The Problem of Apoha in Hetu-vidyā from a Phenomenological Perspective
Liangkang Ni
2008-01-01
Abstract:Since Dignāga, hetu-vidyā, pramān . a, vijñapti-mātratā and other theories in Buddhism have all employed the term apoha to explain the forming of concepts. It has similarity with the phenomenological method of eidetic reduction by which we get ideas. But it also makes a noteworthy contrast, mainly because Dignāga is a nominalist, while Husserl, the founder of phenomenology, is an idealist. Therefore, their results are different despite the similarity in method. Under this background, the author puts forward and tries to argue three theses as follows: first, distinction should be made between the method of ayapoha that is related to express comparative inference in Hetu-vidyā, and the method of apoha that can be applied in the whole sphere of pramān . a. Specifically ayapoha is only one kind of apoha, i.e., the method of apoha specially applied in the sphere of concept and language. Second, the thought of seeing an essence advanced by phenomenology dispels the strict distinction between pratyaks . a-pramān . a and anumā n . a-pramān . a in pramān . a, and can lead to a re-understanding of perception, thinking, judgment, inference, particular, universal, concept, words and other categories. Third, the main reason why the method of affirmation-negative exposition (ayapoha) as well as the whole Hetu-vidyā hasn't flourished in the history of Chinese Buddhism even Buddhism in general, is that they are limited to the level of language. Although there is considerable difference between Dignāga's nominalism and Husserl's idealism, it is also an obvious fact that there are comparability and complementarity between them. In this sense, Husserl's phenomenology is no more Cartesianism in twentieth century than Dignāgaianism in twentieth century.