Philosophy:Abhava

From HandWiki

Abhava means non-existence, negation, nothing, or absence.[1] It is the negative of Bhava which means being, becoming, existing or appearance. Two traditions famously held that absence or non-being is a real thing (vastu). According to the Nyaya tradition, one comes to know about non-being based on perception. The Bhatta Mimamsa tradition argues that there is a sixth pramana, itself known by the name of abhava, through which one comes to know non-being. The Vaisheshika and Dvaita schools also hold Abhava as a distinct category. The Buddhist tradition argues against these two traditions, holding that non-being does not exist as a real thing.[2]

Overview

Nyaya

In the Nyaya tradition, one comes to know of absence based on perceptual episodes. An analogy is drawn to perception of color. In both cases, the perception is mediated, unlike perception of ordinary objects where the perception is unmediated.[3]

Udayana divides Padārtha (Categories) into Bhāva (existence) which is real, and Abhāva (non-existence) which is not real. Dravya (substance), Guṇa (quality), Karma (action), Samanya (community or generality), Visesa (particularity) and Samavaya (inherence) are the marks of existence. Four kinds of Abhava are defined by the Vaisheshika School of Hindu philosophy:[4]

  1. Pragabhava - Prior non-existence, is the non-existence of an effect in its material cause before production; it has no beginning, but it has an end because it is destroyed by the production of the effect. Without prior non-existence there cannot be an effect.
  2. Pradhvamsabhava - Posterior non-existence, is the non-existence of an effect by its destruction; as such it has a beginning but no end i.e. it cannot be destroyed.
  3. Atyantabhava - Absolute non-existence, or absolute negation is non-existence in all times i.e. denial of an absolutely non-existent entity in all times and in all places. It is the state of absolute abstraction.
  4. Anyonyabhava - Mutual non-existence, is denial of identity between two things, which have specific nature. Negation other than mutual negation is negation of relation.

The process with which the sound value collapses into the point value of the gap existing between the first and the next syllable of the first letter of the Rigveda, Agnim, is Pradhvamsabhava, the silent point of all possibilities within the gap is Atyantabhava, the structuring dynamics of what happens within the gap Anyonyabhava, and the mechanics by which the sound emerges from the point value of the gap i.e. emergence of the following syllable, is Pragabhava; this mechanism is inherent in both syllables.[5]

Recognised as a reality by the Nyaya school, Abhava is often stated to be the reality of the greatest moment in the pluralistic universe and is connected with Mukti.[6] It is a relative word, for there can be abhava only when previously there is bhava; moreover it is an event occurring in time.[7][8] The Nyaya and the Siddhantin maintain that the cognition of abhava is due to perception involving special kind of contact or sense contact.[9]

Mimamsa

According to Kumarila, perception and other such pramanas make known what exists. To come to know about an object's non-being aspect, one needs another pramana. According to Kumarila, an object has two aspects, in relation to what it is and in relation to what it is not. For example, a piece of land, in relation to itself, exists, but in relation to being connected with a pot, it does not exist. The particular aspect that one cognizes at a time is based on which aspect one desires to cognize or which one is emergent.[2]

Buddhism

Abhava is that unmanifest level from where the concrete Bhava arises or emerges.[10] Vasubandhu has referred to Sunyata having the characteristic of the own-being of abhava, rather than a characteristic consisting of bhava. Sthiramati observes that this is, in fact, not redundant, meaning abhava does not negate bhava.[11] Abhava refers to particular entities and not to Being; it is a theoretical or logical denial of the existence of some particular impossibility.[12] The acceptance of abhava as an independent padartha having ontological reality of its own is a peculiar feature of Indian philosophical tradition. Dharmakirti considered abhava as an anumana. He had brought in the idea of imaginary presence of that whose absence was apprehended in order to explain the specificity of the absence.[13]

References

  1. ↑ John A.Grimes (17 October 1996). A Concise Dictionary of Indian Philosophy. SUNY Press. p. 3. ISBN 9780791430682. https://books.google.com/books?id=eP5p0ev3nJEC&q=abhava&pg=PA4. 
  2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 Taber, John; Kellner, Birgit (January 2001). "Much Ado about Nothing: Kumārila, Śāntarakṣita, and Dharmakīrti on the Cognition of Non-Being". Journal of the American Oriental Society 121 (1): 72. doi:10.2307/606730. ISSN 0003-0279. https://doi.org/10.2307/606730. 
  3. ↑ Beaulieu, Jack (2023-02-09). "Raghunātha on seeing absence". British Journal for the History of Philosophy 31 (3): 421–447. doi:10.1080/09608788.2022.2164250. ISSN 0960-8788. https://doi.org/10.1080/09608788.2022.2164250. 
  4. ↑ Chandradhar Sharma (1962). Indian Philosophy A Critical Survey. pp. 170. http://archive.org/details/IndianPhilosophyACriticalSurvey. 
  5. ↑ Daniel Meyer Dinkgrafe (2005). Biographical Plays about Famous Artists. Cambridge Scholars Press. p. 89. ISBN 9781904303473. https://books.google.com/books?id=wR50GEyHk-QC&q=abhava&pg=PA89. 
  6. ↑ Ganga Ram Garg (1992). Encyclopaedia of the Hindu World Vol.1. Concept Publishing Company. p. 96. ISBN 9788170223740. https://books.google.com/books?id=w9pmo51lRnYC&q=abhava&pg=PA96. 
  7. ↑ Theodor Stcherbatsky (1989). PrasannapadaE. Motilal Banarsidass Publ.. p. 28. ISBN 9788120805293. https://books.google.com/books?id=itTFXt6ZmVQC&q=abhava&pg=PA28. 
  8. ↑ Thomas E. Wood (January 1994). Nagarjunian Disputations. University of Hawai Press. p. 180. ISBN 9780824816094. https://books.google.com/books?id=jHlvuNFxUlYC&q=abhava&pg=PA180. 
  9. ↑ Swami Parmeshwaranand (2004). Encyclopaedia of Saivism. Sarup & Sons. p. 40. ISBN 9788176254274. https://books.google.com/books?id=8ro-8reHVgoC&q=abhava&pg=PA40. 
  10. ↑ Anna J. Bonshek (2001). Mirror of Consciousness. Motilal Banarsidass. p. 194. ISBN 9788120817746. https://books.google.com/books?id=sT13ws7RKgYC&q=abhava&pg=PA194. 
  11. ↑ David S. Ruegg (10 April 2010). The Buddhist Philosophy of the Middle. Wisdom Publications. p. 74. ISBN 9780861719365. https://books.google.com/books?id=LFSPAtt7OesC&q=abhava&pg=PA75. 
  12. ↑ John C. Plott (1993). Global History of Philosophy:The Axial Age Vol.1. Motilal Banarsidass. p. 163. ISBN 9788120801585. https://books.google.com/books?id=ODPthacrp_cC&q=abhava&pg=PA163. 
  13. ↑ Daya Krishna (20 September 2011). Contrary Thinking. Oxford University Press, USA. p. 125. ISBN 9780199795550. https://books.google.com/books?id=a44AHKGef64C&q=abhava&pg=PA125. 



Retrieved from "https://handwiki.org/wiki/index.php?title=Philosophy:Abhava&oldid=4578749"