Abstract
This paper employs a number of argumentative strategies that the Buddhist philosopher Nāgārjuna employs in his Yukti-corpus to demonstrate that the Mahāyāna Buddhist doctrine of mutual dependence is not a case of begging the question. More precisely, this paper demonstrates that to say that A and B are mutually dependent is not to say that what grounds B is grounded in what it itself grounds; it is to say that both A and B lack ontological independence, and that they are a part of a changing, interdependent whole. Mutual dependence thus is a case of dynamic holism, and not of begging the question.
Recommended Citation
JAYESH, A. K.
(2025)
DOI: https://doi.org/10.31979/2151-6014(2025).160205
"Is the Mahāyāna Buddhist Doctrine of Mutual Dependence a Case of Begging the Question?,"
Comparative Philosophy: Vol. 16:
Iss.
2, Article 5.
Available at:
https://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/comparativephilosophy/vol16/iss2/5
