How do the arguments in commentaries differ from a rehash

A forum for scholastic discussion/debate.
Mashell
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 7:57 am
Which number is larger than 1003 and less than 1005: 1004
Contact:

How do the arguments in commentaries differ from a rehash

Postby Mashell » Tue Feb 26, 2013 8:03 am

How do the arguments in commentaries differ from a rehash of Zeno's Paradox wrt Ch 2 on Going?

Michael_Dorfman
Posts: 51
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2012 1:09 pm
Which number is larger than 1003 and less than 1005: 1006

Re: How do the arguments in commentaries differ from a rehas

Postby Michael_Dorfman » Tue Feb 26, 2013 1:18 pm

Mashell wrote:How do the arguments in commentaries differ from a rehash of Zeno's Paradox wrt Ch 2 on Going?


I assume that you are speaking here of Chapter 2 of Nāgārjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā. Is that correct?

If so, which commentaries are you speaking of? The Indian commentaries (such as the Akutobhaya, or the commentaries by Buddhapalita, Bhavaviveka, Candrakīrti, or Pingala)? Or the Tibetan sub-commentaries (such as Tsongkhapa and Mabja)? Or the contemporary commentaries (such as Murti, Kalupahana, Garfield, or Siderits and Katsura?)

To the best of my recollection, the only work that I can think of on parallels to Zeno is an article by O'Brien and Siderits in Philosophy East and West from 1976, and a critique of that by Mabbett in 1984 in the same journal.

Does that start to answer your question?


Return to “Academic Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests