Posted on

Chlodwig Werba (1955–2019)

You might not know yet that Chlodwig Werba passed away last Friday, the 25.1.2019.

Chlodwig was professor at the University of Vienna (ao. Universitätsprofessor) and served the University almost until the end with a dedication and loyalty that ranged from the carefulness with which he co-edited the Wiener Zeitschrift für Südasienkunde (WZKS) to the attention he paid in switching off all lights and closing all doors when he left in the evening. He was meticulous and extremely precise, always striving for perfection. He expected perfection and dedication from his students (and colleagues), but most of all from himself, because he regarded the study of Sanskrit (and of Indo-Iranian languages in general) as a sort of sacred duty, and every shallow study as a profanation.

His masterpiece, Verba Indoarica, has been used by students and scholars from all over the world. Others will remember his ability to move from Old Persian to Middle Indo Aryan languages via Vedic and Avestic and from a given Prakrit to Pāli and Sanskrit. Though primarily a linguist, he loved Sanskrit and Vedic poetry and though a “scientist” he spoke with enthusiasm of classical music (he played the piano throughout the weekend, he once told me).

If you also had the chance to meet him, read his work or receive his accurate comments on a piece you sent to WZKS, please feel free to share your experience in the comments. You can find some memories by, among others, Asko Parpola and Jan Houben in the January archive of the Indology mailing list.

Posted on

Emotions in Viśiṣṭādvaita Vedānta philosophy: Distance and closeness

The main thing which stroke me when I started working on the theory of emotions in Viśiṣṭādvaita Vedānta is that emotions can be useful and are not to be avoided. In other words, unlike some Sāṅkhya-Yoga philosophers, the Viśiṣṭādvaita Vedānta authors do not think that one should aim at some form of ataraxìa. Why not? Because one needs emotions in order to start one’s path towards the good. Moreover, emotions are not just useful as preliminary steps, insofar as emotions are present also in the liberated state (again, unlike in the Sāṅkhya, Yoga and also Nyāya and Buddhist Theravāda schools).

This does not mean that all emotions are necessarily good. The emotions which are praised are, chronologically speaking, dejection and desperation and then confidence, love (ranging from friendship to passion and awe) and possibly compassion.

Dejection and the absolute desperation in one’s ability to improve one’s condition are absolutely needed at the start of one’s spiritual path. In fact, as long as one thinks to be able to achieve something, no matter how small, one is unconsciously doubting God’s omnipotence and locating oneself above Him. Paradoxically, one’s extreme dejection and the feeling that one will never be saved, since one is not even worthy of begging God for help, are therefore the preliminary step for God’s grace to take place. One’s feeling of extreme distance from God is therefore way closer to Him than the self-conscious confidence of a person who were to think that they are a good Vaiṣṇava.

Once God’s grace has touched one, one feels blissed and joyfully responds to God’s grace with an emotional overflow of confidence and of love. The hymns of the Āḻvārs, which have been recognised as being as authoritative as the Veda for Viśiṣṭādvaita Vedānta, display a vast array of love. One can love God with maternal love (vātsalya), looking at Him as if he were the young Kṛṣṇa. One could also love God with admiration, looking at Him as the ideal king Rāma, and so on. This vast array is less variegated in the reflections of the Viśiṣṭādvaita Vedānta philosophers, who rather focus on their feeling of reverence and awe for God. For instance, Tamil and Maṇipravāḷa texts insist on one’s being a slave (aṭiyēṉ) of God.

The interesting element here is that this feeling is not instrumental to the achievement of God’s favour. One does not present oneself as a slave in order to secure God’s favour and then be able to raise to a higher status. By contrast, one’s ideal condition, the liberated state one strives to reach is exactly permanent servitude (as described in Veṅkaṭanātha’s Rahasyatrayasāra).

Posted on

K.C. Bhattacharyya on the history of philosophy

“The historian here cannot begin his work at all unless he can live in sympathy into the details of an apparently outworn creed and recognise the truth in the first imperfect adumbrations of it. The attitude of the mere narrator has, in the case of the historian of philosophy, to be exchanged, as far as possible, for that of the sympathetic interpreter. There is the danger, no doubt, of too easily reading one’s philosophic creed into the history, but the opposite danger is more serious still. It is the danger of taking the philosophic type studied as a historic curiosity rather than a recipe for the human soul, and of seeking to explain the curiosity by natural causes instead of seriously examining its merits as philosophy. This unfortunately is sometimes the defect of Western expositions of Eastern philosophy and religion.”

(K.C. Bhattacharyya, Studies in Philosophy, Motilal Banarsidas, 1983, p. 2 —Thanks to Elise Coquereau-Saouma for the pointer).

Posted on

Philosophy of action

In case you missed it, I would like to recommend a website on philosophy of action which is a great single go-to page for almost anything related to the topic. It offers links, biographies, encyclopedic entries, essays, videos and learning materials on various facets of philosophy of action. It has also a section on job vacancies and one with short interviews with scholars working on philosophy of action. It is learned and enjoyable and the same time, a great achievement.

Posted on

Call for papers for the first South Asian studies day in Bonn

I received from the organiser of the first South Asian studies day in Bonn the attached call for papers. Please note that you need to send your abstract by the end of December 2018. The conference itself will take place on the 28.6.2019 in Bonn.

Please notice also that the call for papers is in German, but that papers in both English and German are welcome.

Posted on

On the absence of ethics in Indian philosophy

a small addendum

Every year, when I introduce Indian philosophy to my students, I deal with the problem of the alleged absence of ethics from it. I basically deal with this absence in multiple ways:

  • First, and more important, I point out that “philosophy” is not a natural type. There is no binding reason why something should a priori belong to philosophy and, in fact, historically, different texts have been considered philosophically relevant or not (from the Suttanikāya to the Presocratics, from St. Augustin to Levinas, from Nietzsche to Th. Bernhard and G. Leopardi). Hence, there is nothing intrinsically wrong with a philosophical tradition developing more, say, philosophy of language and less, say, ethics, or vice versa. That we think that there are “core” disciplines within philosophy is only the result of specific historical circumstances.
Posted on

Atheism in Europe? Blame it on theism!

Hyman's analysis and some interesting Indian parallels

Gavin Hyman explains in his 2007 contribution to Martin’s Cambdride Companion to Atheism as well as in his 2010 A Short History of Atheism that atheism is always the refusal of a given form of theism. In particular, in European history, atheism is the refusal of theism as conceived in modern times, with God as one “thing” among others. This claim might raise the eyebrows of readers of Julian Baggini, who in his 2003 Atheism. A very short introduction maintained that atheism is independent of theism, since it is tantamount to naturalism. The two claims are, however, less far than it might look like.