Abstract

This dissertation provides an historically based interpretation of the most central issues in the philosophy of Dharmakirti, a major South Asian Buddhist thinker of the seventh century . Our interpretation is historically based in that it construes Dharmakirti's thought either through his text themselves or through the earliest known layer of commentarial literature. Our goal is not to recover some single, true intention of Dharmakirti's works, but rather to provide the basis for a consensus among contemporary scholars that will enable us to move forward more readily in understanding Dharmakirti's philosophy. ;After introducing the notion of a "baseline interpretation" as our methodological motif, we offer in the second chapter a summary of Praman&dotbelow;avada philosophy, the general form of South Asian philosophy in which Praman&dotbelow;ava&dotbelow;¯da was engaged. Here, we attempt to explicate some of the fundamental notions, such as unity or oneness as a criterion for reality, that were shared across South Asian traditions during Dharmakirt's time. We begin the third chapter by examining Dharmakirti's philosophical method, which involves a soteriologically motivated use of multiple philosophical perspectives that are designed to lead his audience away from the suffering caused by ignorance . In the second half of the third chapter, we examine Dharmakirti's ontology of particulars and universals . We consider several issues that have become either controversial or uncertain in the interpretation of Dharmakirti. Concerning particulars, these issues include the alleged spatial extension of particulars. Concerning universals, our discussion focuses upon the apoha-theory, the central notion in Dharmakirti's nominalism. In this context, we inquire, for example, into the question of whether universals are permanent. ;In the fourth chapter of the dissertation we turn to svabhavapratibandha , the foundation of Dharmakirti's logical theory. Expanding upon Ernst Steinkellner's analysis of the key term svabhava, we inquire at length into Dharmakirti's notions of "nature" and "property" and their interrelation. Our approach attempts to address several difficulties in previous interpretations. Finally, in chapter five we examine Dharmakirti's epistemology in terms of "instrumentality" , that which constitutes the validity of an "instrument of knowledge" . After discussing the problematic claim that the Buddha is the source of all instrumentality, we turn to the earliest commentarial presentation, which raises issues such as extrinsic and intrinsic instrumentality and the role of telic function