No description available.

Mode of access: World Wide Web. / Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Hawaii at Manoa, 2004. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 183-186). / Electronic reproduction. / Also available by subscription via World Wide Web / xii, 186 leaves, bound 29 cm

This study is a comparison of the philosophical systems composed by the Indian philosopher Sankara (788-830 CE), and the Muslim mystic, Ibn Arabi (1165-1240 CE). The primary thesis found in this study is that the conceptual systems constructed by Sankara and Ibn Arabi are not perfectly new creations derived from the core of their mystical realizations. Rather, they contain fundamental pre-existing principles, concepts, and teachings that are expanded upon and placed within a systematic philosophy or theology that is intended to lead others to a state of realization. A selection of these presuppositions are extracted from within each of these thinkers’ philosophical systems and employed as structural indicators. Similarities are highlighted, yet the differences between Sankara and Ibn Arabi’s thought, witnessed within their philosophical systems, lead us to the conclusion that the two mystics inhabited different conceptual space. / iv, 195 leaves ; 29 cm

Thesis (doctoral)--Université Michel de Montaigne - Bordeaux III, 1998. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 367-382).

<p>The present dissertation is a translation and analysis of the chapter on <i>anumāna</i> in Vallabha’s <i>Nyāyalīlāvatī,</i> based on certain theoretical considerations on cross-cultural translation and the understanding of tradition. Adopting a non-essentialized and non-historicist conceptualization of the Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika/Navya-nyāya tradition, the work focuses on a reading of the <i>anumāna</i> chapter that is particularized and individualized. It further argues for a plurality of interpretative stances within the academic field of Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika/Navya-nyāya studies, on the grounds that the dominant stance has narrowed the scope of research. With reference to post-colonial theory, this dominant stance is understood in terms of a certain strategy called “mimetic translation”.</p><p>The study of the <i>anumāna</i> chapter consists of three main interpretational sections: translation, comments, and analysis. The translation and comments focus on understanding issues internal to the <i>Nyāyalīlāvatī. </i>The analysis focuses on a contextual interpretation insofar as the text is understood through reading other texts within the Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika/Navya-nyāya discourse. The analysis is further grounded in a concept of intertextuality in that it identifies themes, examples, and arguments appearing in other texts within the discourse. The analysis also identifies and discusses Cārvāka and Mīmāṁsaka arguments within the <i>anumāna</i> chapter.</p><p>Two important themes are discerned in the interpretation of the <i>anumāna</i> chapter: first, a differentiation between the apprehension of <i>vyāpti</i> and the warranting of this relation so as to make the apprehension suitable for a process of knowledge; second, that the sequential arrangement of the subject matter of the sections within the chapter, <i>vyāptigraha</i>, <i>upādhi</i>, <i>tarka</i>, and <i>parāmar</i>śa, reflects the process of coming to inferential knowledge.</p><p>The present work is a contribution to the understanding of the post-Udayana and pre-Gaṅgeśa Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika/Navya-nyāya discourse on inferential knowledge and it is written in the hope of provoking more research on that particular period and discourse in the history of Indian philosophies.</p>

The present dissertation is a translation and analysis of the chapter on anumāna in Vallabha’s Nyāyalīlāvatī, based on certain theoretical considerations on cross-cultural translation and the understanding of tradition. Adopting a non-essentialized and non-historicist conceptualization of the Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika/Navya-nyāya tradition, the work focuses on a reading of the anumāna chapter that is particularized and individualized. It further argues for a plurality of interpretative stances within the academic field of Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika/Navya-nyāya studies, on the grounds that the dominant stance has narrowed the scope of research. With reference to post-colonial theory, this dominant stance is understood in terms of a certain strategy called “mimetic translation”. The study of the anumāna chapter consists of three main interpretational sections: translation, comments, and analysis. The translation and comments focus on understanding issues internal to the Nyāyalīlāvatī. The analysis focuses on a contextual interpretation insofar as the text is understood through reading other texts within the Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika/Navya-nyāya discourse. The analysis is further grounded in a concept of intertextuality in that it identifies themes, examples, and arguments appearing in other texts within the discourse. The analysis also identifies and discusses Cārvāka and Mīmāṁsaka arguments within the anumāna chapter. Two important themes are discerned in the interpretation of the anumāna chapter: first, a differentiation between the apprehension of vyāpti and the warranting of this relation so as to make the apprehension suitable for a process of knowledge; second, that the sequential arrangement of the subject matter of the sections within the chapter, vyāptigraha, upādhi, tarka, and parāmarśa, reflects the process of coming to inferential knowledge. The present work is a contribution to the understanding of the post-Udayana and pre-Gaṅgeśa Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika/Navya-nyāya discourse on inferential knowledge and it is written in the hope of provoking more research on that particular period and discourse in the history of Indian philosophies.