I am looking for a talented proof-reader who also knows Sanskrit.
How many Saṅkarṣa Kāṇḍas are there?
While I have not yet been able to reach a copy of the text of the Saṅkarṣa Kāṇḍa (henceforth SK, about which see this post) with Devasvāmin’s commentary (edited in 1965), I am still weighing different evidences about it. It seems now clear to me that:
Epistemology of perception, or In order to be in a maṇḍala, you must know what a maṇḍala is (Kozicz 2008–9).
What experiences the practitioner when he is in an architectural setting of high symbolic value?
I guess it should be one, according to Nyāya and the other schools who put the burden on the speaker, but I tried to discuss the topic from the point of view of Western epistemology. Let me know if you think it works.
One Year PG Diploma in Sanskrit Computational Linguistics
The Department of Sanskrit Studies of the University of Hyderabad introduces a new programme “P.G. Diploma in Sanskrit Computational Linguistics” under the Innovative Scheme of UGC from 2014–15.
GOAL: To train Sanskrit scholars in the emerging field of Sanskrit Computational Linguistics showing the relevance of Indian grammatical theories to the field of Computational Linguistics, thereby bridging the gap between the past and the present.
Where are the Yoga philosophers?
Today I read in Philipp Maas’s contribution to Periodization and Historiography of Indian Philosophy (edited by Eli Franco) an intriguing critique of Colebrook and of all the Indologists who, seemingly following him, thought that there was nothing philosophical in Yoga apart from its Sāṅkhya component and that what was typical of Yoga alone was not philosophical.
Professor for Classical Indian Polity and Society, 500 BCE-500 CE
The Faculty of Arts at the University of Alberta invites applications for the Saroj and Prem Singhmar Chair in Classical Indian Polity and Society, 500 BCE-500 CE, at the rank of Associate or Full Professor.
In case you were wondering… after many months the first results of the first Italian “Habilitation” examinations are starting to be published. Of direct interest for the readers of this blog might be, among others, the results of Clelia Bartoli, Chiara Letizia, Federico Squarcini, Alessandro Saggiori (all positively evaluated), Enrica Garzilli…
What is the role of the Saṅkarṣakāṇḍa?
Why do Viśiṣṭādvaita Vedāntin authors care for a Mīmāṃsā-related text which Mīmāṃsākas ignore, and which only seems to deal with minor ritual topics?
Should we investigate about the epistemology of testimony in order to improve other people’s testimonial habits? If so, we should avoid too strict criteria, or people will withdraw precious testimonies for fear of not being justified in testifying about them. If, by contrast, the epistemology of testimony merely describes common testimonial norms, then, why does it have so high expectations? You can read my thoughts from the point of view of (Western) epistemology here.