3, 7.14, 10.13 and 16.7. The innovation produced by Candrakīrti
is next contrasted to Nāgārjuna’s style of argument, and it is shown that these two author’s notions of emptiness, as well
as their particular implementation of Madhyamaka logic, significantly diverge from each other. Finally, Candrakīrti’s reading
of these verses is compared with his commentary on MMK 15 so as to suggest a possible subtle metaphysical position that is
at the base of his thinking. 相似文献
3.
4.
Journal of Indian Philosophy - This paper engages with Johaness Bronkhorst’s recognition of a “correspondence principle” as an underlying assumption of Nāgārjuna’s... 相似文献
1