Miszellen Zur Erkenntnistheoretisch Logischen Schule Des Buddhismus

This document, "Miszellen Zur Erkenntnistheoretisch Logischen Schule Des Buddhismus" by Ernst Steinkellner, contains two sections that delve into improving our understanding of key Buddhist texts, specifically those related to Dignāga, a prominent philosopher of the Yogācāra school of Buddhism.

Section VI: A New Approach towards Improving the Textual Basis for an Understanding of Dignāga's Pramāṇasamuccayavṛtti

This section addresses the "deplorable quality" of the existing Tibetan translations of Dignāga's Pramāṇasamuccayavṛtti (a commentary on his seminal work on logic and epistemology). Steinkellner acknowledges the established scholarly approach of comparing the two Tibetan translations and referencing Jinendrabuddhi's Tīkā (a commentary on Dignāga's commentary) which quotes Sanskrit fragments. However, he proposes a novel and significant improvement:

• The Core Argument: Steinkellner argues that a crucial but overlooked source for improving the textual basis is the collection of Tibetan fragments of the Pramāṇasamuccayavṛtti found within other Buddhist works. These other works were often translated by different, and generally better, translators.

• Benefits of this New Approach:

  • Improved Sanskrit Reconstruction: By collecting these translated fragments, scholars can gain a more accurate understanding of the original Sanskrit text, especially in areas where Sanskrit fragments are missing.
  • More Reliable Tibetan Interpretation: It provides more reliable Tibetan versions of specific textual units, allowing for better interpretation and comparison with the pratikas (quoted passages) in Jinendrabuddhi's commentary.
  • Better Evaluation of Existing Sanskrit Fragments: Even when Sanskrit fragments exist, comparing them with these superior Tibetan translations (rather than the poor quality extant translations) leads to a more robust evaluation of the Sanskrit text.

• Distinction from Previous Methods: Steinkellner clarifies that this approach is different from his earlier opposition to "correcting" the existing Tibetan translations to create a text that never existed. Instead, it involves utilizing authentically translated Tibetan fragments from other sources.

• Illustrative Example: The text provides a detailed example illustrating this method. It compares a quotation from Dignāga's Vṛtti as found in Devendrabuddhi's commentary with the existing Tibetan translations and the Sanskrit fragments. The example demonstrates how the translation within Devendrabuddhi's commentary offers a more accurate rendering of the original Sanskrit, particularly in capturing nuances and grammatical structures that are distorted or missing in the other translations. This highlights the value of finding these embedded quotations.

• Conclusion: Steinkellner concludes that this method of collecting Tibetan quotations from other works is a "very promising new channel for philological efforts" and a valuable additional source of textual information, especially until a complete Sanskrit manuscript of the Vṛtti is found.

Section VII: Another Note on pramanabhuta

This section focuses on the correct interpretation of the Sanskrit term pramāṇabhūta as it appears in the introductory verses (maṅgala) of Dignāga's Pramāṇasamuccaya.

• The Issue: The term is often translated as "who is a means of valid cognition," implying the Buddha became a means of valid cognition (pramāṇībhūta). Steinkellner points out that this interpretation, while adopted by Dharmakīrti and subsequent traditions, is not directly supported by Dignāga's own explanation of the verse.

• Dharmakīrti's Interpretation: Dharmakīrti, in his Pramāṇavārttika, explains the term by emphasizing the function of bhūta as excluding what is not eternal or what has not come into being (abhūtavinivrttaye bhutoktiḥ). This interpretation is also adopted by Jinendrabuddhi.

• Jinendrabuddhi's Analysis: Jinendrabuddhi's analysis of the compound pramāṇabhūta is discussed. While he explains the meaning of bhūta in line with Dharmakīrti (as "having become" and excluding the eternal), his grammatical analysis of the compound as a dvandva (a type of compound) leads to a potentially problematic interpretation. This analysis suggests the Buddha is "a means of valid cognition, an authority, as well as to have become."

• Steinkellner's Resolution: Steinkellner agrees with Vetter's assertion that the term pramāṇabhūta does not inherently suggest a cvi-formation (which would more strongly indicate "become"). Therefore, following Vetter, he suggests translating pramāṇabhūta in Dignāga's context as "who is a pramāṇa" (an authority or standard of valid cognition). However, he acknowledges that when interpreted through the lens of Dharmakīrti and the subsequent tradition, it must be understood as "who has become a pramāṇa." This highlights the interpretive layer added by later philosophers.

In essence, Steinkellner's article contributes to Buddhist studies by proposing a new, practical methodology for improving textual understanding of Dignāga's important works and by offering a nuanced analysis of a key term used to describe the Buddha within the Buddhist tradition.