tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6641738716446631837.post350550423325208278..comments2023-08-27T12:35:12.308+02:00Comments on sanscrite cogitare, sanscrite loqui: On exclusion as the meaning of a word (Apoha in Dharmottara)elisa freschihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17068583874519657894noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6641738716446631837.post-50206887872899752742010-01-26T11:13:26.955+01:002010-01-26T11:13:26.955+01:00As for the super-imposition: āropaṇa takes place b...As for the super-imposition: āropaṇa takes place by the force of vikalpa aided by vāsanās.<br /> <br />Vyāvṛttichāyā is vyāvṛtter chāyā. The context is that of the Justification of the negative name "exclusion" (apoha).<br />Apoha, which in fact is neither negative nor positive and hence cannot be called exclusion per se, is nonetheless called "exclusion" because it comes to exist as "atatkāryaparāvṛtta", i.e. being different from those that do not accomplish the same result. So apoha has vyaavṛtti inside. It has some chāyā of vyāvṛtti. That is why it is called apoha. <br />(email text slightly edited by Elisa Freschi)Kei Kataokanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6641738716446631837.post-20928115946592843062010-01-26T11:08:11.850+01:002010-01-26T11:08:11.850+01:00As for the question "Does this mean that, sin...As for the question "Does this mean that, since it is unreal, it cannot be external (and since it is not part of the cognition, it is not internal)?", Kei Kataoka kindly sent me his answer: Yes. Apoha, according to Dharmottara, is neither external (as understood by Dignaaga) nor internal (as understood by Dharmakirti). <br />Apoha is something else! (which is just a nonsense for many people!)Kei Kataokanoreply@blogger.com