Neither one nor many (gcig du 'bral ba'i gtan tshigs)
Tibetan Buddhist Encyclopedia is now 14 years old
Our Encyclopedia recently received a wonderful opportunity for a major renewal on its 14th birthday . After many years of growing our Encyclopedia had become bit slow and sometimes even decided not to answer when people knocked on the door.
A very big thank you and blessings to Dmytro Rudiy (rudiy.nl) for his great work in upgrading the server, website and all of the infrastructure and helping make TBE fast and reliable again for everyone!
We kindly ask our readers to help us cover the cost of this important upgrade and also help with the ongoing costs of keeping the Encyclopedia alive and freely available.
or card
Every little donation helps and every one is deeply appreciated. 🙏🙏🙏
OM AH HUM VAJRA GURU PADMA SIDDHI HUM 🙏🙏🙏
May blessings shower down on all of yous 🙏🙏🙏
Neither one nor many argument (Wylie: gcig du 'bral ba'i gtan tshigs) is an argument employed by different philosophers and spiritual traditions for various reasons. The Neither one nor many argument and its permutations and antecedents, particularly the "problem of the One and the Many" as charted by McEvilley (2002: pp. 23–66) in his magnum opus, has an ancient pedigree in the lineages of both Indian Philosophy and Greek Philosophy. McEvilley (2002) also provides strongly persuasive arguments inferring the mutual influence and mutual iteration of the ancient Indian and Greek philosophical traditions but proffers patently inconclusive and undemonstrable evidence, the perennial bugbear of historical inquiry. The argument is a factor in the algorithmic function of the Catuskoti. In its Buddhist employ, the argument is one of a suite of arguments within the purview of Pramana and Indian logic to demonstrate and test various doctrines. Different authorities and sources provide different enumerations of these said arguments, Khenpo Yonten Gyamtso lists them thus:
- 'diamond splinters' argument (Wylie: rdo rje gzegs ma'i gtan tshigs)
- 'refutation of production of existent and nonexistent effects' (Wylie: yod med skye 'gog gi gtan tshigs)
- 'refutation of production related to four possible alternatives' (Wylie: mu bzhi skye ba'i gtan tshigs)
- 'dependent arising' argument (Wylie: rten 'brel gyi gtan tshigs)
- argument of 'neither one nor many' (Wylie: gcig du 'bral ba'i gtan tshigs)
The Padmakara Translation Group (2005: p. 39) convey the uniqueness of the Madhyamākalaṃkāra of Śāntarakṣita in Buddhist literature in its focused, dedicated and protracted employ of the "neither one nor many" argument:
- The Madhyamakalankara invokes the argument of "neither one nor many" more intensively (throughout sixty-two of its ninety-seven stanzas) than any other text in Buddhist literature. This argument is one of a series of proofs used to demonstrate that phenomena are without real existence.
Source
Wikipedia:Neither one nor many (gcig du 'bral ba'i gtan tshigs)