The Sanjaya Myth: Sanjaya Belatthiputta and the Catuskoti

B. J. Copeland, Syed Moynul Alam Nizar
{"title":"The Sanjaya Myth: Sanjaya Belatthiputta and the Catuskoti","authors":"B. J. Copeland, Syed Moynul Alam Nizar","doi":"10.1353/pew.0.a917045","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Respected modern scholars regard the pre-Buddhist philosopher Sañjaya Belaṭṭhiputta—a significant figure in the Buddhist canon—as the originator of the important classical argument- forms known as the catuṣkoṭi and catuṣkoṭi vinirmukta. We argue that the early Buddhist texts do not in fact support this view of the origin of these argument-forms; the question of their origin is open. While it is certainly true that the Pāli Sāmaññaphala Sutta and some of its parallels portray Sañjaya as deploying the catuṣkoṭi, there is nothing in these passages to suggest that he was its originator. The situation concerning the catuṣkoṭi vinirmukta is perhaps even more surprising: There is nothing in the early Pāli texts and their parallels—nor in Buddhagosa’s famous Pāli commentary on the early texts—to show that Sañjaya even deployed the catuṣkoṭi vinirmukta let alone originated it. Further, our investigations also call into question the standard portrayal of Sañjaya as an obfuscator and prevaricator. It appears he may have been a more interesting and able philosopher than the Sāmaññaphala Sutta—and modern accounts based on it—maintain.","PeriodicalId":506199,"journal":{"name":"Philosophy East and West","volume":"22 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophy East and West","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/pew.0.a917045","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Respected modern scholars regard the pre-Buddhist philosopher Sañjaya Belaṭṭhiputta—a significant figure in the Buddhist canon—as the originator of the important classical argument- forms known as the catuṣkoṭi and catuṣkoṭi vinirmukta. We argue that the early Buddhist texts do not in fact support this view of the origin of these argument-forms; the question of their origin is open. While it is certainly true that the Pāli Sāmaññaphala Sutta and some of its parallels portray Sañjaya as deploying the catuṣkoṭi, there is nothing in these passages to suggest that he was its originator. The situation concerning the catuṣkoṭi vinirmukta is perhaps even more surprising: There is nothing in the early Pāli texts and their parallels—nor in Buddhagosa’s famous Pāli commentary on the early texts—to show that Sañjaya even deployed the catuṣkoṭi vinirmukta let alone originated it. Further, our investigations also call into question the standard portrayal of Sañjaya as an obfuscator and prevaricator. It appears he may have been a more interesting and able philosopher than the Sāmaññaphala Sutta—and modern accounts based on it—maintain.
三迦耶神话Sanjaya Belatthiputta 和 Catuskoti
受人尊敬的现代学者认为佛教经典中的重要经典论证形式 catuṣkoṭi 和 catuṣkoṭi vinirmukta 的鼻祖是佛教以前的哲学家 Sañjaya Belaṭṭhiputta--佛教经典中的重要人物。我们认为,早期佛教典籍事实上并不支持关于这些论证形式起源的观点;它们的起源问题尚无定论。当然,《帕利沙摩那婆罗经》(Pāli Sāmaññaphala Sutta)及其一些类似的经文确实描绘了萨迦耶(Sañjaya)使用 catuṣkoṭi,但这些经文中并没有任何内容表明他是 catuṣkoṭi 的创始者。有关 catuṣkoṭi vinirmukta 的情况可能更令人吃惊:在早期的巴利文及其相似文献中,以及在佛陀鸠摩罗什对早期巴利文的著名注释中,都没有任何证据表明萨迦耶曾经使用过 catuṣkoṭi vinirmukta,更不用说它的创始者了。此外,我们的调查还质疑了将萨迦耶描绘成混淆视听和推诿搪塞者的标准说法。他似乎是一位比《萨婆那婆罗经》(Sāmaññaphala Sutta)以及以其为基础的现代描述更有趣、更能干的哲学家。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信