Introduction
The Buddha is known as "Sabbannu" which means well-known everything. Although Buddha is well-known, there are few questions which Buddha kept a noble silent without giving answers; therefore those questions are known as unanswered questions. Later scholars, as well as interpreters, decided with their own feelings on Buddha's noble silent. Those questions are known as ten unanswered questions. It is known as "Avyakata in Pali" or "Avyakrta in Sanskrit" which Buddha did not reply to those questions. Buddha kept aside them as considering (Thapaniya), questions that should be kept aside.
There are four major ways to analyze questions. The fourfold analyses of questions are:
1. Question that should be answered categorically (Ekamsa vyakariniya)
2. Question that should be answered by asking a counter question (Patipuccha vyakariniya)
3. Question that should be answered analytically (Vibhajja vyakariniya)
4. Question that should be kept aside (Thapaniya)
The ten unanswered questions are included in the fourth category of analysis of questions. There are a number of Suttas in the Pali canon mentioned regarding ten unanswered questions. Those are:
- Potthapada Sutta of Digha Nikaya
- Pasadika Sutta of Digha Nikaya
- Cula Malunkyaputta Sutta of Majjhima Nikaya
- Aggi Vacchagotta Sutta of Samyutta Nikaya
- Vacchagotta Samyutta of Samyutta Nikaya
- Avyakata Samyutta of Samyutta Nikaya
These all Suttas indicated the unexplained or unanswered questions. Buddha has kept aside all the questions as considering Thapaniya because of irrelevance to the path of Nibbana. There are different interpretations regarding the unanswered questions. Some scholars say that Buddha did not answer these ten questions because He was not aware of these subjects. While this interpretation occurs, some scholars say that Buddha knew all the answers but those answers are irrelevant to attain liberation. Again someone says that if Buddha answered these ten questions, Buddha will include either Externalism or Annihilationist (Bhautikavadi/Uacchevavadi).
With considering those scholars' interpretations, it can separate into many points of views. Those are:
- Buddha was not aware about those subjects
- Buddha did not answer because of irrelevance to the path of Nibbana
- Buddha was silent because the questioner can realize the truth himself later
It is essential to know the ten unanswered questions which Buddha kept aside before going to critical examining of it.
Ten Unanswered Questions
Buddha has divided all questions into main four parts to provide answers. Among them "Keep aside" is one method to answer the question. The fourth way of answering the question consists of those that don't lead to the end of suffering and stress. Therefore, firstly Buddha figures out which class the question belongs to, and then responds in appropriate ways. There are ten questions which Buddha kept aside and did not answer. The ten unanswered questions or Avyakata Dhamma are mentioned below. Those are:
1. The world is eternal - Sassato loko
2. The world is not eternal - Asassato loko
3. The world is finite - Antava loko
4. The world is infinite - Anantava loko
5. The self is the same as the body - Tamjivam tam sariram
6. The self and the body are separate - Annam jivm annam sariram
7. Tathagata exists after death - Hoti tathagato param marana
8. Tathagata does not exist after death - Na hoti tathagoato param marana
9. Tathagata both exists and does not exist after death - Hoti ca na ca hoti tathagato param marana
10. Tathagata neither exists nor not exist after death - Neva hoti na na hoti tathagato param marana
The Buddha remained silent while these questions were asked. He described them as a net and refused to be drawn into such a net of theories, speculations, and dogmas. He said that it was because he was free of bondage to all theories and dogmas that He had attained liberation. Such speculation, He said, are attended by fever, unease, bewilderment, and suffering, and it is by freeing oneself of them that one achieves liberation.
The first four questions deal with the nature of the world. The question of whether the world is eternal or not, finite or infinite, reflects the philosophical debates prevalent in ancient India during the Buddha's time. These questions were not merely academic but had profound implications for religious practice and understanding of liberation.
The fifth and sixth questions concern the relationship between the self (jiva) and the body (sarira). These questions touch upon the fundamental issue of personal identity and the nature of consciousness. In ancient Indian philosophy, there were various theories about whether the self is identical with the body or distinct from it.
The remaining four questions concern the status of the Tathagata after death. These questions are particularly significant because they deal with the nature of an enlightened being after the dissolution of the physical body. The Tathagata, or the Buddha, represents the highest spiritual achievement, and questions about his post-mortem existence reflect deep concerns about the nature of liberation itself.
The Buddha's silence on these questions is not a sign of ignorance but rather a pedagogical strategy. He recognized that engaging in such speculations would not lead to liberation but would instead entangle practitioners in conceptual proliferation (papañca). The Buddha's approach was consistently pragmatic: he taught only what was conducive to the cessation of suffering.
Fourteen Unanswered Questions Depicted in Sanskrit Sources
The ten unanswered questions are given as fourteen by adding the first two propositions into a four-cornered formula in Sanskrit sources. Therefore, in Sanskrit sources, four additional questions appear. They are:
XI. Sassato ca assasatoloka - Is the world both eternal and not eternal?
XII. Na sassato Na assasato loko - Is the world neither eternal nor not eternal?
XIII. Antava anantava loko - Is the world both finite and infinite?
XIV. Na antava na anantava loko - Is the world neither finite nor infinite?
Scholars and interpreters have described their own views regarding these unanswered questions critically in the later period. The addition of these four questions in Sanskrit sources reflects the development of Buddhist philosophical thought. The four-cornered negation (catuskoti) became a characteristic feature of later Buddhist logic, particularly in the Madhyamika school of Nagarjuna.
The fourteen questions represent a more comprehensive attempt to categorize all possible metaphysical positions regarding the nature of reality, self, and the post-mortem status of the enlightened being. The logical structure of the catuskoti (four alternatives) was employed to demonstrate the limitations of conceptual thinking when dealing with ultimate reality.
The addition of the "both" and "neither" alternatives to the first two questions reflects a sophisticated understanding of logic. It acknowledges that reality may not be captured by simple either/or propositions. The Buddha's silence on these questions, therefore, may be seen as a recognition that these questions are wrongly formulated and that any answer, whether affirmative or negative, would be inadequate.
The fourteen questions thus represent a more complete enumeration of the metaphysical positions that the Buddha refused to endorse. The consistency of his silence across all these formulations suggests a principled refusal to engage in metaphysical speculation rather than a mere evasion of difficult questions.
Scholars' Interpretations on Ten Unanswered Questions
There are numerous interpretations regarding these ten unanswered questions. Scholars from various traditions have offered their explanations for the Buddha's noble silence. These interpretations reflect different philosophical presuppositions and methodological approaches to understanding Buddhist thought.
Chandima Bandara has explained regarding the first and second questions. He mentions that Buddha did not answer because it has been mentioned in the Brahmajala Sutta. The Brahmajala Sutta enumerates sixty-two wrong views, and the first two unanswered questions correspond to the eternalist and annihilationist views that the Buddha rejected.
Oldin Barg has interpreted that Buddha as an unconstitutional person therefore He did not answer. This interpretation, though somewhat problematic, suggests that the Buddha was not bound by conventional philosophical frameworks and was free to respond to questions in whatever way was most beneficial.
Jakob has mentioned that Buddha did not reply to those questions because skepticism was excited at that period. According to this view, the Buddha's silence was a response to the prevailing intellectual climate, which was characterized by intense philosophical debate and skepticism about religious claims.
Radha Krishna has interpreted that Buddha is an esoteric (Ghudhavadi). This interpretation suggests that the Buddha deliberately concealed certain truths, revealing them only to those who were spiritually mature enough to understand them.
Ananda Kumara Svami said that Buddha is a traditionalist. This interpretation views the Buddha as a conservative figure who adhered to traditional teachings and practices, refusing to engage in novel philosophical speculations.
T. R. B Murthi said that the Buddha needed to be over well-balanced therefore He did not answer these questions. According to Murti, the Buddha's silence reflects a commitment to the middle way, avoiding the extremes of affirmation and denial.
Nagarjuna has mentioned his Direct Approach as his interpretation. He simply says that the answers to these questions are wrong. There may be theoretical reasons for rejecting the unanswerable questions, and there certainly are pragmatic reasons for not becoming entangled in such speculation. However, Nagarjuna's primary reason for rejecting them in his final section is none of these. He simply rejects them because they do not hold up to logical scrutiny.
These are some scholars' interpretations regarding ten unanswered questions. It is their freedom to define the reasons for Buddha's noble silence. The diversity of interpretations reflects the complexity of the issue and the richness of Buddhist philosophical traditions.
Critical Interpretation Regarding Ten Questions
As mentioned above, the fourfold analyses of questions used by the Buddha are:
1. Question that should be answered categorically (Ekamsa vyakariniya)
2. Question that should be answered by asking a counter question (Patipuccha vyakariniya)
3. Question that should be answered analytically (Vibhajja vyakariniya)
4. Question that should be kept aside (Thapaniya)
In the Anguttara Nikaya, on one occasion the questions of the fourth category are qualified with the term "Panha veyakaranani," the question that should not be analyzed. In addition to the term Thapaniya or Thapetani, two more terms are added to qualify these questions. They are Abyakatani and Patikkhittani. The first term, Abyakatani, indicates that these questions are not explained (in detail). The second term Patikkhittani means that these questions were rejected (without giving a detailed answer). For example:
Ven. Malukya Putta declared that he would become a layman again if the Buddha did not answer these questions. The Buddha said on this occasion that he was not obliged to answer these questions and indicated that if Malukya Putta wished to become a lay person, he could do so. The Buddha's explanation was very much similar to the answer given to Malukya Putta. The Vaccagotta asked more questions in relation to the liberated one. These four questions are:
1. Is the liberated one reborn?
2. Is not the liberated one reborn?
3. Is or is not the liberated one reborn?
4. Is the liberated one neither reborn nor not reborn?
Malukyaputta or Vaccagotta put to the Buddha the term "tathagata" cannot indicate the arahant or the enlightened one since these questions were pre-Buddhist. That is why Ven. Buddhaghosa denies it as being or soul.
When Mulakyaputta asked these questions, the Buddha said that they represent wrong view. Furthermore, the Buddha said that these questions have nothing to do with the cessation of suffering. When Vaccagotta asked these questions, the Buddha said it is futile to know the details of the arrow when a man is hit without making treatment to the wound, indicating that answering these questions could not bring benefits to anyone.
Ven. Viccagotta wanted to know from Ven. Moggallana the reason for the Buddha's silence on these questions. On one occasion, Ven. Moggallana said that the Buddha did not answer these questions because the Enlightened One cannot be identified with the five aggregates.
With completing this sub-topic, four major critical views of modern scholars can be seen in unanswered questions. They are:
1. Firstly, the Buddha did not know the answers to them (Skepticism, Naive Agnosticism)
2. Secondly, the Buddha knew the answers, but deliberately left those unanswered because they were not relevant to Buddhism as a religion (Pragmatism)
3. Thirdly, the questions go beyond the limits of knowledge (Rational Agnosticism)
4. Finally, only the first four questions go beyond limits of knowledge (Rational Agnosticism) whereas the other six are logically meaningless (Logical Positivism)
With summarizing this sub-topic, although there are numbers of critical views regarding unanswered questions, traditionally it is believed that those are irrelevant on the path of liberation.
The first critical view, skepticism or naive agnosticism, suggests that the Buddha was simply ignorant of the answers. This view is difficult to reconcile with the Buddhist tradition that regards the Buddha as omniscient. However, it reflects a naturalistic interpretation of the Buddha's teachings that has gained some traction in modern scholarship.
The second view, pragmatism, is more consistent with the canonical texts. The Buddha's repeated emphasis on the practical goal of ending suffering suggests that he consciously chose not to engage in questions that did not serve this purpose.
The third view, rational agnosticism, draws parallels between the Buddha's unanswered questions and Kant's antinomies. According to this view, the questions transcend the limits of human reason and therefore cannot be answered.
The fourth view, logical positivism, distinguishes between different types of unanswered questions. Some are beyond the limits of knowledge, while others are simply meaningless. This view reflects the influence of Western philosophical analysis on Buddhist studies.
Ten Unanswered Questions and Their Irrelevance on the Path of Achieving Nibbana
The above topics have provided details regarding the unanswered questions. With this theme, it describes the irrelevance of giving answers to those questions on the path of achieving Nibbana. The Buddha did not answer because of two main reasons:
1. When the questioner himself would not be able to understand the real significance of the answer to his question.
2. When the questions posed to Him were wrong. In the former, the answer would be too profound for the questioner to understand; in the latter, the questions were wrongly put.
In these cases, the Buddha kept noble silence. There are a number of Suttas that have mentioned regarding these questions. Those are:
- Potthapada Sutta of Digha Nikaya
- Pasadika Sutta of Digha Nikaya
- Cula Malunkyaputta Sutta of Majjhima Nikaya
- Aggi Vacchagotta Sutta of Samyutta Nikaya
- Vacchagotta Samyutta of Samyutta Nikaya
- Avyakata Samyutta of Samyutta Nikaya
- Ahu Sutta
- Tittha Sutta
- Brahmajala Sutta
- Mahali Sutta
Among these, Cula Malunkyaputta Sutta of Majjhima Nikaya elaborates on Malukya Putta's actions while Buddha rejects to give answers to his questions. It describes that Malukya Putta vowed to disrobe if Buddha did not respond to these questions. Then Buddha said on this occasion that he was not obliged to answer these questions and indicated that if Malukya Putta wished to become a lay person, he could do so. The Buddha's explanation was very much similar to the answer given to Malukya Putta. Vaccagotta asked more questions in relation to the liberated one. These four questions are:
1. Is the liberated one reborn?
2. Is or is not the liberated one reborn?
3. Is not the liberated one reborn?
4. Is the liberated one neither reborn nor not reborn?
While considering these ten or fourteen questions, the best solutions can be obtained by knowing the Buddhist period. When Siddharatha became a Buddha, there were sixty-two views in society. He chose the middle path and attained Buddhahood. Buddha has mentioned that the other two paths are wrong to liberate. There were sixty-two major views at the time of Buddha. Externalism and Annihilationist (Bhautikavadi/Uacchevavadi) were two of them. The soul theory gets an exceptional place in their concepts. Buddhism teaches regarding non-soul concept. If Buddha answered those questions, Buddha will also include those categories.
The sixty-two wrong views enumerated in the Brahmajala Sutta include various forms of eternalism, annihilationism, and other speculative positions. The ten unanswered questions can be seen as representing key areas of metaphysical speculation that lead to these wrong views.
The Buddha's teaching of the middle way avoids the extremes of eternalism and annihilationism. By remaining silent on questions that would commit him to either extreme, the Buddha preserved the integrity of his teaching.
The table below shows how the ten questions are equated with the sixty-two grounds for wrong views stated in the Brahmajala Sutta:
Ten Unanswered Questions | The 62 Grounds for Wrong Views
The world is eternal - Sassato Loko | Externalism
The world is not eternal - Asassato Loko | Annihilationist
The world is finite - Antava Loko | Extensions
The world is infinite - Anantava Loko | Extensions
The self is the same as the body - Tam Jivam Tam Sariram | Immortality
The self and the body are separate - Annam Jivam Annam Sariram | Immortality
The Tathagata [a sentient being] exists after death - Hoti Tathagato Param Maranam | Immortality
The Tathagata does not exist after death - Na Hoti Tathagato Param Maranam | Annihilationist
The Tathagata both exists and does not exist after death - Hoti Ca Na Ca Hoti Tathagato Param Marana | Partial externalism
The Tathagata neither exists nor not exist after death - Neva Hoti Na na Hoti Tathagato Param Maranam | Endless hedging
This is the major significance of the unanswered ten questions. These are irrelevant to the path of liberation. They interrupt gaining right views and motivation for Nibbana.
The soteriological irrelevance of these questions can be understood in several ways. First, they do not contribute to the understanding of suffering and its cessation. Second, they distract practitioners from the urgent task of spiritual practice. Third, they entangle the mind in conceptual proliferation, which is an obstacle to liberation.
The Buddha's teaching is fundamentally pragmatic. He taught only what was conducive to liberation. The unanswered questions, whatever their theoretical interest, do not serve this purpose. Therefore, the Buddha set them aside, encouraging his followers to focus their attention on the practical aspects of the path.
The parable of the poisoned arrow, which appears in the Cula Malunkyaputta Sutta, beautifully illustrates this point. A person wounded by a poisoned arrow should focus on removing the arrow and healing the wound rather than investigating who shot the arrow and where it came from. Similarly, beings afflicted by the poison of ignorance should focus on the path to liberation rather than engaging in metaphysical speculation.
Personal Views on Clarification of Ten Unanswered Questions
Personally, I believe that the probable reasons these questions were left aside unanswered require us to understand why Buddhism deems it unnecessary to answer the questions contained in the two lists. In this connection, there are three points that we should take into consideration.
The first point refers to the fact that the fourteen questions in the two lists are never presented in the Buddhist texts as unanswerable ("Avyakaraniya") questions. On the contrary, they are questions that have been left unanswered (Avyakata). To call them unanswerable amounts to declaring that they are perfectly legitimate questions but that any answer to them transcends the limits of knowledge. This distinction is crucial because it reveals the Buddha's pedagogical approach. He did not declare the questions to be inherently unanswerable; rather, he chose not to answer them because doing so would not be beneficial.
The second point is that, if these questions have been declared unanswered or undetermined, this does not mean that they have been rejected as false. To reject them as false is certainly to answer them and not to leave them unanswered. The Buddha did not say that the world is not eternal; he simply refused to answer whether it is eternal or not. This suggests that the questions themselves are flawed rather than the answers to them being unknowable. In this connection, the commentary to the Anguttaranikaya says that "unanswered" (Avyakata) means that which has not been answered categorically, or analytically, or by raising a counter-question.
The third point that we need to keep in mind here is that it is not correct to say that the Buddha was silent on these questions. On the contrary, he very much responded to them. Although he did not give a categorical answer to any of the questions, he stated the reasons for his not determining these questions as true or false. The Buddha's response was not silence but rather a teaching about the nature of questions and answers. He taught that some questions should be set aside because they do not lead to liberation.
My personal reflection on these points leads me to conclude that the unanswered questions serve an important pedagogical function. They teach us about the limitations of conceptual thinking and the importance of focusing on what is practically beneficial. The Buddha's silence on these questions is not a weakness but a strength of his teaching. It demonstrates his wisdom in recognizing what is truly important and his compassion in guiding his followers toward liberation.
The unanswered questions also highlight the unique nature of Buddhist soteriology. Unlike other religious traditions that seek to provide comprehensive answers to all questions, Buddhism is content to leave certain questions unanswered. This reflects the Buddhist emphasis on practical wisdom rather than theoretical knowledge.
Furthermore, the unanswered questions point to the limits of language and conceptual thinking. Ultimate reality, as realized in Nibbana, transcends conceptual categories. Therefore, questions formulated in conceptual terms cannot capture the nature of ultimate reality. The Buddha's silence on these questions is a recognition of the inadequacy of language to describe the indescribable.
In my view, the unanswered questions also serve to humble the intellect. They remind us that not all questions can be answered and that wisdom consists in recognizing the limits of knowledge. This humility is essential for spiritual progress, as it prevents the mind from becoming entangled in pride and dogmatism.
Conclusion
To conclude, the Sallekha Sutta elaborates on the simile of an arrow. It explains that if an arrow hits the body, a wise person must consider the injured. Searching for the ways the arrow came and the person who hit the arrow are useless. Likewise, all beings are hit by the arrow of ignorance, and the hit person (all beings) are looking toward the arrow's direction and searching for the person who hit it. The thing that should be done is providing medical treatment to the hit person. Similarly, the ten unanswered questions must be considered as irrelevant to the path to liberation. Such as:
1. The world is eternal - Sassato loko
2. The world is not eternal - Asassato loko
3. The world is finite - Antava loko
4. The world is infinite - Anantava loko
5. The self is the same as the body - Tamjivam tam sariram
6. The self and the body are separate - Annam jivm annam sariram
7. Tathagata exists after death - Hoti tathagato param marana
8. Tathagata does not exist after death - Na hoti tathagoato param marana
9. Tathagata both exists and does not exist after death - Hoti ca na ca hoti tathagato param marana
10. Tathagata neither exists nor not exist after death - Neva hoti na na hoti tathagato param marana
Searching for these answers is also the same as searching for the directions of where the arrow came and who hit the arrow. Therefore, Buddha might keep His noble silence. Although there are different interpretations on these unanswered questions, the noble silence of Buddha explains the irrelevance of the path of Nibbana.
The ten unanswered questions represent a significant teaching within Theravada Buddhism. They illustrate the practical orientation of the Buddha's teaching and the importance of focusing on the path to liberation rather than engaging in metaphysical speculation. The Buddha's silence on these questions is not a sign of ignorance but a pedagogical strategy that redirects attention from conceptual proliferation to the practical cultivation of the Noble Eightfold Path.
Throughout this paper, we have examined the textual sources that present these questions, the fourfold classification of questions in Buddhist epistemology, the various scholarly interpretations of the Buddha's silence, and the soteriological irrelevance of these questions. We have seen that the unanswered questions are set aside not because they are inherently unknowable but because they are irrelevant to the path of liberation.
The parable of the poisoned arrow serves as the primary illustration of this point. Just as the wounded person should focus on removing the arrow rather than investigating its origin, practitioners should focus on the path to liberation rather than engaging in metaphysical speculation. The unanswered questions are a "thicket of views" that ensnares the mind in conceptual proliferation, preventing the direct realization of Nibbana.
The Buddha's silence on these questions is a form of skillful means (upaya-kausalya) that protects practitioners from misunderstanding and spiritual harm. It redirects attention from conceptual proliferation to the practical cultivation of the path, recognizing that liberation depends not on resolving metaphysical questions but on transcending the conditions that generate such questions.
The various scholarly interpretations of the Buddha's silence offer partial insights but ultimately fail to capture the full significance of the Buddha's pedagogical strategy. The unanswered questions are set aside not because they are unknowable or irrelevant, but because they are wrongly formulated. They proceed from assumptions about self and world that the Buddha's teaching of dependent origination and non-self deconstructs.
In conclusion, the ten unanswered questions are soterologically irrelevant because they do not lead to the cessation of suffering. The Buddha's noble silence is not a limitation but a teaching, demonstrating that true wisdom lies not in answering every question but in recognizing which questions need not be asked. The path to Nibbana requires abandoning such questions and focusing instead on the urgent task of removing the poisoned arrow of ignorance and craving.
The Buddha's approach to these questions reflects his profound understanding of the human condition and his compassion for all beings. He recognized that metaphysical speculation is a source of suffering and that liberation comes not from answering such questions but from transcending the need to ask them. His noble silence on these questions is therefore a teaching of the highest order, pointing beyond concepts and words toward the direct realization of Nibbana.
End Notes
1. The term "Sabbannu" literally means "all-knowing" and is used in Buddhist tradition to describe the Buddha's omniscience regarding matters relevant to liberation.
2. "Avyakata" in Pali and "Avyakrta" in Sanskrit literally mean "not declared" or "undetermined."
3. "Thapaniya" refers to questions that should be set aside or put aside without being answered.
4. The fourfold classification of questions is found in the Anguttara Nikaya and represents the Buddha's sophisticated approach to responding to different types of inquiries.
5. "Ekamsa vyakariniya" refers to questions that require a definitive answer, such as "Is there suffering?" to which the answer is categorically "yes."
6. "Vibhajja vyakariniya" refers to questions that require an analytical answer, such as questions about karma that require distinction between different types of actions.
7. "Patipuccha vyakariniya" refers to questions that should be answered with a counter-question to clarify the questioner's meaning.
8. The Cula Malunkyaputta Sutta (MN 63) is one of the primary sources for the ten unanswered questions and contains the famous parable of the poisoned arrow.
9. The Brahmajala Sutta (DN 1) enumerates sixty-two wrong views that the Buddha rejected, many of which correspond to the unanswered questions.
10. The concept of "papañca" or conceptual proliferation refers to the tendency of the mind to elaborate concepts and theories, which is seen as an obstacle to liberation.
11. "Upaya-kausalya" or skillful means refers to the Buddha's ability to adapt his teaching to the capacity of different audiences.
12. The simile of the Simsapa leaves appears in the Samyutta Nikaya and illustrates the Buddha's selective teaching of what is conducive to liberation.
Bibliography
Primary Resources
1. Potthapada Sutta, Silakkhanda Vagga, Digha Nikaya, P 178 PTS
2. Pasadika Sutta, Patika Vagga, Digha Nikaya, P 117 PTS
3. Cula Malunkyaputta Sutta, Majjhima Nikaya i, P 426 PTS
4. Aggi Vacchagotta Sutta, Samyutta Nikaya i, P 483 PTS
5. Vacchagotta Samyutta, Samyutta Nikaya iii, P 257 PTS
6. Avyakata Samyutta, Samyutta Nikaya iv, P 374-402 PTS
7. Ahu Sutta, Udana Pali, Khuddaka Nikaya, P 66 PTS
8. Tittha Sutta, Anguttara Nikaya I, P 176 PTS
9. Brahmajala Sutta, Silakkhanda Vagga, Digha Nikaya, P 01 PTS
10. Mahali Sutta, Khanda Samyutta, Samyutta Nikaya iii, P 67 PTS
Secondary Resources
1. Analayo, Bhikkhu, 2003. Satipatthana: The Direct Path of Realization. Kandy: Buddhist Publication Society, 2003. Repr Petaling Jaya (Malaysia): Buddhist Wisdom Centre, 2006 (paging reset). See esp 2003:216-232 (ch XI).
2. Baggini, Julian & Peter S. Fosl. 2010. The Philosopher's Toolkit: A Compendium of Philosophical Concepts and Methods. [Blackwell, 2003] 2nd ed. Chichester, W Sussex: John Wiley, 2010.
3. Basham, A.L. 1951. History and Doctrines of the Ajivikas. London: Luzac, 1951.
4. Bharadwaja, V.K. 1984. "Rationality, Argumentation and Embarrassment: A Study of Four Logical Alternatives (catus-koti) in Buddhist Logic," Philosophy East and West 34,3 July 1984: 303-319.
5. Collins, Steven. 1982. Selfless Persons: Imagery and Thought in Theravada Buddhism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982:131-137 (ch 4.2).
6. Cook, Roy T. 2009. A Dictionary of Philosophical Logic. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2009.
7. Fuller, Paul. 2005. The Notion of Ditthi in Theravada Buddhism: The Point of View. London: RoutledgeCurzon, 2005:38-40.
8. Ganeri, Jonardon. 2006. "Words that Burn: Why Did the Buddha Say What He Did?" Contemporary Buddhism 7,1 May 2006:7-27.
9. Gethin, Rupert. 1998. Foundations of Buddhism. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998.
10. Gunaratne, R.D. 1980. "The Logical Form of Catuskoti: A New Solution." Philosophy East and West 30, 2 Apr 1980: 211-239.
11. Harvey, Peter. 1992. "The Mind-Body Relationship in Pali Buddhism: A Philosophical Investigation" in Summary Report, International Association of Buddhist Studies 10th International Conference (ed AWP Guruge), Paris, 1992.
12. Hick, John. 1993. Disputed Questions in Theology and the Philosophy of Religion. London: Macmillan & New Haven: Yale University Press, 1993.
13. Hospers, John. 1967. An Introduction to Philosophical Analysis, 2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1967. 1997. An Introduction to Philosophical Analysis, 4th ed. London: Routledge, 1997.
14. Ifrah, Georges. 1985. From One to Zero: A Universal History of Numbers. [French Histoire Universelle des Chiffres, Paris, 1981] tr Lowell Bair. New York: Viking Penguin Inc, 1985.
15. Jayatilleke, K.N. 1950. "Some Problems of Translation and Interpretation II." University of Ceylon Review 8,1 Jan 1950: 45-55. 1963. Early Buddhist Theory of Knowledge. London: Allen & Unwin 1963:333-351; repr Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1980. 1967. "The Logic of the Four Alternatives." Philosophy East and West 17,1 1967:69-83.
16. Kalupahana, David J. 1976. Buddhist Philosophy: A Historical Analysis. Honolulu: University Press of Hawaii, 1976. 1992. A History of Buddhist Philosophy: Continuities and Discontinuities. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1992. Repr Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1994, 2006.
17. Karunadasa, Y. 2005. "The Unanswered Questions: Why Are They Unanswered? A Re-examination of the Textual Data." The Journal of the Centre for Buddhist Studies (Sri Lanka) 3, Aug 2005:85-111. = 2007. "The Unanswered Questions: Why Are They Unanswered? A Re-examination of the Textual Data." Pacific World Journal 3,9 Fall 2007:3-28.
18. Katsura Shoryu. 1991. "Dignaga and Dharmakirti on Apoha," in (ed) E Steinkellner, Studies in the Buddhist Epistemological Tradition. Vienna: Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1991:129-146.
19. Moulton, J. Paul. 2004. "Zero," in (eds) K. Lee Lerner & Brenda Wilmoth, Gale Encyclopedia of Science, 3rd ed. Farmington Hills, MI: The Gale Group, v6 2004:4372 f.
20. Murti, T.R.V. 1955. The Central Philosophy of Buddhism: A Study of the Madhyamika System. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1955:36-54 (ch 2).
21. Priest, Graham. 2010. "The Logic of the Catuskoti." Comparative Philosophy 1,9 2010:24-54.
22. Puhakka, Kaisa. 2003. "Awakening from the Spell of Reality: Lessons from Nagarjuna," in (ed) Seth Robert Segall, Encountering Buddhism: Western Psychology and Buddhist Teachings. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 2003:131-142.
23. Raju, P. 1953. "The Principle of Four-Cornered Negation in Indian Philosophy." Review of Metaphysics 7 1953: 694-713.
24. Ruegg, D. Seyfort. 1977. "The Use of the Four Positions of the Catuskoti and the Problem of the Description of Reality in Mahayana Buddhism." Journal of Indian Philosophy 5 1977: 1-71. Repr (ed) Paul Williams, Buddhism: Critical Concepts in Religious Studies art 55 2005 4:213-301.
No comments:
Post a Comment