{"title":"龙树的本体论:相对主义、思维极限的悖论与空性和依存产生的一致统一性","authors":"Irina Urbanaeva","doi":"10.21146/0042-8744-2024-7-150-160","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article contains a critical analysis of relativistic “readings” of Nagarjuna’s Mūlamadhyamakakārikā (MMK) – approaches in which emptiness is identified with dependent arising, and Nagarjuna’s Madhyamaka appears as a synonym for relativity (Fyodor I. Shcherbatskoy, David J. Kalupahana, Shi Huifeng), emptiness – as an auxiliary means for purifying relative reality (Tao Jiang). Jay Garfield and Graham Priest, analyzing the emptiness of emptiness from the perspective of dialetheism, come to the conclusion about the existence of the ontological paradox of Nagarjuna, which means the identity of two realities – absolute and relative. Thus, Madhyamaka is reduced to relativism, albeit in a more subtle form, by considering the “true contradictions” at the limits of thought. The author of the article, relying on Tibetan texts (Heart Sutra, MMK, works of Aryadeva, Buddhapalita, Chandrakirti, Tsongkhapa), proves the fallacy of these attempts to ontologically relativize Madhyamaka. To understand the ontological specificity of Madhyamaka, it is important to understand both the difference between the two truths in this teaching and their specific unity as two ontological reverses of any object, and not as two realities or two domains of reality or two truths in the Western tradition.","PeriodicalId":46795,"journal":{"name":"VOPROSY FILOSOFII","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Nagarjuna’s Ontology: Relativism, Paradox at the Limits of Thought vs Consistent Unity of Emptiness and Dependent Arising\",\"authors\":\"Irina Urbanaeva\",\"doi\":\"10.21146/0042-8744-2024-7-150-160\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The article contains a critical analysis of relativistic “readings” of Nagarjuna’s Mūlamadhyamakakārikā (MMK) – approaches in which emptiness is identified with dependent arising, and Nagarjuna’s Madhyamaka appears as a synonym for relativity (Fyodor I. Shcherbatskoy, David J. Kalupahana, Shi Huifeng), emptiness – as an auxiliary means for purifying relative reality (Tao Jiang). Jay Garfield and Graham Priest, analyzing the emptiness of emptiness from the perspective of dialetheism, come to the conclusion about the existence of the ontological paradox of Nagarjuna, which means the identity of two realities – absolute and relative. Thus, Madhyamaka is reduced to relativism, albeit in a more subtle form, by considering the “true contradictions” at the limits of thought. The author of the article, relying on Tibetan texts (Heart Sutra, MMK, works of Aryadeva, Buddhapalita, Chandrakirti, Tsongkhapa), proves the fallacy of these attempts to ontologically relativize Madhyamaka. To understand the ontological specificity of Madhyamaka, it is important to understand both the difference between the two truths in this teaching and their specific unity as two ontological reverses of any object, and not as two realities or two domains of reality or two truths in the Western tradition.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46795,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"VOPROSY FILOSOFII\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"VOPROSY FILOSOFII\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21146/0042-8744-2024-7-150-160\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"VOPROSY FILOSOFII","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21146/0042-8744-2024-7-150-160","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Nagarjuna’s Ontology: Relativism, Paradox at the Limits of Thought vs Consistent Unity of Emptiness and Dependent Arising
The article contains a critical analysis of relativistic “readings” of Nagarjuna’s Mūlamadhyamakakārikā (MMK) – approaches in which emptiness is identified with dependent arising, and Nagarjuna’s Madhyamaka appears as a synonym for relativity (Fyodor I. Shcherbatskoy, David J. Kalupahana, Shi Huifeng), emptiness – as an auxiliary means for purifying relative reality (Tao Jiang). Jay Garfield and Graham Priest, analyzing the emptiness of emptiness from the perspective of dialetheism, come to the conclusion about the existence of the ontological paradox of Nagarjuna, which means the identity of two realities – absolute and relative. Thus, Madhyamaka is reduced to relativism, albeit in a more subtle form, by considering the “true contradictions” at the limits of thought. The author of the article, relying on Tibetan texts (Heart Sutra, MMK, works of Aryadeva, Buddhapalita, Chandrakirti, Tsongkhapa), proves the fallacy of these attempts to ontologically relativize Madhyamaka. To understand the ontological specificity of Madhyamaka, it is important to understand both the difference between the two truths in this teaching and their specific unity as two ontological reverses of any object, and not as two realities or two domains of reality or two truths in the Western tradition.
期刊介绍:
"Вопросы философии" - академическое научное издание, центральный философский журнал в России. В настоящее время является органом Президиума Российской Академии Наук. Журнал "Вопросы философии" исторически тесно связан с Институтом философии РАН. Выходит ежемесячно. Журнал был основан в июле 1947 г. Интернет-версия журнала запущена в мае 2009 года.