Browsing by Author "Chandaratana Thero, Dapane"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3

A Comparative study of universal political structure in Kauṭilya’s Arthasāstra and Buddhism
(Department of Sanskrit, University of Kelaniya, Kelaniya, 2016) Chandaratana Thero, Dapane; Wanarathana Thero, Rideegama; Pagngnarathana Thero, Welipitiye
Kauṭilya’s Arthasāstra (4th century B.C) is considered as one of the foremost and sophisticated volumes that gives a perfect definition on the reign. For him a state is an integration of sevenfold theories(saptāṅga nyāya).They are,1) the King (svāmi),2)the ministers(amātyaya),3) endemic (janapada),4)capital city(durga),5)treasury(kōṣa),6)law(Danḍa) and 7) diplomacy or international relation(Mitra). Kauṭilya’s seven fold theories on reign emphasize that there is no a state where there is no above ingredients. Furthermore, he highlighted four forms of cardinal attributes that must have a king.viz, 1) birthright or purity of birth (abhigāmikaguna), 2) wisdom (praññāguna),3) endeavour (utsāhaguna) 4)personal skills (ātmasampat). It is quite obvious that kauṭilya’s sevenfold theories on reign have parallel with Buddhist concept of universal monarch. According to Cakkavattisīhanāda sutta universal monarch has sevenfold of jewels (saptaratna). they are 1) cakka (wheel of power=kingship), 02) hatti, 03) assa (elephant and horse=diplomacy or authority), 04mani (wealth), 5) itthi (wife),6) gahapati(steward=treasurer) and 7) parināyaka (ministers). Prima facie, above two categories of a reign appeared as two different types of classifications on a reign, but when it is comparatively studied, it is possible to realize that the above two categories are analogical. Accordingly, kauṭilya’s svāmi janapada and mitra is similar with cakkaratna in Buddhism, and kōṣa and amātya respectively parallel with gahapati ratna and parināya ratna. Furthermore, hatti and assa represent diplomacy or authority of a reign. Therefore, these two components are comparable with the category of mitra in Arthasāstra. Thus, it is an understandable fact that the above two categories which were put forwarded by the Buddha and Kauṭilya on a reign are considerably parallel to each other. In addition to above similarities, Kauṭilya’s explanation of fourfold cardinal attributes of a king is similar to Buddha’s explanation about the king. Buddha has mentioned that the king should be a member of a virtuous family. ( ubatō sujatō).This statement similar to the attribute of abhigāmikaguna of Arthasāstra. Moreover, praññaguna utsāhaguan and ātmasampat are similar to Buddha’s statements such as; “king should be skilled and cleaver in her duties” (rañña khattiyanaṅ sippatthānāni tattha sikkhitō hōti anavayō) and the king should be intelligent too. ( panḍitō hōti vyatte mēdavi…). Considering all the above facts it can be mentioned that the Buddha, who was a great philosopher in 6th century B.C. presented a universally applicable hierarchy for the state, and that view has been innovated by Kauṭilya in 4th century B.C.
Critical analysis of elimination of ethical propositions of A. J Ayer and Carnap with reference to Buddhist ethics
(Staff Development Center, University of Kelaniya, Sri Lanka, 2015) Chandaratana Thero, Dapane
In “Language truth and logic” A.J Ayer argues all the ethical statements are essentially meaningless and only expressions of emotive meaning and they are not based on empirical observation. All the statements are empirically or logically verifiable as having factual content are meaningful. The statements that are unable to verifiable as factual content are the expression of emotion and they are neither true nor false. So the normative statements are not essentially factual such as statement like “stealing money is wrong”. These kinds of statements are considered to be as ethical judgment or statement. The above statements are comprised with ethical words .These words do not express the literal meaning but expresses the emotive meanings which reinforce the emotions of the man to do only actions which considered to be good .Therefore according to A.J Ayer the ethical statements are meaningless. Carnp also stands in the similar notion on the ethical sentences. According to him philosophical investigations of what is good and what is evil, what is right to do and what is wrong to do, are pretended be factual investigations. The purpose of this philosophical or normative ethics is to state norms for human’s actions or judgment about moral values. For instance, the statement “do not kill” has grammatically the imperative forms and will therefore it does not consider as meaningful assertion. He moreover mentioned that someone might think that “If a person kills anybody,he will have feelings of remorse”. So,the sentence “killing is evil.”would be possible to verify through the remorse. But it is only emotional reactions of the person, so ethical statements are pseudo proportions. A.J Ayer and Carnap reject the normative ethics in order to the method of verification. Nevertheless their method of elimination of ethics can not be employed to reject the ethical statements made by the Buddha as its basis comprises with empirical content. The method adopted by the Buddha to verify the ethical statements is “inference by oneself” (attanan upamankatva). All the ethical statements made by the Buddha would be possible to verify through the above method such as very common statement for ethics is “killing is evil” can verify. Suppose, someone stabs you with purpose to kill you, but with the medical treatments you get cure. Now you have an experience on harmfulness as you experience the suffering .Then you should infer that if such an action is harmful to me, it is common to all other beings. In this way one can verify the meaningfulness of an ethical statement. Therefore, the method adopted by A.J Ayer and Carnap to eliminate the ethical statements as meaningless would not be possible to employed for the rejection of Buddhists ethics.
The use of Upamā as a partial theory of knowledge in early Buddhism
(Faculty of Graduate Studies, University of Kelaniya, 2015) Chandaratana Thero, Dapane
The etymological combination of prefix 'upa' and root ‗ma‘ makes the origination of words upama and upamana which means simile, comparison, analogy etc. The Pali English dictionary composed by T.W Rhys Davids and William Stede has translated the word upama as likeness, simile, parable and example. The upamana is translated as comparison. Rupasiddhi mentioned that upamana means resemblance (sādissē upamanan upama). Thus comparison of object or a thing to another object or thing is generally known as upama or upamana .It is true to say, upamana helps us to realize, a thing that is difficult to be realized only by mere explanation. That is why many philosophers have used similes to explain their philosophical matters. Nyaya, Vedanta and Mimansa schools of philosophy have accepted upamana as an independent theory of knowledge. Tarkasangraha dipika explains that upamana is something that which causes to gain resemblance knowledge (Upamiti Karanamupamānam). Ven. Dinnaga mentioned in Nyayavartika that upamana is included in perception. Vaiseshika showed that upamana contains in Anumana. Thus different philosophers have different notions regarding acceptance of upamana as theory of knowledge. Early Buddhism has employed upamana (comparison) to make clear the sense (upamā.......kata atthassa viññapanāya - M.I.185) and Buddhism emphasizes that some intelligent people understand the meaning of what is said by means of a simile (upamāya pi idha ekacce viññu purisā bhāsitassa attam jananti- A ІV 163) But there is no evidence to prove that whether Buddha has accepted or rejected upamana as direct personal theory of knowledge. Nevertheless Buddha has employed so many times upamana as the way of explaining his deep philosophical matters. For example in Suttanipata the Buddha compares the extinction of Enlighten One to going out of fire of oil lamp (Nibbanti dhira yatayam padipo) Nibbana is above of our general knowledge. It cannot be understood without attaining it, But above example helps to get understanding, at least the nature of one who attains to Nibbana, In this context upamana conduces to get partial knowledge about the nature of Enlighten One . In Dhammapada Buddha used upama as the method of understanding the criteria of the good and bad. Here the Buddha said ―all the beings fear punishment and death, therefore having compared oneself, one should refrain from doing bad actions‖ (attānam upamam katva nahaneyya naghataye). This is one of clear examples that Buddha has used upama as theory of knowledge. Generally it is accepted that there are only two types of theories of knowledge in Buddhism as perception (pratyaksha ) and inference (anumana). But considering all factors my suggestion here is that early Buddhism employed upamana (comparison) as a partial theory of knowledge.