达亚·克里希纳
印度哲学不是陈列固定灵性教义的博物馆,而是一套活的论证,可以被追问、被延续,并与其他传统对话。
定位
斋浦尔拉贾斯坦大学的哲学家,他质疑那种把印度哲学看作灵性的、只以解脱为目的、受权威束缚的形象,并组织了“对话”(samvada)——让传统梵文学者与受西方哲学训练的哲学家进行有组织的讨论。
核心思想
- 关于印度哲学的三个神话
- 对话:传统之间的交流
- 哲学是开放的探究,而非教义
- 从反向视角看印度哲学
批评
批评了 1
萨瓦帕利·拉达克里希南
批评了
Daya Krishna called it a myth that Indian philosophy is ‘essentially spiritual’ and aimed at liberation – the picture Radhakrishnan’s Indian Philosophy (1923) had made standard. Daya Krishna, ‘Three Myths about Indian Philosophy’, Diogenes 14 (1966); repr. in Indian Philosophy: A Counter Perspective, 1991; S. Radhakrishnan, Indian Philosophy I, 1923, introduction
依据: AI 草稿
萨瓦帕利·拉达克里希南 › 1888–1975
作品
- 1966关于印度哲学的三个神话
反驳三种流行的观念:印度哲学本质上是灵性的;它只以解脱为目的;它的各学派是受权威束缚的固定体系,而非活的论证。
- 1991印度哲学:一种反向视角
一组论文,把古典学派当作开放的问题重新阅读:一旦追问文本实际提出了哪些论证,吠陀、诸见(darshana)与解脱的观念便呈现出不同的面貌。
立场
Daya Krishna’s best-known essay, “Three Myths about Indian Philosophy” (1966), attacked three ideas that had shaped the image of Indian philosophy in the West and in India itself: that it is essentially spiritual, that its aim is liberation (moksha), and that its schools (darshanas) are fixed systems tied to scriptural authority. The texts, he argued, contain arguments about knowledge, language, being and value that can be assessed like any others, and the darshanas changed through debate. In “Indian Philosophy: A Counter Perspective” (1991) and in his studies of the Vedas he extended this critique, asking what problems the texts actually address. He saw philosophy as an open, creative enquiry and was impatient with a historiography that treated traditions as finished. The samvada project put this into practice: questions about Western philosophy were put to Navya-Nyaya pandits in Sanskrit, and their answers were discussed with philosophers trained in the West. He has been read as a central figure of twentieth-century Indian philosophy in English, together with K. C. Bhattacharya and J. N. Mohanty.
生平与背景
Daya Krishna was born in 1924 in Delhi and studied philosophy at the University of Delhi. His first book, “The Nature of Philosophy” (1955), treated philosophy as a reflective activity with its own tasks, distinct from science and religion. He taught at the University of Saugar and from the 1960s at the University of Rajasthan in Jaipur, where he headed the philosophy department for many years. He wrote on social philosophy and the theory of social change as well as on epistemology and aesthetics. As editor of the Journal of Indian Council of Philosophical Research he made it a forum for debate between scholars of Indian and Western philosophy. From the 1980s he organised, together with M. P. Rege and others, meetings in which traditional Sanskrit pandits and Western-trained philosophers discussed each other’s questions. He remained active in Jaipur, where he held informal philosophical discussions until his death on 5 October 2007.
其他主要作品
- The Nature of Philosophy (1955)
- Three Myths about Indian Philosophy (Diogenes, 1966)
- Social Philosophy: Past and Future (1969)
- Indian Philosophy: A Counter Perspective (1991)
- Saṃvāda: A Dialogue between Two Philosophical Traditions (editor with M. P. Rege and others, 1991)
- New Perspectives in Indian Philosophy (2001)
截至 2026年11月 · 来源 · 改进本页 · Agora 是如何制作的