International Phenomenological Society

Concepts by Intuition and the Nature of Sanskrit Philosophical Terminology Author(s): Kurt F. Leidecker Reviewed work(s): Source: Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, Vol. 15, No. 2 (Dec., 1954), pp. 230-237 Published by: International Phenomenological Society Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2103577 . Accessed: 23/07/2012 04:39
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

International Phenomenological Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Philosophy and Phenomenological Research.

http://www.jstor.org

CONCEPTS BY INTUITION AND THE NATURE OF SANSKRIT PHILOSOPHICAL TERMINOLOGY discuscomparative into has Filmer C. Northrop introduced recent S. he which regards a philosophy terminology and Western sionsofEastern between distinctions On as fundamental. thebasisofit he makesincisive prestige rise Westand East and explains West'sremarkable in power, the and and scientific knowledge the East's lack in thisrespect. distinctions of that While mustbe saidin all fairness theauthor these it in are and Occident to live together a envisages giveand takeif Orient that and harmony peace,it is regrettable he shouldhave madeit a sine if the For, whatever. on theonehand, true, qua nonofanyrapprochement and,on theother, as is distinction notso absolute we are led to believe, to it corresponds the factsonlyveryconditionally. of takenby a number phihave beenraisedand exception Objections Theseinclude has attention distinction beendrawn. the to losophers whose is refutation still as but Western wellas Easternscholars, a conclusive But as it standsand is is becausea half-truth involved. mainly lacking, of rather it by defended its author, has theeffect adumbrating staunchly East and West.It is,therebetween understanding thanclarifying mutual between thathas beendriven the of to fore, importance seewhether wedge and East and Westis justifiable ifso on whatgrounds. of in writings Northrop's: may be found the following The argument and Scienof Intuitive Western Emphases Eastern "The Complementary and West, CharlesA. Moore,ed. in tific Philosophy" Philosophy-East with reprinted someomissions pp. 1944),pp. 168-234, 168-190 (Princeton, Sciences The on and a fewadditions pp. 77-100ofNorthrop's Logicofthe of and the Humanities Y., 1947); TheMeeting East and West(N. Y., (N. and and Oriental Occi1946),pp. 447-454;"Methodology Epistemology, A. Charles Moore,ed. (U. of dental"in Essaysin East-West Philosophy, is principally stated,the contention that the East, including Briefly in and withBritishempiricism naturalism India and China,together with while West,beginning the set by by general, store concepts intuition, modemscience,use conceptsby postulation. and particularly Greece, backwardness and socialand scientific has to Failure use thelatter meant for retardation theOrient. on can be raisedagainstthis theory philosophical Many objections with out primarily pointing paperis concerned But grounds. thepresent
230 Hawaii, 1951), pp. 151-160, 428.

CONCEPTS BY INTUITION

231

is a knowledge philosopher often basic linguistic the factthatwithout by is in perhaps the same way as a philologist handicapped led astray, to ourselves an exLet in training philosophy. us limit lack ofsufficient whichis concerned arguments of amination thatportion Northrop's of in keeping mindthat a philosophy, Brahmanical specifically withIndian, and some case can be made out forBuddhistic similar not identical if philosophy. Chinese baseshis contention Northrop upon which the If we examine sources thatthey we just of the within confines Indianphilosophy indicated, find The He few are extremely in number. quotes CharlesJohnston, Great as of Paul Deussen'sThe Philosophy theUpanishads transUpanishads; vol. of and his TheSystem theVeddnta; 1 of Daslatedby A. S. Geden, The of A gupta'sfour-volume History Indian Philosophy; Bible of the Katha, and ed. World, by Ballou,Spiegelberg Friess;theBrhadAraiiyaka, Recently justmentioned. in as Upanishads quoted thebooks Kena and 1AT to and to he added references Chatterjee Datta, An IntroductionIndian Philosin and Philosophy, the papersof the participants the East-West of held Conferences at the University Hawaii. ophers' and is contention that brahman hence, stated,Northrop's Succinctly desiredreality as also authority, atman, the keenly upon Upanishadic by concepts intuition. represent the a Let by Whatare concepts intuition? us assemble fewfrom pages space apprehended; visually as is There blue a color writings. ofNorthrop's whichare givenimmediately "sensibles" as immediately apprehended;' as factors wants;all introsuch psychological senseawareness; through all and are and data spected sensed which transitory temporal; nominalistic things; all objects the particulars; esse-e8t-percipi of Berkeley; determinate and as wellas undifferentiated;that differentiated is all that immediately as define concepts intuition all we is Negatively might which ineffable. by or inference deduction. are which not givenby thought, thoseconcepts acquainted who to startling anyone is evensuperficially sound Thismust have Vedoubtless which and philosophy theUpanishads withVedAntic so analysisis not to be dismissed But danticimplications. Northrop's of intothe category concepts placestheseconcepts beingexperienceable that, factremains Yet by as by intuition defined Northrop. the strange is of the scientist, nature brahman of just likethehypothesis a Western on intuition thebasisofwhatit is not, the evenwithout proper described sincefewifanycan,whenasked,truthfully, netiofYajflavalkya, theneti of brahman. as thehypothesis the Just experienced haveactually say they but however, has beenevolvedon the is scientist not pureimagination,
1 Weshallnotdiscuss apprehensible. spaceis immediately here whether

easily. The very fact that Indians have always insisted on brahmanas

232

PHILOSOPHY

AND PHENOMENOLOGICAL RESEARCH

of the within realm induction to in basisofplausibleness conformityreality reality thathis "postulated" is theorist hopeful and andinspection, every so of capable' beinginspected, the or maybecome turnout to be reality -of If of has concept brahman implications a likenature. thelanguage such or of to to seems conform thelanguage inspection evenintroa derivation by concepts postulato of this spection, is nottheresult anyinability form that using of and itself thestructure themind but tion, is dueto language of masters thetheoretical werenotsuchgreat Even theGreeks language. as concepts a backwithourmodern as any'study Plato and Aristotle of will ground reveal. dealin Westare at disadvantage suchmatters We ofthepresent-day as concrete at in thoughts, thatwe are experts handling ingwithancient at we To if-they wereabstract. speakwithVaihinger, have arrived the in sake is operative everysphereof for thought thought's pointwhere which and directness thatvitality has and endeavor, language no longer and Painfully laboritimes. in it'had,letus-say Vedicandevenpost-Vedic at circles least, in ouslywe have at last cometo the realization literary values which reveals literature of Western trend recent thatthesymbolic Theseareprecisely valueswhich the missed. completely wehaveheretofore or Theypossessed and expressed triedto express. theprimitives ancients translarecent call I to to degree. merely attention thethem an eminent and Verrier of Elwin'sFolk-Songs of -of tions W. G. Archer's Uraonpoems to thatwhatpurports be to We C(hhattisgarh. are coming the realization and acin withthe common and representation description agreement What is at usageofthewords, notdescription all, butsymbolism. cepted by to whatseemed- be concepts inspecsense, thusbecomes was nonsense The poet can at by tionturnout to be concepts postulation.) symbolist the terminology He -possess technical last hopeto be understood. did not he his thinking; did not needit becausethewords to convey theoretical to as Empiricists we are, we are insensitive carried meanings. multiple callous. we completely indeed, havebecome words; in was of movement symbolism brought The analogy withtheliterary Not of thinking. all symbolism a tofacilitate correct appraisal Upanishadic as or the has,ofcourse, theoretical relational its object.Muchalso is in and of thenature a' substitution a synecdoche. in the 2.14, story Katha Upanishad Northrop, quoting-from Nachiketas whatthouseest,as if on weight the phraseyatpagyasi, placesimmense as this of there were theleastpossibility interpreting "seeing" equivanot or a "seeing"whenI comprehend mathematical lent to my professing of have an idea (cf.theetymology. theword),or,in the logicalproblem, to seems be gained little essences. Very perceive of language philosophers, of from distinction difthe another arising complication by introducing

CONCEPTS BY INTUITION

233

in continua the case or and esthetic indefinite undifferentiated ferentiated thatifthatinterpretation seem It brahman. would of ofthestages "seeing" emfor the wereput on it we wouldbe committing sameblunder which himself. by have been castigated Northrop alike and piricists Berkeley and an from indefinite undifAs muchor-aslittle sensecan be extracted a to be, as from symis brahman supposed which continuum ferentiated evengo mad We we which areunsympathetic. might bolist's poemtoward to it. trying understand in Indianthinking from instances specific somemore Let us investigate postulational thanthoseof grounds on which interpretationanyother the and, inaccurate evenabsurd. highly becomes thinking and to 'The "reference taste"in theBrahmasitras 8aikara's comments takesas a clear Northrop of TheSystem theVedanta, Deussens citedfrom by witha concept intuiwe "are dealing that indication and indisputable 4.5.13in Upanishad to is, tion."2 The allusion ofcourse, Brhadaran~yaka to a lumpof of atman the compares pervasiveness-the, which Yajfiavalkya or Neglecting overlooking by introduced yathd.. a salt.It-is,clearly, simile all from differthe then Northrop goeson to interpret freedom thisfact, to as thinking an allusion characterize brahman VedAntic in enceswhich dealSincewe are,in reality, continuum. or-indefinite theundifferentiated to we a ingwith simile areforced say,nonsequitur. We continuum? do notposafter thisesthetic all, what Furthermore, is,. at Wild to testimony thefact thatit is experienceable all. As John sess-any in for "I fiidno evidence this- myownexof said in-criticism Northrop:' would The continuum -is which alwaysdifferentiated." esthetic perience, becausehe wants bypostulation, concept seemnothing a Northropian but from -out different ourown! to.makeEastern philosophy; as completely the is differencesor describes lack or abfrom -Andagain,thefreedom in fact, not onlyIn allusionto but a is sence- subject-object of relation, thetechnical non-posinon-naturalistic, suggesting non-empirical,@ phrase the the realmin which in realmof'being, other. precisely words, tivistic are -imagination), operative. intellection to say thoseof (not by conceptsof indicated thewholecontext thepassagein question This is clearly by, of or ofrecognitions doctrines brahman in which evena multiplicity not different apare different statements, there is admitted. For, obviously, and point from. positivist esse-est-percipi of the different views proaches, If ofcourse). there then, are, in interpretation, view latter Northrop's -(the and the to is tantamount ~denying positivist nominalist it differences noas of the another realm, realm intellection, possessing and realm regarding if iftheystillexistor,rather, theyshould The differences, truevalidity.
8 Essays in

2Philosophy-East

and West, 192. p. East-West Philosophy, 259. p.

234

AND RESEARCH PHILOSOPHY PHENOMENOLOGICAL

stillbe acknowledged, to use Hegel'sphrase, are, "preserved" aufgehoben, and cancelled thesametime, at thatis,removed from sight immediate and experience somehow yet there and availablewhenneeded. likemanner In mayais there yetnotthere, and depending ourknowledge intention. on or Rather thanindicating complete the otherness Indianthinking of from Western theoretical deductive and thinking, appreciation theterrific an of in struggle express language to something relational, categorical, something thatobeysand fits other modesof comprehension the immethan diate and sensory apprehension, lead us to recognize essential will the onenessof the mosttremendous The humanaccomplishment, thinking. pre-Socratics evena Plato and an Aristotle and encountered iense difin ficulties conveying their meanings language. have become in We heirs to their difficulties difficulties in fact, which are, increasing theyears with thatseparate culture our from theirs. Northrop himself, occasion, on waversand feelsconstrained admit to thatwe in theWestalso have often beenguilty concepts intuition, of by not butperhaps quiteso often to theextent theEast. He acknowland as is edgesthatIndia initiated mathematics, which, course, inconvenient of forhis thesis.He further acknowledges we also occasionally that lapse in and into positivistic thinking verylaudablyhe pointsout the error At he logical positivism. thefirst East-West Philosophers' Conference even or that and brahman acknowledged thedistinction sagutqam nirgu~zam of or or aparamand parambrahman, qualified lower the and theunqualified higher brahman, nothing was short puzzling himfrom pointof of to the viewofhisthesis.4 order salvage schematism had to makelight In to his he ofit and suggest it maybe a "compromise theinterest practical that in of and the and expedience" mayhave"eventually corrupted obscured fundaThe fundamental mentaldoctrine." doctrine, according Northrop, to is, thatof the "intuited is of course, manifold which indetermiirreducible lie nateand undifferentiated." Wherein practical the expediency might he unless is a defensive it Buddhism. doesnotdivulge, measure against Thereis, however, veryserious a one. difficulty, timea historic this ariseand in Whendid thedistinction sagunam nirgunam of and brahman did of whatrelation it standto Buddhism? characterizationbrahman The as sagun&am so for cannot, faras I am aware,be attested any oftheolder whereas, is of nirgurnamoccasionally predicated the highest Upanishads, thus and The formulareality, in gvetgAvatara Maitri Upanishads. precise and brahmans tionofthetwokindsofhigher lower occurs verylate and imin thusstands no relation anycorrective to measures which Northrop putesto Buddhism. in are thatsatand citor caitanyam the It should alwaysbe borne mind
4P. 197-198.

CONCEPTS BY INTUITION

235

Whilesat, apartfrom reality, dnanda. of features thehighest inalienable of continuum withthe esthetic can be reconciled dnanda, and perhaps puts aspect?That clearly whatcan we do withthecaitanyam Northrop's, were If by into brahman the realmof concepts postulation. intelligence to and we aspect, couldbe tempted persuaded interimportant nota most shadowy nor short long;. . . neither neither nor thick thin, pret "neither the Upanifrom by nordark.. ." citedindirectly Northrop Brhaddran~yaka conintuited indeterminate, of shad3.8.8,as an indication someindefinite, and the search Upanishads readin Katha 3.15 But tinuum. ifwe further seen,tastedand felt, heard, is thatthisreality notevencapableofbeing experior any"intuition" an "esthetic" as whatcanweassume a basisfor concepts of welltheframework Northrop's it ence?Somehow doesnotfit or definite indefinite. whether byintuition, to it In thisconnection is interesting pointout thatDeussentakesthe by of the verysamepassagesdescribing unknowableness brahman means in attributes Katha 2.21and and ofabsolutely contradictory irreconcilable by Brahman means of "the Ia 4-5 as illustrating impossibilityconceiving on an thus definitions."5 putting interpretation it absolutely ofempirical I In to opposed thatofNorthrop's. fact, wouldliketo pointoutthatthe in thesis thateven of are destructive Northrop's texts doubly Upanishadic of Deussen'sand Sankara'sinterpretationnetinetiand adopt ifwe reject na and that Hillebrandt's suggestion na is an affirmative translate itina iti and might pleaseNorthrop at thesametimecanit as "in truth is" which for as be notaltogether rejected a possibility, Katha 6.12-13also winds asti, existence, as theonlyand best of up uponthesamethought being-or we brahman, have to admitthatthisis a pure of method comprehending to previous thispassage, since, especially or act ofintellection postulation, denied. has or apprehension beenvigorously esthetic intuitive It it 3.1.8-9makes stillclearer. is insistent Munrdaka Indeed, Upanishad Thatwe of lead to comprehensionbrahman. cannot devas, thatthesenses, is apprehension in with here perception thesenseofimmediate aredealing certainly bothofwhich of borne by theinclusion tapasand karman, out this as To reality. clinch, it were, with haveto connection postulational of or prasada, theserenity knowlwe interpretation, are toldthatjiAMna him leadsto thegoaland he whohas it "sees,"pagyate, whois withedge, sensethanthatof in suchseeing anyother To outparts, nifkalar. regard of as let Platonicintellection, us say withNorthrop an intuiting an esexof the description intuitive wouldrender previous thetic continuum, is continuum conof the (withwhich apprehension an esthetic perience unintelligible. or completely tinuous connatural) so ofthe reality One morewordabouttheindeterminateness ultimate
5

p. of The Philosophy theUpanishads, 149.

236

RESEARCH PHILOSOPHY AND PHENOMENOLOGICAL

or No neti by suggested Yajfiavalkya's neti. ultimate absolute powerfully determined, for has or philosophy evenscience everbeenfully ofreligion, with which coincides or thatwould imply omniscience a typeofknowledge suchas the is God. Onlythe trend indicated, suchas Aristotle's being, ultimateconlogicalcompletion, of complementation fragmentariness, whether stated negation, implies and sistency the like.Everydefinition is limitathatwhich beyond To thus, inpositive terms otherwise. define, or or the impossible. Thus,when Hinduthinker themystic, tionis,logically, the insteadofimplying indeterminatenes8 work withnegatives, so-called, of the they of thatwhichis to be defined, indicate othernes8 the reality of relation thephenomeof of the thought from reality thesubject-object howquestion, world. or nal, intuited empirico-naturalistic It is another is. reality This is a logicalor metaever,of whatnaturethe ultimate with the excelled the problem, in which Hindushaveequally one physical knows thatthe Hinduspossess of West.Anystudent Indianphilosophy prewithNorthrop's but systems, beingalso acquainted metaphysical denies Hindus the that he suppositions, willnotbe surprised thatscholar positivists. in and ability general callsthem metaphysical by is withnominalism Northrop, Now, if Indianspeculation charged is 2.4 Upanishad where.it statedthat whatare we to makeofTaittireya having withthe mindwithout together back from brahman wordsturn' aprapya manasasaha?Or,whatare we to it: vaconirvatante reached yato relathe makeofsuchpassages Isa 10 and Kena 3b in which epistemic as into in us range them tions described sucha wayas willnotpermit. to, are theintuitive esthetic? and in epistemology We have not eventouched uponthewholesubjectof, from Western totally distinct features whichexhibits philosophy Indian. of the and of systems epistemology hencecomplicate matter comparing in weremade- the lightofthe thetwoevenmore.If sucha comparison of the of charges Northrop's, untenableness the and nominalistic positivist we evenmore, contentions wouldbecome latter's However, did apparent. of ourselves thelinguistic to aspects thematter. wantto limit nature side On thepositive mIuch out couldalso be pointed thatis ofthe, in but ofthepostulational Indianphilosophy has beenput by Northrop of to to the under intuitional makeit subservient hisscheme establishing For thought. inWestern Easternfrom valid criteria distinguishing for by then stance, Whitehead's if objectsare concepts postulation, eternal of in eva. the eternal present the self,nityam atmasarstham, Svetasva1.12 And, taraUpanishad is also a concept postulation. whyshouldthe -by thanthe anu ofIndian atomsofDemocritus anymorepostulational be is In it atomists? fact, wouldseemthatthereverse thecase. of distinction concepts by This paper, maintains Northrop's that then,

CONCEPTS BY INTUITION

237

is, by and intuition concepts postulation to be sure,a validone and proand of naturalism, the new videsa somewhat toolfor critique empiricism, to thatthedistinction it of However, seeks prove forms positivism. various description as when inappropriate, applied a general indeed, is misleading, worldof the within thought This thin-king. has been shown of Oriental holdstrueforother that the criticism and Brahmanism it is suggested speculation. areasofOriental has that been It has further demonstrated themisunderstanding itsbaand of account thelinguistic semantic takesufficient sis in thefailure'to evidence supporting some by factors'involved, overemphasizing seemingly is which evidence of amount contradictory a and neglecting considerable in analysis. easilyuncovered thecontextual may Indianphilosophy have in It has not beendenied' thispaperthatis but by concepts intuition, suchpractice by or actually incorporated has posirather startlingly links thesis Northrop's Actually, farnotuniversal. of withthe speculations the Upaniand empiricism naturalism tivism, indeed. strange bedfellows for' makes very which shads, of meeting East and Westcan be that Fromall thisfollows no fruitful even distinctions ifit wereconabouton thebasisofNorthrop's brought according thatwhich, the learnfrom East, for cededthattheWestmight by from East'has notevenbeenclarified the to Northrop, to be learned is it on thedistinction; thecontrary, has beenobscured. KURT F. LEIDECKER.
MARY WASHINGTON COLLEGE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINLA