In texts, through thoughts, with pleasure

This is a: article, written by Birgit Kellner 26 days ago.
Keywords: bibliographies , Buddhist epistemology , Philosophy

This bibliography lists relevant secondary literature relating to “self-awareness” (svasaṃvedana), a concept developed in the logico-epistemological tradition of Buddhism.

As far as Indo-Tibetological works are concerned, the list is limited to articles and books that mainly deal with self-awareness or topics that are very closely connected with it in traditional Buddhist philosophical discourse (e.g. sahopalambhaniyama).

The list further contains some articles, monographs and collections about philosophical issues, especially in the philosophy of mind, that I have found useful while researching this South Asian notion (or that I have marked as potentially useful).

The list will continually be enhanced; feel free to suggest additions.

The nature of consciousness. Philosophical Debates. . Eds. Block, Ned & Owen Flanagan. Cambridge, Mass./London: MIT Press (1997).

Higher-order Theories of Consciousness: an anthology. Ed. Gennaro, R.J. : John Benjamins Pub. (2004).

Andō, Yoshinori: "Jikoninshikisetsu ni kan suru ichikōsatsu - Jaina-ninshikiron o chūshin ni {*An inquiry into the doctrine of svasaṃvedana - with a focus on Jaina epistemology]." Ronshū 13  (1983), 122-124.

Arnold, Dan: "Is Svasaṃvitti Transcendental? A Tentative Reconstruction Following Śāntarakṣita." Asian Philosophy 15/1  (2005), 77-111.

Dreyfus, Georges: "Can the Fool Lead the Blind? Perception and the Given in Dharmakīrti's Thought." JIP 24/3  (1996), 209-229.

Dreyfus, Georges: "Perception and Apperception in Tibetan Buddhist Epistemology." Tibetan Studies. Proceedings of the 7th Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies, Graz 1995. Volume I. Eds. Krasser, Helmut & Michael Torsten Much. Wien: VÖAdW (1997), 237-251.

Dreyfus, Georges: "Is perception intentional? A preliminary exploration of intentionality in Dharmakīrti." Pramāṇakīrtiḥ. Papers dedicated to Ernst Steinkellner on the occasion of his 70th Birthday. Part 1 (WSTB 70.1). Eds. Kellner, Birgit & Helmut Krasser et als. Wien: Arbeitskreis für Tibetische und Buddhistische Studien Universität Wien (2007), 95-113.

Iwata, Takashi: "Sahopalambhaniyama. Struktur und Entwicklung des Schlusses von der Tatsache, daß Erkenntnis und Gegenstand ausschließlich zusammen wahrgenommen werden, auf deren Nichtverschiedenheit. Band 1" Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag (1991).

Iwata, Takashi: "Sahopalambhaniyama. Struktur und Entwicklung des Schlusses von der Tatsache, daß Erkenntnis und Gegenstand ausschließlich zusammen wahrgenommen werden, auf deren Nichtverschiedenheit. Band 2" Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag (1991).

Katsura, Shōryū: "Dharmakīrti ni okeru jikoninshiki no riron." Nantō Bukkyō 23  (1969), 1-44.

Kriegel, Uriah: "Consciousness as Intransitive Self-Consciousness: Two Views and an Argument." Canadian Journal of Philosophy 33/1  (2003), 103-132.

Kriegel, Uriah: "Consciousness and Self-Consciousness." Monist 87/2  (2004), 185-209.

Kyūma, Taiken: "Jinendrabuddhi ni okeru "i ni yoru chikaku" to "jikoninshiki" {*mānasapratyakṣa and svasaṃvedana in Jinendrabuddhi}." Ronshū 13  (2008), 91-100.

Mackenzie, Matthew D.: "The Illumination of Consciousness: approaches to self-awareness in the Indian and Western traditions." PEW 57/1  (2007), 40-62.

Matilal, Bimal Krishna: "Problems concerning 'self-awareness' in Indian philosophy." Indo-Shisōshi-Kenkyū 3  (1985), 1-12.

Nagatomo, Taijun: "Bukkyōronrigakuha ni okeru raku-nado no chi ni tsuite {*On the perception of pleasure and so forth in the Buddhist school of logic}." IBK 65  (1984), 295-297.

Nagatomo, Taijun: "Ślokavārttika ni okeru jishōhihansetsu ni tsuite {*On the criticism of svasaṃvedana in the Ślokavārttika}." Ronshū 12  (1985), 98-100.

Perrett, Roy W.: "Intentionality and self-awareness." Ratio 16/3  (2003), 222-235.

Robbins, Robert: "A reexamination of Dignāga's concept of self awareness." Contacts between Cultures: South Asia Volume 2. Ed. Koppedrayer, K.I. Lewiston: The Edwin Mellen Press (1992), 242-248.

Suganuma, Akira: "On Self‑cognition (svasaṃvedana) in the Tattvasaṃgraha." IBK 11/2  (1963), 809-804.

Taber, John: "A Hindu Critique of Buddhist Epistemology. Kumārila on perception. The 'Determination of Perception' chapter of Kumārila Bhaṭṭa's Ślokavārttika" New York: RoutledgeCurzon (2005).

Tanizawa, J.: "Dharmakīrti ni miru bukkyōronrigakuha no chikakuron no chokusetsujitsuzaironteki keikō {* A tendency towards direct realism in the theory of perception of the logical school of Buddhism, as seen in Dharmakīrti}." Indotetsugaku Bukkyogaku Kenkyu 9  (2002), 17-28.

Williams, Paul: "On rang rig." Contributions on Tibetan and Buddhist religion and philosophy. Proceedings of the Csoma de Körös Symposium held at Velm-Vienna, Austria, 13-19 September 1981, vol.2. Eds. Steinkellner, Ernst & Helmut Tauscher. Wien: Arbeitskreis für Tibetische und Buddhistische Studien (1983), 321-332.

Williams, Paul: "The reflexive nature of awareness. A Tibetan Madhyamaka defence" Richmond: Curzon Press (1998).

Yaita, Hideomi: "Nyāyakandalī ni okeru bukkyōsetsu ni tsuite - chi no 'jikoninshiki'-setsu o megutte {*A study of the Buddhist explanation of the ‘svasaṃvedana’ theory in the Nyāyakandalī}." Taishō Daigaku Daigakuin Kenkyū Ronshū 5  (1981), 270-260.

Yao, Zhihua: "Knowing that one knows. The Buddhist doctrine of self-cognition" Boston University: PhD thesis (2003).

Yao, Zhihua: "Dignāga and four types of perception." JIP 32  (2004), 57-79.

Yao, Zhihua: "The Buddhist Theory of Self-Cognition" London etc.: Routledge (2005).

Zahavi, Dan: "Subjectivity and Selfhood. Investigating the First-Person Perspective" Cambridge, MA/London: MIT Press (2005).

Comment

This is a: cocktail, written by Birgit Kellner 34 days ago.
Keywords: entertainment

And then there was the retired papyrologist at the breakfast table of the small hotel who, when I told him I was specializing in Buddhist philosophy, exclaimed “oh, that’s going to put me to sleep riight away!”

Mind you, a papyrologist.

Comment

This is a: article, written by Birgit Kellner 109 days ago.
Keywords: Tibet today

It’s always interesting to look at the way the Dalai Lama is described in news items such as this one (probably online only for a very limited time). I’ll cite the juicier ones in German:

1. “das religiöse Oberhaupt der buddhistischen Tibeter” (twice)
2. “geistliches Oberhaupt der tibetischen Buddhisten”
3. “Buddhistenführer”
4. “geistlicher Anführer”

“Buddhistenführer” sounds awkward to me, but seems to have some currency (well, 146 Google hits in a very unrefined search); “geistlicher Anführer” sounds like a gang lord with some spiritual inclinations.

“Geistliches Oberhaupt” is very commonly used in this context. The added qualification “der tibetischen Buddhisten” is in a sense remarkably sophisticated, as it narrows down the range of persons in question to those which are Tibetans and those which are Buddhists (as opposed to Thai Buddhists or Tibetan Bon pos). This is fairly precise, even though it does not reflect that there might be, say, Karmapas who are Tibetan Buddhists, yet would not consider the Dalai Lama, a monk from the Gelugpa tradition, their “spiritual head”.

But it’s the first phrase that really caught my attention: what motivates journalists to refer to the DL as the “religious head of Buddhist Tibetans”?

The news item as such, which contains a number of grammatical errors and stylistic blunders, must have been written at great speed, as is customary in news releases of this type. Rather than being the product of a strong authorial intention, it is better taken as a linguistic snapshot, containing some buzzwords that simply drift around in the mediasphere.

So whence this particular buzzword, in particular, whence “Buddhist Tibetans”? Is this an unusually sophisticated recognition of the religious diversity of Tibet, alerting the reader that there are other religions there, too (Bon, for instance, or Islam)? Does it reflect the simple anti-essentialist insight that, while religion is important for all things Tibetan, there might also be Tibetans who choose not to be religious at all, and thus also not to be Buddhist? Or is this a reflection of a line of thought that sees Buddhism as foreign to Tibet and on the whole a rather bad thing, with “Buddhist Tibetans” aiming to imply that there are, in addition to naively credulous Buddhists that have been deceived by manipulative lamas, also reasonable and rational non-religious Tibetans?

Well, one can be hyper-sensitive. Maybe this is just simply the product of the journalist’s disdain for repetition, which artificially makes people continually look for new ways to say the same thing, even if they aren’t actually saying the same thing. (“Hey, Gonzo, let’s say ‘Buddhist Tibetans’ for ‘Tibetan Buddhists’, we already have ‘Tibetan Buddhists’ a few lines earlier.”)

Oh, and aunt Google does provide altogether 3 distinct occurrences of this phrase, none of which are particularly enlightening.

Comment