[Springer] On Necessary Connection in Mental Causation每每N芋g芋rjuna*s Master Argument Against the Sautr芋ntika-Vasubandhu: A M芋dhyamika Response to Mark Siderits

ffjkdsajlfsdfjk Post time 1 hour(s) ago | Show all posts |Read mode
This post will be closed automatically in 2026-11-11 03:18
Reward10points

Abstract
The two traditional Indian Buddhist philosophers 每 the M芋dhyamika N芋g芋rjuna (c.150每250) and the Sautr芋ntika-Vasubandhu (c. 350每430) 每 agree that mental causation involves a causal relationship between successive consciousness moments in which the previous moments are causes and the latter moments effects. In this chapter, I investigate the nature of this relation at stake. Is it a type of relationship that requires (1) necessary connection between successive consciousness moments in which there is an internal causal connection between the previous and the latter conscious moments? (2) Alternatively, is the causal relationship between consciousness moments just a matter of constant conjunctions of intrinsic natures (svabh芋vas) without any necessary causal relation? If the former, the two Buddhist philosophers need to explain which of the two truths 每 conventional truth or ultimate truth 每 does this necessary relation belong and why? If the latter, they need to explain how mental causation 每 a continuum of interrupted mental events in which the previous moment are causes and the subsequent moments effects 每 possible with intrinsic natures, absent any necessary causal connection between them? Either way, the Buddhist philosophers must address these two questions concerning causal relation adequately.




Reply

Use magic Donate Report

All Reply0 Show all posts

Reply

You have to log in before you can reply Login | Register

Points Rules

Junior Member
  • post

  • reply

  • points

    30


Return to the list