1. Philosophical Traditions Of India Raffaele Torella (review)

Reviews of Books 105

in "Notes on the Palaeography of the Old Tibetan Inscriptions: Zhol and bSam yas." Finally, with char- acteristic virtuosity, Leonard W. J. van der Kuijp's argument for and demonstration of the importance of rigorous text-critical practice for Tibetologists too eager to supplement that practice with theory should not be missed. In line with previous publications by Indus in this series, this volume is a collection of highly spe- cialized studies that will no doubt appeal to only a select audience. Perhaps in anticipation of this, there is little effort to standardize presentations of Tibetan technical terms, or even in many cases to translate such commonplace terminology as phyi dar ("period of later dispensation"). As a result, the volume potentially alienates a broader spectrum of readers from other scholarly disciplines whose insights Tibetology could no doubt profit from, and who certainly could have been provided easier access with alternative editorial decisions and a larger introduction. That said, this rich body of research holds the promise that more cross-disciplinary conversations will appear in the future, and that the study of the complex subject of the edition in Tibet might, in the words of Anne Chayet, truly begin to "réunir les chercheurs intéressés par ces thèmes, croiser les disciplines dont ils se réclament, comparer les meth- odes et donc, d'une façon générale, en regroupant les recherches, leur donner une impulsion nouvelle" (pp. 10-11).

MATTHEW KING UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO

The Philosophical Traditions of India: An Appraisal. By RAFFAELE TORELLA. Translated by Kenneth Frederick Hurry. Varanasi: INDICA BOOKS, 2011. Pp. 269.

One can only welcome K. F. Hurry's English translation of Raffaele Torella's masterly intro- duction to classical and medieval Indian philosophy, whose Italian original (Il pensiero dell'India: Un'introduzione. Rome: Carocci Editore) was published in 2008. For this book is much more than a new doxographic account of Indian philosophy. Reflecting more than thirty years of Torella's creative and exemplary interaction with philosophical and non-philosophical Sanskrit literature, this introduc- tion abounds in insightful observations and new materials on the nature, the sociocultural background, the "archaeology," and the historiography of Indian philosophy. Besides a very learned introduction (pp. 7-32), the book comprises two main parts: "Brahmanic Philosophy and Environs" (pp. 33-120) and "Opponents of Brahmanic Culture: The Materialism of the Lokayatas, Jainism and Buddhism" (pp. 121-71). A fourfold "Excursus" ("The Form of the Texts," pp. 173-79; "Logic," pp. 180-83; "Knowledge and Truth," pp. 184-88; "Linguistic Speculations," pp. 189-96), two appendices ("Orality and Writing," pp. 197-211; "From the Sarvadarśanasamgraha: The Pratyabhijñā-Darśana," pp. 212- 23), a bibliography (pp. 225-50), and three indices (pp. 251-69) round out the volume. The book's introduction deals with the various (Western as well as Neo-Hindu) prejudices respon- sible for the denial of anything like "genuine" philosophy in ancient India. With most critics, Torel- la admits that no Sanskrit word (except perhaps the rare tattvajñānaișaņā) provides a satisfactory equivalent of 'philosophy' or 'philosopher': darśana (rather than being philosophy is a "world view," p. 15; see below), ānvīkşikī (rather than philosophy, "a wider critical and investigative attitude that perennially tests the validity of the rules regulating human activities," p. 16), parīkșaka (rather than a philosopher, "one who questions things instead of accepting them," p. 17). In this connection, the author engages in a stimulating discussion of the Neo-Hindus' emphasis on direct personal experience and the transformative character of Indian philosophy as darśana, and argues that this understanding of darśana is irrelevant for classical and medieval facts "since those connotations of the immediacy of personal experience and the all-inclusiveness they wished to attribute are alien to it" (p. 15). Simi- larly, he is ready to grant the absence of "pure theory" (together with "axiological neutrality" and the search for universal truths, one of the defining features of "philosophy" according to Husserl) in Indian philosophical literature, which more often than not is to be read within "ethical-religious contexts" and against the background of "soteriological-devotional preoccupation[s]" (p. 18). Note, however, that

106 Journal of the American Oriental Society 132.1 (2012)

according to the author (p. 29), "the western critic himself is increasingly aware that 'pure' theory, free from conditioning, which by contrast is claimed to characterise western thought, is in actual fact nourished and guided by unconscious paradigms, and inevitably conditioned by contexts and cultural models." Does, then, the lack of personal flavor and impulse (notwithstanding Dharmakīrti, Jayarāśi, Raghunātha Siromaņi, pp. 20-21), of "any search for truth without some kind of pre-established direc- tions," as well as the "virtual absence of conversion" (p. 18; note Torella's discussion of Mandana Miśra, Śankaranandana, and Vācaspati Miśra, pp. 19-20), plead against the existence of philosophy in ancient and medieval India? The answer to this question provides Torella with an opportunity to discuss the central notion of sastra-one of the most penetrating parts of the book (pp. 21-26). Finally, is "Indian philosophy" something like a contradictio in terminis due to the apparent conditioning of speculation by (mostly Vedic) revelation? Certainly not, for "[i]n actual fact, the nature and results of this stated dependence on Vedic revelation probably have much less impact than western critics may fear" (p. 28; after all-the remark bears on Kumārila-"in the works of Indian philosophers, rarely does one see such an extensive and sophisticated use of rational argument as in this very champion of the Veda's authority," p. 26). This is the occasion to discuss the questions of (the śāstrakāras' atti- tude toward) history (pp. 25-26), of the mainly commentarial nature of Indian philosophical literature (p. 25), and of the relationships between reason(ed argument) and scripture (pp. 26-29). After several publications aimed "at refuting [the] mythical vision [ ... ] of an ataraxic and disem- bodied India" (p. 7 n. 1), of "a land of boundless riches and lasciviousness" (p. 7 n. 2), Torella attempts to present "an India that was different from the usual mystical India" (p. 7) by "abstracting as far as possible the religious and soteriological dimension" (p. 7) of the philosophical systems and focusing on "a prevalently ontological-logical-epistemological scenario" (p. 137): "[P]artially following doxo- graphic tradition, our presentation of the darśanas turns particularly on 'philosophic' themes, leaving religious components aside as far as possible. [ ... ] The main, closely interconnected themes are: the nature of the real, causality, the means of valid knowledge, language and verbal knowledge" (p. 32). Indeed, if doxography presents "each darśana [ ... ] as [if] it were embalmed in a definitive form, unac- companied by any reconstruction of its formation process" (p. 30), this book (which, according to its author, is "not a manual," p. 8) goes far beyond a genre to which Western scholarship has very little to add to Haribhadra and Mädhava. True, the author's starting point remains the so-called darśanas, defined here-against Neo-Hindu interpretations (see above)-as "coherent presentation[s] of a body of theories mainly concerning the nature of the real and the conditions of knowing it, integrated by concepts of an ethical-religious nature" (p. 15). But these are envisioned as doctrinal systems reflecting broader cultural interests, involved in history, interacting with their concurrents by way of polemics and/or influence, and changing in spite of their strong capacity to "obscure any diachronic perspective" (p. 23). The presentation of each darśana includes general remarks on its most characteristic features, vested or unconscious interests, and historiography; the chronology and stratigraphy of its textual his- tory (including materials drawn from unedited manuscripts!); a systematic account of its main tenets: the four pramānas, the sixteen tattvas and the five-membered inference of the Nyāya (pp. 33-56; the chapter includes an outline of Navyanyāya, pp. 54-56); the six (or ten) padārthas of the Vaiśeșika (pp. 57-75); the evolutionary scheme of the Sänkhya, including its (epic and non-epic) prehistory, satkārya- and pariņāma-vāda (pp. 76-90); the "therapeutic paradigm" of Yoga and its doctrinal dif- ferences with Sänkhya (pp. 91-101; "I have been strongly tempted to omit any treatment of Yoga in a work [ ... ] devoted essentially to the 'philosophy' of India," p. 91); Mīmāmsā (pp. 102-8; the main doctrinal and apologetic concerns of Mīmāmsa are dealt with in excursus III and IV); the Vedānta(s) of Gaudapāda, Śankara, Śrīharșa, and Vijñānabhikșu (pp. 109-16); the Pratyabhijñā (pp. 117-20, pre- sented further in appendix 2); the minimalist epistemology and the hedonistic ethics of the Lokāyatas (pp. 121-25); Jaina epistemology, logic, anekānta- and naya-vāda (pp. 126-36); the Sarvāstivādin- Vaibhāșika doctrines of dharmas, causality, and existence (pp. 139-45); the "instantaneist" ontology and the gnoseology of the Sautrāntikas (pp. 145-48); the Mādhyamika attitude toward emptiness, theses, the two truths, and prasangas (pp. 148-53); the ālayavijñāna, the three natures/characteristics, and the idealism(s) of Yogācāra (pp. 153-57); Dignāga's ideas on the two pramānas (including the distinction between svārtha- and parārtha-anumāna and the issue of pramānaphala) and the apoha

Reviews of Books 107

theory (pp. 159-65); Dharmakīrti's thought (definition of pramāņa, svabhāvapratibandha, scriptural authority, pp. 165-71). Several key items in the presentation of the darśanas provide opportunities to dive into "cross- system(at)ic" issues: Sanskrit and nominal style (pp. 54-56), debate and methodology (pp. 33-35), universals (pp. 71-73), yogipratyaksa (pp. 95-100), and the "therapeutic paradigm" at stake in Nyāya, Āyurveda, Yoga, and Buddhism (pp. 94-95). This inclination is further strengthened by the extremely useful excursus on the form of philosophical literature (sūtra, vrtti, vārttika, bhāșya, and the "metaphysics" of commentary), logic (inductive vs deductive), epistemic validity (svatah- and parataḥ-prāmāņya, error, khyātis), linguistic speculations (conventionalism, word denotation, sentence meaning, śābdabodha, abhihitānvaya vs. anvitābhidhāna). Finally, appendix 1 is likely to provide one of the best discussions to date on the issues of literacy, (the normative attitudes regarding) orality and writing, and the accessibility and diffusion of knowledge in Indian philosophy. "The exaltation of orality [ ... ] at the levels found in Brahmanic India reveals that its nature is, as it were, not primary, i.e., instrumental to the grandiose and refined cultural and social control strategy put into effect by the Brahmanic élite. The brahmins, numerically overwhelmed by their (cultural) subjects, were bound to create a rigidly pyramidal structure, continually restating, through the need for oral-and hence per- sonal-reception of Vedic knowledge, their irreplaceable function" (p. 208). On p. 209 he speaks of the brahmins' "deification of orality so as to hold on to a monopoly of knowledge." To put it briefly, one of Torella's achievements is to present the most significant "systems" as developing at the crossroads of vertical-traditional-commentarial and horizontal-cultural-polemical lines. This amounts to saying that the author succeeds in providing a picture of Indian philosophy from within, taking into consideration its cultural, ideological, social, and even material parameters without indulging in any form of com- parative or "analytically" oriented approach (this is meant as a compliment). Very few topics and attitudes characteristic of Indian philosophical texts are left out of considera- tion. The book contains hardly any errors and will no doubt be recommended as the best introduction to date to anyone interested in Indian philosophy-including specialists, who will not fail to be impressed by Torella's astounding erudition, his breadth of perspective, and the many gems unearthed by him in all layers of Indian philosophical traditions. Instead of blaming the author for this and that, as a loi du genre would recommend, let me suggest a few things that he might consider adding in the next edi- tion of his book. First, one might expect a discussion of the question of the origin(s) of philosophy in India (but see p. 17 n. 10 and pp. 48-49). Second, and in spite of his explicit program in this book, the author might address the question of the very "confessionality" and apologetic concerns of Indian philosophers-a question with a strong bearing on the nature of Indian philosophy itself: what would have been the fate of Western philosophy if Jews, Muslims, and Christians had maintained themselves throughout European history and continued the critical/apologetic dialogue initiated in early medieval Spain? Third, a few words would certainly not be out of place concerning the defining (but also chang- ing) features of "orthodoxy" both before and after the rise of Islam in India. Finally, the bibliography might be updated in order to include a few major contributions to Indian philosophy, among which are Kei Kataoka's Kumārila on Truth, Omniscience and Killing (Vienna: Austrian Academy of Sciences Press, 2011), Andrew Nicholson's Unifying Hinduism (New York: Columbia Univ. Press. 2010), and Isabelle Ratié's Le Soi et l'Autre (Leiden: Brill, 2011). Following is the reviewer's tiny contribution to the next edition of this outstanding book: Ānandagīri > Ānandagiri (p. 28 n. 22); Navanyāya > Navyanyāya (pp. 37-38); consists > consist (p. 38); vitaņda > vitaņdā (p. 41); endowed-with-fire > endowed-with-smoke (p. 50); buddyapeksa > buddhyapekșa (p. 73); n.43 >n.3 (p. 82); karma > karman (passim); °mārtāņda > °mārtaņda (p. 93); Nyāyābhāsya > Nyāyabhāșya (p. 95); ārșa > ārșa (p. 98); Mīmāņsa > Mīmāņsā (pp. 104-5); an nth > another (p. 110); Chandogya > Chāndogya (pp. 110-11); Madhyamakahrdaya IV.56ab > Madhyamakahṛdaya VIII.56ab (p. 110); Āryaśālistambhasūtra > Āryaśālistambasūtra (p. 138); correligionaries > coreligionaries (p. 138 n. 2); Sthāviras > Sthaviras (p. 141); Dhammasangani > Dhammasangaņi (p. 140); note that a Sanskrit manuscript of Sthiramati's commentary on the AKBh is now available (p. 142); (inference of real exis- tence) > (inference [of momentariness] out of [real] existence) (p. 147 n. 9); Tarkajvalā > Tarkajvālā (p. 150); Tson kha pa > Tson/Tsong kha pa (p. 153); Āsanga > Asanga (p. 155); note that neither of the

108 Journal of the American Oriental Society 132.1 (2012)

two treatises has survived in Tibetan translation; note also that Vasubandhu allows three (and not only two) pramāņas in his AKBh and Vyākhyāyukti (p. 158); dvyābhāsam > dvyābhāsa (p. 164); Tārānātha > Tāranātha (p. 165 n. 32); in "This is a tree, because it is an oak," the two concepts are not co-extensive (p. 169); Śākyamati > Śākyabuddhi (p. 169 n. 39); Mālīnīślokavārttika > Mālinīślokavārttika (p. 175); (Madhyamā, 'Median [Voice]' > (Madhyamā, 'Median [Voice]') (p. 179); Mills' > Mill's (p. 181); Prabhākara > Prābhākara (p. 195); Lariviére > Lariviere (p. 198 n. 3); Mahābhașya > Mahābhāșya (p. 199); model > modèle (p. 291 n. 10).

VINCENT ELTSCHINGER AUSTRIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES

A Dictionary of Pali, pt. 2: g-n. By MARGARET CONE. Bristol: PALI TEXT SOCIETY, 2010. Pp. x + 653. £40. A Critical Pali Dictionary, vol. 3, fasc. 8, kāmadhātu-kāreti. Edited by OSKAR VON HINÜBER). Bristol: PALI TEXT SOCIETY, 2011. Pp. xv-xxxvii + 387-474. £15.

In JAOS 123.3 (2003): 687-90, it was my privilege to celebrate the publication of part 1 of Margaret Cone's new Dictionary of Pali (= DOP). There is no need to repeat here the remarks about the history of Pali lexicography made in the earlier review. But one can repeat the celebration: this is another landmark in the study of Pali, a required reference tool for anyone working on Pali texts, at whatever level. Part 2 has author and title details on the front cover as well as the spine as was the case with part 1, and-a most welcome addition-running heads at the top of pages, which makes it easier to use than part 1. Part 2 has a list of addenda to part 1 (pp. 645-53). Many of the entries are major research contributions, with many centrally important terms: part 1, for example, has long and extremely useful entries on kamma and related terms; part 2 has entries on dhamma and nibbāna. Dr. Cone has been working on the dictionary since 1984. At the time of writing this review, I gather (October 2011) she has reached the letter p (s.v. parama). Let us hope that part 3 will be published in the not-too-distant future. In the previous review I mentioned the Critical Pali Dictionary (= CPD), begun in 1926 (not 1924 as is stated on the title page), which had at the time of that writing reached vol. 3, fasc. 6, to kasāvacuņna, published by the Royal Danish Academy of Sciences and Letters. The year 2001 saw the appearance of vol. 3, fasc. 7, kasāvacuņņa-kāmadhātu, then published by the Department of Asian Studies, University of Copenhagen, reviewed in JAOS 123.4 (2003): 932. 2011 brought the appearance of volume 3, fasc. 8, kāmadhātu-kāreti, now published by the Pali Text Society. Here the tone must be elegiac as well as celebratory, for this will be the last fascicule to appear: CPD has now come to an end. The entire CPD to date is available in hard copy from the Pali Text Society: see http://www. palitext.com; entries from all fascicules up to the penultimate (vol. 3, fasc. 6) are also available on-line at http://pali.hum.ku.dk/cpd/. (This site also contains the prefaces to the three volumes, abbreviations, obituaries, and other useful material.) The introductory materials to three separate fascicules of vol- ume 3 give the recent history of CPD, with details of the contributors: readers should note that of the prefatory pages (in roman numerals) to volume 3, pages i-vi are in fascicule 1, pp. vii-xiv in fascicule 7, and pp. xv-xxxvii in fascicule 8, as is the contents page for volume 3 as a whole. Anyone binding the fascicules of volume 3 together should take note of this. At the end of the fascicule (pp. 469-74) is a list of additions and corrections to volume 3 as a whole. Of the two dictionaries, CPD is for the most part fuller, quantitatively: the entry for the simple verb karoti, 'to do', for instance, occurs in volume 3, fasc. 6, pp. 301-14, with twenty-six columns of entries, while the causative forms kārayati, kārāpeti, and kāreti have separate entries in fasc. 8, pp. 453-55 (six columns), pp. 456-58 (four col- umns), and pp. 464-67 (seven columns) respectively. DOP has both simple and causative forms of the verb together under karoti, pp. 646-53 (just over thirteen columns). Both have various derivatives of Vkr under separate headings. CPD does not end with kāreti, despite the cover page: the last entry is

PREFACE

Deciding to reprint a book without changes after ten years from its second revised edition might mean two different things: a) the author has stopped working on the subject; or b) the author considers his book to be perfect. In the present case, however, none of the two options hold, for a) the Pratyabhijña has never ceased to be one of my favourite subjects of research; b) I am well aware that any truly scientific work is intrinsically provisional. The book gestated over a long period: it was the first time that a seminal text of the extraordinary tradition of non-dual Saivism was edited critically and its translation supported by copious annotations covering both the philological and philosophical side. I dare say that after its publication it became clear that no serious study of Pratyabhijñā philosophy could be carried out without taking into account the complex relationship of its tenets with the main lines of Indian philosophy as a whole, particularly Dharmakīrti and the epistemological school of Buddhism, Bhartrhari, Mīmāmsa and the other major darsanas, aesthetic speculation. In other words, that the time when Saiva advaita philosophy was studied by focusing exclusively, or nearly exclusively, on Saiva sources was definitively over. Among the recent contributions to Pratyabhijñā (and Saiva advaita) studies stand out those by Isabelle Ratié, Alexis Sanderson and Raffaele Torella, which are listed in the following Additional Bibliography. My recent discovery of a relatively long fragment of Utpaladeva's extended commentary (Vivrti or Țīkā) on his IPK and Vrtti, running from I.3.6 through I.5.3, deserves a special mention. After looking into the edition and English translation of this extremely important text, published in several articles from 2007 onwards (see Additional Bibliography: TORELLA 2007 a, b, c, d; TORELLA forthcoming a), we are no longer allowed to consider Utpaladeva a mere predecessor of Abhinavagupta - as being the latter the great master of Pratyabhijñā - but rather, we must take Utpaladeva, particularly with his Vivrti, as the real centre of gravity of the system, and Abhinavagupta mainly as his brilliant commentator.1 Instead of including this additional material into the body of the present book, which in the generous opinion of the scholarly world keeps its validity intact (even several years on from its original publication), I have preferred to refer the interested reader to the above articles themselves, which moreover will soon take the shape of a unitary volume.

Raffaele Torella

Rocca Priora, January 2012

1 In August 2010 the first international workshop entirely devoted to Utpaladeva took place in Shimla ("Utpaladeva, philosopher of Recognition"), organised by Bettina Bäumer and myself, under the auspices of the Indian Institute for Advanced Study. The Proceedings will be published within 2012.