Western Existential Tradition and Mahayana Buddhism: Comparative Analysis of Ontological Negativity

2024/2025

Academic Year

ENG

Instruction in English

6

ECTS credits

Delivered at:

School of Philosophy and Cultural Studies

Course type:

Compulsory course

When:

2 year, 1, 2 module

Instructor

Lifintseva, Tatyana P.

Course Syllabus

Abstract

The course concerns the comparison of two traditions: existential philosophy (its non-theistic current), phenomenology and post-structuralism (Husserl, Heidegger, Sartre, Lacan etc.), on the one hand, and Mahayana Buddhism (darśanas / schools of mādhyamaka and yogacāra), on another. The course investigates the concept of a “subjectless consciousness” and deconstruction of a classical subject in Western philosophy of the XX-th XXI-th century (especially in structuralism and post-structuralism). It also investigates the “non-dual” consciousness (jñāna), “understanding wisdom” (prajñāpārmitā) and an extra-subjective “consciousness treasury” (ālayavijñāna) in Māhāyana Buddhism (darśanas of mādhyamaka-śūnyavāda and yogacāra-vijñānavada). It also explores a clarification to what degree the Western concepts of “subjectless consciousness“, «extra-subject consciousness”, “structural apriori”, “rhizome” etc. may be correlated with the concepts of Māhāyana Buddhist philosophy. We pretend to examine examines ontological strategies of Western existential philosophy and the Buddhist school (darśana) of mādhyamaka. We can discover similar phenomenological strategies together with extreme differences in anthropology and the value purposes (personalism and deconstruction of classic European subject in the existential philosophy and radical impersonalism of Buddhism). We suppose that Heidegger, Sartre and Buddhism have comparable theories of consciousness. The mādhyamaka’s “śūnyata” (emptiness) is comparable with Heideggers’s and Sartre’s “Nothingness” (though they are not absolutely similar) and we can discover primacy of negativity in both cases. We also try to substantiate that the position of mādhyamaka was a radical nihilism and not scepticism contrary to the opinion of a number of modern buddologists. And what is also important for us is the problem of the “unhappy consciousness” (be it the Buddhist “duḥkha” or “Sorge” of Heidegger, or Sartre’s “Nausea”) and different attitudes of thinkers. One of the most complicated themes of philosophy of consciousness is mentioned in the course – the problem of intentionality of consciousnesses and its possibility (or impossibility) to be the universal anthropological characteristic. On an example of creativity of the J.- P. Sartre and some Vedhist and Buddhist texts two philosophical positions towards the intentionality are compared: Western as revealing and describing consciousness as intentional and Indian "disposal" of consciousness from intentionality, that was its soteriological purpose. We do not set the task to investigate the complete history of comparative philosophy which, in essence, coincides with the history of philosophy itself because the self-determination of this or that thinker or philosophical school happens in dialogue and polemic to other schools (we can remember Plato's "dialogues" or discussions of Shraman’s epoch in India). However we have to substantiate the significance of this “narrow” investigations in the whole horizon and landscape of intercultural, intertraditional and intertextual dialogue. So, philosophical сomparativistics is the area of historic-philosophical and philosophical researches, the comparative studying of philosophical traditions of the “West” and the “East”, the “North” and the “South” including studying of philosophical schools, doctrines, systems, the categorical devices and separate concepts. The comparative philosophy is also a comparison of philosophical cultures and traditions of all main civilizations of the world and, as at most, as an ideal of comparison of all philosophical representations of all civilizations The searches of adequate to the studied subject research strategy in many respects are closed with general cultural studies tasks. Such approach allocates a special sphere of research — philosophical comparativistics, and also those researches which set as the purpose of identification of the certain general characteristics inherent in many independently arisen philosophical cultures. The comparative philosophy opens philosophy in spheres of civilization, culture, mentality and conceptuality, rationally proves the polyphony of the world philosophy, reveals the general and special in philosophical cultures, develops the international projects promoting mutual understanding between people.