Key concepts in Eastern philosophy

257 Pages·1999·1.802 MB·English

by  Leaman, Oliver

KEY CONCEPTS IN EASTERN
PHILOSOPHY
Key Concepts in Eastern Philosophy provides an extensive glossary of the main
terms and concepts used in Eastern philosophy. The book includes definitions of
philosophical ideas linked to the national traditions of:
(cid:0) Persia (cid:0) India
(cid:0) the Islamic world (cid:0) China
(cid:0) Japan (cid:0) Tibet
(cid:0) Korea
including concepts from:
(cid:0) Zoroastrianism (cid:0) Hinduism
(cid:0) Sufism (cid:0) Islam
(cid:0) Confucianism (cid:0) Shintoism
(cid:0) Taoism (cid:0) Buddhism
Each entry includes a guide for further reading and critical analysis, is cross-
referenced with associated concepts and is in easy-to-use A–Z format.
Oliver Leaman is Professor of Philosophy at Liverpool John Moores
University.
KEY CONCEPTS SERIES
Other titles available from Routledge
Key Concepts in Communication and Cultural Studies (second edition) Tim
O’Sullivan, John Hartley, Danny Saunders, Martin Montgomery and John Fiske
Key Concepts in Cinema Studies Susan Hayward
Key Concepts in Post-Colonial Studies Bill Ashcroft, Gareth Griffiths and Helen
Tiffin
Key Concepts in Popular Music Roy Shuker
Key Concepts in the Philosophy of Education Christopher Winch and John
Gingell
Key Concepts in Cultural Theory Peter Sedgwick and Andrew Edgar
Key Concepts in Language and Linguistics R.L.Trask
KEY CONCEPTS IN
EASTERN PHILOSOPHY
Oliver Leaman
London and New York
First published 1999
by Routledge
11 New Fetter Lane, London EC4P 4EE
Simultaneously published in the USA and Canada
by Routledge
29 West 35th Street, New York, NY 10001
Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group
This edition published in the Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2005.
“To purchase your own copy of this or any of Taylor & Francis or Routledge’s collection of
thousands of eBooks please go to www.eBookstore.tandf.co.uk.”
© 1999 Oliver Leaman
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or
reproduced or utilized in any form or by any electronic,
mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented,
including photocopying and recording, or in any information
storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from
the publishers.
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.
Library of Congress Cataloguing in Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book has been requested.
ISBN 0-203-00581-3 Master e-book ISBN
ISBN 0-203-22358-6 (Adobe eReader Format)
ISBN 0-415-17362-0 (hbk)
0-415-17363-9 (pbk)
In fond memory of Norman Calder
CONTENTS
Introduction vii
Notes on Text xii
Key Thinkers and Dates xiv
List of Key Concepts xviii
KEY CONCEPTS 1
References and Further Reading 194
Index of Terms 203
Index of Thinkers 222
INTRODUCTION
There are many problems in knowing how to discuss the key concepts of Eastern
philosophy. The first is in deciding what Eastern philosophy actually is, that is,
what counts as the East. There are no problems in including East Asian thought,
especially that of India, China and Japan, and the related civilizations in that part
of the world. I have included Islamic and Zoroastrian philosophy since so much
of it took place within Persia and then went further East, but it should be pointed
out that some of its main thinkers were very much part of what is generally
called the Western world, even living as far West as what is today Spain. On the
other hand, many important East Asian thinkers have also spent at least some time
in the West, and it seemed to me appropriate to include Islamic philosophy
within the description of Eastern. I was influenced in this by the discussion
within Islamic philosophy itself as to how Eastern or otherwise it was.
The second problem is in differentiating between philosophy and religion. It is
often held that there are several basic distinctions between Eastern and Western
philosophy. Eastern philosophy is sometimes taken to be more holistic, and has
sought as its end some form of enlightenment, while Western philosophy is more
concerned with truth, logic, reason and individualism. This is not the place to
debate the differences, if any, between these two forms of thought, since such a
debate would be far beyond the scope of this book, and certainly of this
introduction. I do not think that these generalizations about Eastern and Western
philosophy really lead us anywhere, although I realize that with that statement I
have just produced a generalization of my own.
One of the things that strike many of those who are predominantly trained
within the Western tradition when they approach Eastern philosophy is both how
similar it is, and how different. It is true that more of the problems that arise within
the Eastern traditions are clothed within the language of a particular religion than
is the case any more in the West, but this clothing often appears to be quite
superficial. The logic of the controversies which lies beneath the appearance is
much the same as in the West, or even exactly the same. It would be rash to
insist that the arguments are always the same, of course, since every significant
thinker puts his or her own style of expression on the problems they consider.
Many of the arguments produced in Eastern philosophy are very different from
viii
anything that exists in the West, and often there appears to be an entirely
different way of looking at the notion of being and change. In any case, saying
anything sensible about vast collections of philosophical traditions stretching
over thousands of years and even more square miles is even less likely to be
sensible. I have attempted to express the ideas of these philosophical traditions in
clear and accessible language, and with no direct reference to Western
philosophy. If there is comparative philosophy in this book, it is between the
different Eastern philosophical traditions, which are often genuinely linked both
historically and culturally. Yet it has to be acknowledged that there is much in
Eastern philosophy that will strike those unfamiliar with this tradition as very
different from what might be called Western philosophy, in the sense that it has
at its basis a culture and view of the world that frequently appears to be very
distinct from those prevailing elsewhere. There is no assumption in this book
that Eastern and Western philosophy follow a similar approach. It would be
highly misleading to adopt such a strategy, since there are huge differences in
some of the working practices and techniques of many of the traditions within
the East and the West, if we can use these terms usefully.
The premise on which I am working here is that Eastern philosophy is
philosophy, and not something special and esoteric which we need special non-
philosophical tools to operate. On the other hand, there is no doubt that Eastern
philosophy is closely connected with the religions of the East, and it is
impossible to understand that philosophy unless one also understands something
of the religions. I have tried to explain enough about the relevant religion or
culture to make the context of the philosophy comprehensible. For this reason I
have included some material that is far more relevant to religion than to
philosophy. It is always difficult to know if one has gone into enough depth, and
if one has spent too much time on the religion and not enough on the philosophy.
This is a book on philosophy, and not on religion, and a book on religion would
include far more discussion of the key religious concepts than I have done. I
have tried to write in such a way as to presuppose no knowledge of Eastern
religions, nor philosophy itself, and I have tried to explain to the reader how
particular theoretical problems arose within a specific cultural context. I should
not wish to argue that Eastern religions have acted as parameters within which the
philosophy operated, since often the thinkers themselves have stretched the
religion within which they are working to such an extent that it is not reasonable
to see that religion as constraining the philosophical thought. If it was the case
that Eastern philosophers were always faithful to a literal understanding of their
religions in their philosophical output then they would be poor philosophers. It is
because they felt the need to follow the argument wherever it went that their
philosophy is worth the name of philosophy and is not part of the history of ideas
or theology.
Clearly readers will benefit from following the cross-references and reading
about the network of concepts that relate to a particular topic. One might try to
force readers to do this by not saying anything about a term that is explained
ix
elsewhere in the book. While I hope readers will explore the whole gamut of
concepts in this book, I have tried to make the content of each section work fairly
independently of everything else. As a result, there is some repetition, since a
term that I suspect readers may not know will often, but not always, be explained
briefly whenever it comes up, and readers will not always be obliged to go to the
section dealing with that term alone. I chose this approach as a result of talking
to a variety of people about how they like entries to be written. The general view
was that if one was reading something in which a new philosophical concept
figured what one wanted was a quick answer to the question as to what it means.
Later on one could browse through the volume to deepen one’s grasp both of
that term and of the terms to which it is linked. In the interests of brevity,
though, I have not always explained each technical term in each section, and it
will be easy for readers to go to the appropriate section if they find any terms
with which they are not familiar. Every foreign term is provided either with its
own entry or with a definition of its meaning together with a reference to an
entry that has discussion of it. Where there is no definition of its meaning, it
should be assumed that it means exactly the term that is referred to as being the
relevant entry. So, for example, the term bheda is represented as ‘bheda,
difference, see Dvaita’, where a discussion of this Sanskrit term may be found
within a context in which it plays a part in a theory.
There is a particular problem in writing this sort of book about philosophical
terms, and that lies in the essentially argumentative nature of philosophy. Every
time I write something making a claim about a particular philosophical position,
a voice in my head says ‘But this is only one view, and there are others who take
a different view.’ In an article or a book on a particular topic or thinker one has
the space to look at a whole range of interpretations, and one can then argue in
favour of what one takes to be the correct interpretation. I am constantly aware
here that I have not had the opportunity to do that, and readers should be warned
that the content here is entirely dependent on my view. I have tried to present
what I take to be the most generally accepted view, since in a book of this kind it
is not appropriate to do anything else. On the other hand, there is no doubt that I
have presented my own line of interpretation on a whole range of issues, and
readers will no doubt appreciate that this is just one person’s understanding of
the issue. If they follow up the references to relevant books, they will find a wide
variety of both supporting and critical arguments on all these concepts.
Another aspect of presenting such a book on philosophical concepts is that I
have tried to display something of the ways in which the concepts are used in
arguments, which is after all the main activity of philosophy. Rather than say
that A believed p and B suggested that not-p I have tried to point out where
different thinkers challenged each other and what the main points of their
arguments were. Of course, it is not easy to do this within a short space, but I
hope it has been possible to convey something of the flavour of the arguments
that constitute Eastern philosophy. Had I shortened each section I could have
included many more concepts, but I felt that it is better to discuss a rather more