Buddhist Spiritual Practices
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Buddhist Spiritual Practices Thinking with Pierre Hadot on Buddhism, Philosophy, and the Path Edited by David V. Fiordalis Mangalam Press Berkeley, CA Mangalam Press 2018 Allston Way, Berkeley, CA USA www.mangalampress.org Copyright © 2018 by Mangalam Press. All rights reserved. No part of this work may be copied, reproduced, published, distributed, or stored electronically, photographically, or optically in any form without the prior written permission of the publisher. ISBN: 978-0-89800-117-4 Library of Congress Control Number: 2018930282 Mangalam Press is an imprint of Dharma Publishing. The cover image depicts a contemporary example of Tibetan Buddhist instructional art: the nine stages on the path of “calming” (śamatha) meditation. Courtesy of Exotic India, www.exoticindia.com. Used with permission. ♾ Printed on acid-free paper. This paper meets the requirements of ANSI/NISO Z39.48-1992 (Permanence of Paper). Printed in the USA by Dharma Press, Cazadero, CA 95421 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Table of Contents Acknowledgments ix Introduction 1 David V. Fiordalis Comparisons with Buddhism Some Remarks on Hadot, Foucault, and 21 Steven Collins Schools, Schools, Schools—Or, Must a Philosopher be Like a Fish? 71 Sara L. McClintock The Spiritual Exercises of the Middle Way: Madhyamakopadeśa with Hadot Reading Atiśa’s 105 James B. Apple Spiritual Exercises and the Buddhist Path: An Exercise in Thinking with and against Hadot 147 Pierre-Julien Harter the Philosophy of “Incompletion” The “Fecundity of Dialogue” and 181 Maria Heim Philosophy as a Way to Die: Meditation, Memory, and Rebirth in Greece and Tibet 217 Davey K. Tomlinson Learning, Reasoning, Cultivating: The Practice of Wisdom and the Treasury of Abhidharma 245 David V. Fiordalis Bibliography 291 Contributors 327 Selected Titles from Dharma Publishing 331 Introduction David V. Fiordalis his volume appears at a time when Buddhist philosophy is being Treassessed along with philosophy itself. As an academic discipline in the English-speaking world, philosophy has a “pluralism” problem, or so a number of authors have claimed in recent years, and greater engagement with Buddhist philosophy (and other non-western philosophical traditions) has been proposed as a partial solution to this problem.1 For instance, David Chalmers, a leading contemporary philosopher of mind, had1 this to say in June, 2012, while attending an NEH Summer Seminar entitled “Investigating Consciousness: Buddhist and Contemporary Philosophical Per- spent the last week thinking about Buddhist philosophy of mind—an enormous- spectives”ly rich tradition led by that Christian anticipates Coseru, numerous Jay Garfield, key ideas and Evanin contemporary Thompson: “Havinganalytic philosophy of mind—it’s a little stunning that hardly any of the leading research departments of philosophy in the anglophone world employ anyone who specializes in Buddhist philosophy, or indeed in any area of non-western philo- sophy. How hard would it be to change the conventions so that every department would be expected to have at least one specialist in non-western philosophy?” See the blog post by Eric Schliesser, “Can we make philosophy a little less pro- vincial?” New APPS: Art, Politics, Philosophy, Science. June 2, 2012. <http://www. newappsblog.com/2012/06/can-we-make-philosophy-a-little-less-provincial. Oxford Hand- bookhtml#comments> of World Philosophy (Accessed (London: June 30,Oxford 2017). University See also Press, Jay Garfield 2011), 3-6;and JustinWilliam E. Edelglass, “Introduction,” in Jay Garfield Newand WilliamYork Times: Edelglass, The Stone eds.,, June 3, 2012 <https://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/06/03/philosophys-western- H. Smith, “Philosophy’s Western Bias,” New York Times: bias/> (Accessed June 30, 2017); Jay L. Garfield and Brian W. Van Norden, “If Philosophy Won’t Diversify, Let’s Call1 It What It Really Is,” 2 Buddhist Spiritual Practices Of course, some question whether pluralism really is a problem for philosophy, or if it is, whether greater engagement with Buddhist philosophy is the solution.2 Not everyone even agrees on how much it makes sense to speak of something called Buddhist philosophy.3 Still, assuming we decide to engage the Buddhist intellectual tradition (call it “philosophy” or something else)—either as a solution to some modern problem or for other reasons—how we engage it and what points we choose to engage become important questions to consider. This volume addresses such questions, and does so by employing a different set of metaphors and methods from those being promoted by many contemporary advocates for a philosophical approach to the study of Buddhism. Many apologists for the philosophical study of Buddhist philosophy, set within the framework of “cross-cultural philosophy,” “fusion philosophy,” or the “rational reconstruction” of Buddhist philosophy, have focused largely on treating topics and questions already recognizable to modern analytically-trained philosophers.4 Such an approach has the advantage of being able to demonstrate the The Stone. May 11, 2016 <https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/11/opinion/if- philosophy-wont-diversify-lets-call-it-what-it-really-is.html> (Accessed June 30, Lecture, Yale University, April 6, 2017. <https://www.academia.edu/32354219/ 2017); Jonardon Ganeri, “Why Philosophy Needs Sanskrit, Now More than Ever.” 30, 2017). Why_Philosophy_Needs_Sanskrit_Now_More_than_Ever>In this regard, it is instructive to read the comments section (Accessed of the onlineJune articles2 listed above, and the various comments and links found here: “Philo- sophical Diversity in U.S. Philosophy Departments (Updated).” Daily Nous. May 11, 2016. <http://dailynous.com/2016/05/11/philosophical-diversity -in-u-s-philosophy-departments/> (Accessed June 30, 2017). Matthew Kapstein, Reason’s Traces comments3 that “Buddhist philosophy” remains a “strangely hybrid expression” to which we’ve simply “grown accustomed (Boston: by repeated Wisdom usage” Publications, (4). More could 2001), be said, but Chalmers’ comment in the note above also points to the larger situation wherein the notion of Buddhist philosophy has not yet been fully domesticated, if that is the right term. The reasons for doing so are potentially many, but would certainly include making4 the case for greater inclusion of specialists in Buddhist (and other non-western) intellectual traditions in philosophy departments throughout the English-speaking world, besides simply describing and justifying a certain type of scholarly interest or practice. 3 Introduction clear presence of systematic reasoning and argumentation outside the western tradition—something that has been challenged over the years.5 In this way, scholars can place Buddhist philosophers into con- versation with modern western philosophers on questions already deemed philosophical. This is an important step in the recognition of a global philosophy, but one wonders whether it goes far enough in advancing the case for a truly pluralistic one. For it presupposes a particular conception of philosophy that is prevalent in contempo- rary departments of philosophy in the English-speaking world: the so-called “problems and arguments” approach to doing philosophy.6 Notice how Mark Siderits, a leading voice for the philosophical Buddhism as Philosophy: An Introduction, which is representative of a growing bodyapproach of texts to Buddhism, seeking to defines introduce philosophy students in to his Buddhist textbook, philosophy: “Philosophy, then, is the systematic investigation of questions in ethics, metaphysics and epistemology (as well as several related 7 Such problems and methods of argument then formfields). the It basisinvolves for usingphilosophy analysis wherever and argumentation and whenever in itsystematic is found. Thus,and reflective while speaking ways.” about the ancient Greek tradition, which he calls the source of modern western philosophy, and comparing it to the classical Indian tradition, Siderits says: “They tackle the same basic questions in ethics, metaphysics and epistemology. And they employ the same basic techniques of analysis and argumentation. (This is For scholars of Buddhism, the best-known example is probably the remark- able5 statement made by Antony Flew, An Introduction to Western Philosophy (In- dianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1971), 34, cited partially in Kapstein, Reason’s Traces, 5, that “Eastern philosophy” is not concerned with argument. critique6 of it in Reason’s Traces, While scholars of Buddhism most likely associate this phrase with Kapstein’s Pappas, Philosophical Problems andone Arguments may find (Indianapolis,it, for instance, IN: in Hackett,the title 1992).of the followingMy sense introductoryfrom colleagues textbook: in philosophy James W. is Cornman,that introductory Keith Lehrer philosophy and George classes S. still typically take a topics-based approach, whether or not they focus on readings from the canon. Mark Siderits, Buddhism as Philosophy: An Introduction (Indianapolis, IN: Hackett,7 2007), 5. 4 Buddhist Spiritual Practices why it is appropriate to call them both ‘philosophy’.)”8 Siderits goes on to say, “To study Buddhism as philosophy means studying those Buddhist texts that present philosophical theories and arguments.”9 In making this statement, he seems largely to predetermine what it means for a theory or argument to be philosophical. broadly in terms of the pursuit of truth, an ideal he perceives to motivate its rationalAt the methods same time,of analysis Siderits and wants which to he define