Zagadnienie tożsamości bytu w filozofii buddyjskiej

The Buddhist philosophical school of Madhyamaka is famous for its statement that things do not have their own inherent nature, essence or self‑nature (svabhāva). As a result, it is said that there is no objective foundation of the identity of things. Thus, the identity of things is not grounded in...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Krzysztof JAKUBCZAK
Format: Article
Language:deu
Published: Pedagogical University of Cracow 2015-06-01
Series:Argument : Biannual Philosophical Journal
Online Access:http://argumentwp.vipserv.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/pdfv5n1/argument_v5_n1_JakubczakK.pdf
id doaj-ba3ddcadb04d4369a499370b834d1888
record_format Article
spelling doaj-ba3ddcadb04d4369a499370b834d18882020-11-25T02:09:16ZdeuPedagogical University of CracowArgument : Biannual Philosophical Journal2083-66352084-10432015-06-0151171178Zagadnienie tożsamości bytu w filozofii buddyjskiej Krzysztof JAKUBCZAK0Jagiellonian University in CracowThe Buddhist philosophical school of Madhyamaka is famous for its statement that things do not have their own inherent nature, essence or self‑nature (svabhāva). As a result, it is said that there is no objective foundation of the identity of things. Thus, the identity of things is not grounded in things themselves but is solely imputed and externally imposed on them. Things are what they are only for us, whereas for themselves, or from their ‘own side’ they are empty (śūnya). That is why Madhyamaka philosophy is often compared to the philosophical conceptions inspired by a linguistic reflection (from Ludwig Wittgenstein to Jacques Derrida) which defines the problem of identity in terms of cognitive subjectivism and constructivism. Starting the analysis from the Abhidharma Buddhist tradition I will show that this reading of Madhyamaka view is too narrow. I will demonstrate that it is a result of an assumption, shared by Parmenides and Plato and wrongly ascribed to this Buddhist school, that the identity of being must be grounded in the self‑existing, self‑defined and (relatively) permanent ontological foundation. This tacit assumption, if rejected, makes any identity a completely subjective and relative construct. The point I am going to argue for, however, is that the Madhyamaka school sticks to an alternative understanding of objectivity; the foundation of all things is nothing but pure relation that precedes, in the ontological sense, all co‑related elements (i.e. things). Therefore, the question comes up: how being‑in‑relationship or ‘relationality’ may be the foundation of identity and what kind of identity it endows. I will try to answer these questions.http://argumentwp.vipserv.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/pdfv5n1/argument_v5_n1_JakubczakK.pdf
collection DOAJ
language deu
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Krzysztof JAKUBCZAK
spellingShingle Krzysztof JAKUBCZAK
Zagadnienie tożsamości bytu w filozofii buddyjskiej
Argument : Biannual Philosophical Journal
author_facet Krzysztof JAKUBCZAK
author_sort Krzysztof JAKUBCZAK
title Zagadnienie tożsamości bytu w filozofii buddyjskiej
title_short Zagadnienie tożsamości bytu w filozofii buddyjskiej
title_full Zagadnienie tożsamości bytu w filozofii buddyjskiej
title_fullStr Zagadnienie tożsamości bytu w filozofii buddyjskiej
title_full_unstemmed Zagadnienie tożsamości bytu w filozofii buddyjskiej
title_sort zagadnienie tożsamości bytu w filozofii buddyjskiej
publisher Pedagogical University of Cracow
series Argument : Biannual Philosophical Journal
issn 2083-6635
2084-1043
publishDate 2015-06-01
description The Buddhist philosophical school of Madhyamaka is famous for its statement that things do not have their own inherent nature, essence or self‑nature (svabhāva). As a result, it is said that there is no objective foundation of the identity of things. Thus, the identity of things is not grounded in things themselves but is solely imputed and externally imposed on them. Things are what they are only for us, whereas for themselves, or from their ‘own side’ they are empty (śūnya). That is why Madhyamaka philosophy is often compared to the philosophical conceptions inspired by a linguistic reflection (from Ludwig Wittgenstein to Jacques Derrida) which defines the problem of identity in terms of cognitive subjectivism and constructivism. Starting the analysis from the Abhidharma Buddhist tradition I will show that this reading of Madhyamaka view is too narrow. I will demonstrate that it is a result of an assumption, shared by Parmenides and Plato and wrongly ascribed to this Buddhist school, that the identity of being must be grounded in the self‑existing, self‑defined and (relatively) permanent ontological foundation. This tacit assumption, if rejected, makes any identity a completely subjective and relative construct. The point I am going to argue for, however, is that the Madhyamaka school sticks to an alternative understanding of objectivity; the foundation of all things is nothing but pure relation that precedes, in the ontological sense, all co‑related elements (i.e. things). Therefore, the question comes up: how being‑in‑relationship or ‘relationality’ may be the foundation of identity and what kind of identity it endows. I will try to answer these questions.
url http://argumentwp.vipserv.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/pdfv5n1/argument_v5_n1_JakubczakK.pdf
work_keys_str_mv AT krzysztofjakubczak zagadnienietozsamoscibytuwfilozofiibuddyjskiej
_version_ 1724924903991279616