Publication details
Year: 2024
Pages: 211-232
Series: East Asian Journal of Philosophy
Full citation:
, "Two Paths", East Asian Journal of Philosophy 3 (1), 2024, pp. 211-232.
Two Paths
A critique of Husserl's view of the Buddha
pp. 211-232
in: Laura Langone & Alexandra Ilieva (eds), East Asian Journal of Philosophy 3 (1), 2024.Abstract
In “On the Teachings of Gotama Buddha” (1925) and “Socrates-Buddha” (1926), Edmund Husserl claims that the Buddha achieves a transcendental view of consciousness by performing the epoché. Yet, states Husserl, the Buddha fails to develop a purely theoretical and universal science of consciousness, i.e., phenomenology, because his purely practical goal of Nibbāna limits knowledge of consciousness. I evaluate Husserl’s claims by examining the Buddha’s Majjhima Nikāya. I argue that Husserl correctly identifies an epoché and transcendental viewpoint in the Buddha’s teachings. However, I contend that Husserl’s distinction between pure theory and pure praxis leads him to misconstrue the function of the Buddha’s epoché, the extent of knowledge that the Buddha gains from the transcendental viewpoint, and the nature of Nibbāna. I finally suggest that the Buddha presents a way of studying consciousness that is a way of life, meaning that any distinction between pure theory and pure praxis is dissolved.
Publication details
Year: 2024
Pages: 211-232
Series: East Asian Journal of Philosophy
Full citation:
, "Two Paths", East Asian Journal of Philosophy 3 (1), 2024, pp. 211-232.