Is Word-Meaning Denoted or Remembered? Śālikanātha’s Cornerstone in Defence of Anvitābhidhāna

IF 0.4 2区 哲学 0 ASIAN STUDIES JOURNAL OF INDIAN PHILOSOPHY Pub Date : 2022-01-27 DOI:10.1007/s10781-021-09503-z
Shishir Saxena
{"title":"Is Word-Meaning Denoted or Remembered? Śālikanātha’s Cornerstone in Defence of Anvitābhidhāna","authors":"Shishir Saxena","doi":"10.1007/s10781-021-09503-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The role of memory in one’s cognition of sentential meaning is a pivotal topic in Indian philosophical debates on the nature of language. The Bhāṭṭa Mīmāṃsakas claim in their doctrine of <i>abhihitānvaya</i> that words denote word-meanings which in turn lead one to sentential meaning, with memory playing only a limited role in this process. The Prābhākara Mīmāṃsakas however assign memory a central role and assert that each word in a sentence denotes the connected sentential meaning. This paper is a philosophical and philological study of the arguments presented by the influential Prābhākara thinker Śālikanātha in his <i>Vākyārthamātṛkā-I</i> (VM-I) in order to substantiate the role of memory as part of the doctrine of <i>anvitābhidhāna</i>. The VM-I commences these discussions with an objection of the Bhāṭṭa <i>pūrvapakṣin</i> against this Prābhākara doctrine (often quoted even in recent scholarship), and thereafter proceeds to refute this objection by demonstrating the role of memory, specifically in regard to word-meaning. Śālikanātha lays out his refutation by means of several layers of intricate argumentation, and this paper attempts to follow the text closely and present cogently his philosophical reasoning. The aim of this paper is thus to not only demonstrate the early pre-empting of this Bhāṭṭa objection by Śālikanātha himself but also his own responses to this, thereby enabling one to understand with greater clarity a cornerstone of the elaborate doctrine of <i>anvitābhidhāna</i>.</p>","PeriodicalId":51854,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF INDIAN PHILOSOPHY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JOURNAL OF INDIAN PHILOSOPHY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10781-021-09503-z","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ASIAN STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The role of memory in one’s cognition of sentential meaning is a pivotal topic in Indian philosophical debates on the nature of language. The Bhāṭṭa Mīmāṃsakas claim in their doctrine of abhihitānvaya that words denote word-meanings which in turn lead one to sentential meaning, with memory playing only a limited role in this process. The Prābhākara Mīmāṃsakas however assign memory a central role and assert that each word in a sentence denotes the connected sentential meaning. This paper is a philosophical and philological study of the arguments presented by the influential Prābhākara thinker Śālikanātha in his Vākyārthamātṛkā-I (VM-I) in order to substantiate the role of memory as part of the doctrine of anvitābhidhāna. The VM-I commences these discussions with an objection of the Bhāṭṭa pūrvapakṣin against this Prābhākara doctrine (often quoted even in recent scholarship), and thereafter proceeds to refute this objection by demonstrating the role of memory, specifically in regard to word-meaning. Śālikanātha lays out his refutation by means of several layers of intricate argumentation, and this paper attempts to follow the text closely and present cogently his philosophical reasoning. The aim of this paper is thus to not only demonstrate the early pre-empting of this Bhāṭṭa objection by Śālikanātha himself but also his own responses to this, thereby enabling one to understand with greater clarity a cornerstone of the elaborate doctrine of anvitābhidhāna.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
字义是表示还是记忆?Śālikanātha捍卫Anvitābhidhāna的基石
记忆在句子意义认知中的作用是印度关于语言本质的哲学争论中的一个关键话题。在他们的abhihitānvaya理论中Bhāṭṭa Mīmāṃsakas声称,单词表示单词的意义,而单词的意义又导致句子的意义,记忆在这个过程中只起有限的作用。然而,Prābhākara Mīmāṃsakas将记忆置于中心地位,并断言句子中的每个单词都表示相连的句子含义。本文从哲学和文献学的角度研究了有影响力的Prābhākara思想家Śālikanātha在他的Vākyārthamātṛkā-I (VM-I)中提出的论点,以证实记忆作为anvitābhidhāna学说的一部分的作用。VM-I以Bhāṭṭa pūrvapakṣin反对Prābhākara学说(即使在最近的学术研究中也经常被引用)的反对意见开始这些讨论,然后通过论证记忆的作用来反驳这一反对意见,特别是在词义方面。Śālikanātha通过层层复杂的论证来展开他的反驳,本文试图紧紧跟随文本,令人信服地呈现他的哲学推理。因此,本文的目的不仅是展示Śālikanātha本人对Bhāṭṭa反对意见的早期先发制人,而且还展示他自己对此的回应,从而使人们能够更清楚地理解anvitābhidhāna详细学说的基石。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
32
期刊介绍: The Journal of Indian Philosophy publishes articles on various aspects of Indian thought, classical and modern. Articles range from close analysis of individual philosophical texts to detailed annotated translations of texts. The journal also publishes more speculative discussions of philosophical issues based on a close reading of primary sources.
期刊最新文献
Ethical Causality and Rebirth in the Pātañjalayogaśāstra and Abhidharmakośabhās A3B2 tvs=1mm h-1.7 . h0.7 A3B2 tvs ya: A Mirrored Argument Divine Favour and Human Gratitude: A Study of Vedānta Deśikaṉ’s Upakārasaṅgraham Māyājāla-sūtra: A Canonical Proto-Yogācāra Sūtra? Dialogues About Death in Milindapañha and Carakasaṃhitā In Some Ways: Syādvāda as the Synthesis of Anekāntavāda and Nayavāda in Akalaṅka’s Philosophical Treatises
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1