Quadrant Model of Reality Book 6 Religion

Religion chapter

QMRJesuit and theologian Bernard Lonergan had a worthy goal: to generalize the successful methods of science to all facets of human inquiry. Most particularly, he sought to consider not only exterior data from sensation but interior data from consciousness. He presented four epistemological precepts of ‘being’ that transcended cultural norms, to inform all domains of human knowing and knowledge: Being Attentive in Experience Being Intelligent in Understanding Being Reasonable in Judgment Being Responsible in Deciding In addition, his Generalized Empirical Method (GEM) had four facets, and four methodological questions: Cognitional What do I do when I know? Epistemological Why is doing that knowing? Metaphysical What do I know when I do it? Methodological What therefore should we do? These are certainly worthy precepts, domains, facets, and questions. How well have his techniques worked? At one time, Lonergan was said to be considered by many to be one of the finest thinkers of the 20th century. The summary of the article on Lonergan at the IEP states: A generalized empirical method in ethics clarifies the subject’s operations regarding values. The effort relies on a personal appropriation of what occurs when making value judgments, on a discovery of innate moral norms, and on a grasp of the meaning of moral objectivity. These innate methods of moral consciousness are expressed in explanatory categories, to be used both for conceptualizing for oneself what occurs regarding value judgments and for expressing to others the actual grounds for one’s value positions. GEM is based on a gamble that the odds of genuine moral development are best when the players lay these intellectual, moral and affective cards on the table. Concretely, this implies a duty to acknowledge the historicity of one’s moral views as well as a readiness to admit oversights in one’s self-knowledge. Moreover, given the proliferation of moral issues that affect confronting cultures with different histories today, it also implies a duty to meet the stranger in a place where this openness can occur. Lonergan’s imperatives are also somewhat similar to Kolb’s Learning Cycle and the Scientific Method. In both of those fourfolds, observation (sensation) occurs both before (but also cyclically after) experimentation (action). Could this be because these are methods for inquiry as opposed to one of making? Some think there is no distinction, that discovery is always socially constructed anyway, but I disagree.

In his Method in Theology, Lonergan grouped the processes by which theology reflects on religion into eight specializations, each with functional relationships to the other seven. As illustrated in the chart below, the four levels of human self-transcendence - being attentive, intelligent, reasonable, and responsible – function in the two phases of understanding the past and planning for the future. Thus, we learn about the past by moving upward through research, interpretation, history, and a dialectical evaluation. We move into the future by moving downward through foundational commitments, basic doctrines, systematic organizations of doctrines, and communication of the resulting meanings and values. Our future slips into our past soon enough, and the process continues, turn after turn, reversing or advancing the forces of decline, meeting ever new challenges or buckling under the current ones. While Lonergan presented this view primarily to meet problems in theology, he extended the notion of functional specialties to ethics, historiography and the human sciences by associating doctrines, systematics, and communications with policies, plans and implementations, respectively. These eight functional specialties are not distinct professions or separate university departments. They represent Lonergan's grouping of the operations of mind and heart by which we actually do better. That is, he is not suggesting a recipe for better living; he is proposing a theoretical explanation of how the mind and heart work whenever we actually improve life, along with a proposal for collaboration in light of this explanation. lonergan-fig The bottom three rows of functions will be initially familiar to anyone involved in practically any enterprise. The top row of functions is less familiar, but it represents Lonergan's clarification of the evaluative moments that occur in any collaboration that improves human living. The functional specialty dialectic occurs when investigators explicitly sort out and evaluate the basic elements in any human situation. They evaluate the data of research, the explanations of interpreters, and the accounts of historians. To ensure that all the relevant questions are met, they bring together different people with different evaluations with a view to clarifying and resolving any differences that may appear. From a GEM perspective, the most radical differences result from the presence or absence of conversion. Three principal types have been identified. There is an intellectual conversion by which a person has personally met the challenges of a cognitional theory, an epistemology, a metaphysics, and a methodology. There is a moral conversion by which a person is committed to values above mere satisfactions. And there is an affective conversion by which a person relies on the love of neighbor, community, and God to heal bias and prioritize

Buddhism Chapter

Christianity chapter

Western Christian meditation contrasts with most other approaches in that it does not involve the repetition of any phrase or action and requires no specific posture. Western Christian meditation progressed from the 6th century practice of Bible reading among Benedictine monks called Lectio Divina, i.e. divine reading. Its four formal steps as a "ladder" were defined by the monk Guigo II in the 12th century with the Latin terms lectio, meditatio, oratio, and contemplatio (i.e. read, ponder, pray, contemplate). Western Christian meditation was further developed by saints such as Ignatius of Loyola and Teresa of Avila in the 16th century.[

De Verbo Incarnato is divided into four parts. The first part is an interpretation of the divinity and humanity of Christ as presented in the New Testament (thesis 1). The second part recapitulates the formation of the dogmatic theological tradition of Christology up through the monothelite controversy in the seventh century (theses 2-5). The third part, which covers much the same material as The Constitution of Christ but in a somewhat different manner, formulates what Lonergan calls "theological conclusions" from the hypostatic union regarding the ontological constitution of Christ as one person in two natures (theses 6-9), and his psychological constitution as a single subject of two subjectivities (thesis 10). The fourth part concerns "what belongs to Christ" (de iis quae christi sunt), including his grace, knowledge, sinlessness, and freedom (theses 11-14). The fifth and final section regards the redemptive work of Christ, in three theses: redemption in the New Testament (thesis 15), the satisfaction given by Christ (thesis 16), and "Understanding the Mystery: The Law of the Cross," presenting Lonergan's synthetic understanding of Christ's work (thesis 17).

The Cardinal virtues are a quartette set of virtues recognized in the writings of Classical Antiquity and, along with the theological virtues, also in Christian tradition. They consist of the following qualities: Prudence (φρόνησις, phronēsis; Latin: Prudentia): also described as wisdom, the ability to judge between actions with regard to appropriate actions at a given time. Justice (δικαιοσύνη, dikaiosynē; Latin: Iustitia): also considered as fairness, the most extensive and most important virtue.[1] Temperance (σωφροσύνη, sōphrosynē; Latin: Temperantia): also known as restraint, the practice of self-control, abstention, and moderation tempering the appetition. Courage (ἀνδρεία, andreia; Latin: Fortitudo): also named fortitude, forbearance, strength, endurance, and the ability to confront fear, uncertainty, and intimidation. These were derived initially from Plato's scheme, discussed in Republic Book IV, 426-435 (and see Protagoras 330b, which also includes piety (hosiotes)); expanded on by Cicero, and adapted by Saint Ambrose, Augustine of Hippo, and Thomas Aquinas (see Summa Theologica II(I).61). The term "cardinal" comes from the Latin cardo or hinge; the cardinal virtues are so called because they are the basic virtues required for a virtuous life. They are also related to the Quadrivium.

The Cardinal Virtues are often depicted as female allegorical figures and were a popular subject for funerary sculpture. The attributes and names of these figures may vary according to local tradition.

In many churches and artwork the Cardinal Virtues are depicted with symbolic items:

Justice – sword, balance and scales, and a crown

Temperance – wheel, bridle and reins, vegetables and fish, cup, water and wine in two jugs

Fortitude – armor, club, with a lion, palm, tower, yoke, broken column

Prudence – book, scroll, mirror (occasionally attacked by a serpent)

Notable depictions include sculptures on the tomb of Francis II, Duke of Brittany and the tomb of John Hotham. They were also depicted in the garden at Edzell Castle.

A humorous depiction of the four cardinal virtues appears in the children's book "Masterpiece" written by Elise Broach and illustrated by Kelly Murphy.

The term Full Gospel is often used as a synonym for Pentecostalism and Charismatic Christianity, Protestant movements originating in the 19th century. Early Pentecostals and Charismatics saw their teachings on baptism with the Holy Spirit, spiritual gifts, and divine healing as a return to the doctrines and power of the Apostolic Age. Because of this many early Pentecostals and Charismatics call their movement the Apostolic Faith or the Full Gospel. This term has origins in the holiness movement. A. B. Simpson, the founder of the Christian and Missionary Alliance, framed his core beliefs around the "Fourfold Gospel", that Christ is Savior, Sanctifier, Healer, and Soon Coming King. Many Pentecostals were influenced by Simpson and adopted his Fourfold or "Foursquare" Gospel as an articulation of their beliefs. This term is still used today in the name of the International Church of the Foursquare Gospel. The term "Full Gospel" also refers to Romans 15,18-19, where Paul says: "... to make the Gentiles obedient, by word and deed, through mighty signs and wonders, by the power of the Spirit of God; so that from Jerusalem, and round about unto Illyricum, I have fully preached the gospel of Christ."

Cradley Heath Baptist Church, also known as Four-ways Baptist Church, was the first Church of any denomination to build a chapel in Cradley Heath, West Midlands.[1] The first meeting was in December 1833, in Granger's Lane. Later, land was bought near the Four-Ways end of the High Street, and a meeting place was built. The site was expanded, and two further buildings were built, the last in 1904. This is now a listed building. The church is noted for appointing Britain's first recorded black West Indian pastor, Rev. George Cosens (or Cousens), in 1837.

Islam Chapter

"Tariqat" in the Four Spiritual Stations: The Four Stations, sharia, tariqa, haqiqa. The fourth station, marifa, which is considered "unseen", is actually the center of the haqiqa region. It's the essence of all four stations.

The Jewish writer Abraham bar Ḥiyya teaches the asceticism of the Sufis. His distinction with regard to the observance of Jewish law by various classes of men is essentially a Sufic theory. According to it there are four principal degrees of human perfection or sanctity; namely: 1. of "Shari'ah", i.e., of strict obedience to all ritual laws of Islam, such as prayer, fasting, pilgrimage, almsgiving, ablution, etc., which is the lowest degree of worship, and is attainable by all 2. of Ṭariqah, which is accessible only to a higher class of men who, while strictly adhering to the outward or ceremonial injunctions of religion, rise to an inward perception of mental power and virtue necessary for the nearer approach to the Divinity 3. of "Ḥaḳikah", the degree attained by those who, through continuous contemplation and inward devotion, have risen to the true perception of the nature of the visible and invisible; who, in fact, have recognized the Godhead, and through this knowledge have succeeded in establishing an ecstatic relation to it; and 4. of the "Ma'arifah", in which state man communicates directly with the Deity.

Four Doors is the concept in tasawwuf, and to a lesser extent in other branches of Islam such as Ismailism and Alevism, that there are four paths to Allah, starting with Sharia, then to Tariqa, then to Marifa, then to Haqiqa.

A Tariqa (or tariqah; Arabic: طريقة ṭarīqah) is the term for a school or order of Sufism, or especially for the mystical teaching and spiritual practices of such an order with the aim of seeking Haqīqah, which translates as "ultimate truth". A Tariqa has a Murshid (guide) who plays the role of leader or spiritual director. The members or followers of a tariqa are known as Murīdīn (singular Murīd), meaning "desirous", viz. "desiring the knowledge of knowing God and loving God" (also called a Faqīr فقير) The metaphor of "way, path" is to be understood in connection of the term sharia which also has the meaning of "path", more specifically "well-trodden path; path to the waterhole". The "path" metaphor of tariqa is that of a further path, taken by the mystic, which continues from the "well-trodden path" or exoteric of sharia towards the esoteric haqiqa. A fourth "station" following the succession of shariah, tariqa and haqiqa is called marifa. This is the "unseen center" of haqiqa, and the ultimate aim of the mystic, corresponding to the unio mystica in Western mysticism. Tasawwuf, Arabic word that refers to mysticism and Islamic esotericism, is known in the West as Sufism.[ The fourth is always transcendent

The Tale of the Four Dervishes (Persian: قصه چهار درویش Ghesseh-ye Chahār Darvīsh; known in Urdu as Bagh-o Bahar (باغ و بہار, "Garden and Spring")) is a collection of allegorical stories by Amir Khusro written in Persian in the late 13th century. Legend has it that Amir Khusro's master and Sufi saint Nizamuddin Auliya had fallen ill. To cheer him up, Amir Khusro started telling him a series of stories in One Thousand and One Nights style. By the end of the stories, Nizamuddin Auliya had recovered, and prayed that anyone who listened to these stories would also be cured. The book is in some ways similar to the Thousand and One Nights in its method of framing and linking unfinished stories within each other. The central character is a king, Azad Bakht, who falls into depression after thinking about his own mortality, and so sets out from his palace seeking wise men. He comes upon four dervishes in a cemetery, and listens to their fantastical stories. Translations[edit] These stories were originally written in Persian by Amir Khusro as "Ghasseh-e Chahar Darvesh" (The Tale of the Four Dervishes). It was initially translated by Mir Husain Ata Tehseen into Urdu as Nau Tarz-e-Murassa but the language was a highly literate one and was not understood by general public to enjoy. In 1801, College of Fort William in Calcutta started a project translating Indian literature. Mr. John Borthwick Gilchrist, a famous scholar of literature, asked Mir Amman, an employee of the college, to translate it into the Urdu language. Mir Amman translated it from Persian into everyday Urdu, under the title Bagh o Bahar (The Garden and the Spring Season). Later, in 1857, Duncan Forbes retranslated it into English. The translation of Mir Amman is still enjoyed as a classical work of Urdu Literature for the common daily language of its time.

Hinduism Chapter

Bhima: One of the four supreme physical powers, along with Balrama, Shalya & Kichaka. Bhima had phenomenal personal strength,he is also known for killing many powerful kings and demons like Jarasandh, Kirmira, Bakasura, Hidimb, Jatasura, Kichak and wrestler Jimut,he was an unsurpassed master of the mace weapon and a consummate wrestler. He slays all of the one hundred Kuru brothers including the chief antagonist of the saga, Duryodhana. There are no greater destroyer's than him to Kuru army, he alone destroyed half of it. He lost only once against Karna.

The Four Dharmadhatu (Chinese: 四法界), is a philosophical concept propagated by Master Tu-shun (Chinese: 杜順; 557-640 CE),[1] the founder of Hua-yan (Chinese: 華嚴) school. It builds upon and is a variant of the Dharmadhatu doctrine. Contents [hide] 1 The Four Dharmadhatu 2 See also 3 References 4 Further reading 5 External links The Four Dharmadhatu[edit] The Four Dharmadhatu were outlined in Tu-shun's treatise which has been rendered into English as 'On the Meditation of Dharmadhātu'. The Four Dharmadhatu are: The Dharmadhātu of 'Shih' (Chinese: 事法界; "shi fajie"). 'Shih' is a rendering of the character 事 which holds the semantic field: "matter", "phenomenon", "event". It may be understood as the 'realm' (Sanskrit: dhātu) of all matters and phenomena. The Dharmadhātu of 'Li'(Chinese: 理法界; "li fajie"). 'Li' is a rendering of the character 理 which holds the semantic field: "principle", "law", "noumenon". This 'realm' (Sanskrit: dhātu) may be understood as that of principles. It has been referred to as "the realm of the one principle". The "one principle" being qualified as śūnyatā (Sanskrit).[2] The Dharmadhātu of Non-obstruction of 'Li' against 'Shih' (Chinese: 理事無礙法界; "lishi wuai fajie"). This 'realm' (Sanskrit: dhātu) has been rendered into English as "the realm of non-obstruction between principle and phenomena".[3] The Dharmadhātu of the Non-obstruction of 'Shih' and 'Shih' (Chinese: 事事無礙法界; "shishi wuai fajie"). This 'realm' (Sanskrit: dhātu) has been rendered into English as "the realm of non-obstruction between phenomena".[

Huayan teaches the Four Dharmadhatu, four ways to view reality: All dharmas are seen as particular separate events; All events are an expression of the absolute; Events and essence interpenetrate; All events interpenetrate.[40]

The 'Four Extremes' (Tibetan: མཐའ་བཞི, Wylie: mtha' bzhi; Sanskrit: caturanta; Devanagari: चतुरन्त) [25] is a particular application of the Catuṣkoṭi: Being (Wylie: yod) Non-being (Wylie: med) Both being and non-being (Wylie: yod-med) Neither being and non-being (Wylie: yod-med min)[25] Dumoulin et al. (1988, 2005: pp. 43–44), in the initially groundbreaking work on Zen which is now for the most part dated due to progress in scholarship (though still useful as the premier English work of comprehensive overview), model a particular formulation of the Catuṣkoṭi that approaches the Caturanta engaging the Buddhist technical term 'dharmas' and attribute the model to Nagarjuna: If we focus on the doctrinal agreement that exists between the Wisdom Sūtras[26] and the tracts of the Mādhyamika we note that both schools characteristically practice a didactic negation. By setting up a series of self-contradictory oppositions, Nāgārjuna disproves all conceivable statements, which can be reduced to these four: All things (dharmas) exist: affirmation of being, negation of nonbeing All things (dharmas) do not exist: affirmation of nonbeing, negation of being All things (dharmas) both exist and do not exist: both affirmation and negation All things (dharmas) neither exist nor do not exist: neither affirmation nor negation With the aid of these four alternatives (catuṣkoṭika: affirmation, negation, double affirmation, double negation), Nāgārjuna rejects all firm standpoints and traces a middle path between being and nonbeing. Most likely the eight negations, arranged in couplets in Chinese, can be traced back to Nāgārjuna: neither destruction nor production, neither annihilation nor permanence, neither unity nor difference, neither coming nor going.[27]

Catuṣkoṭi (Sanskrit; Devanagari: चतुष्कोटि, Tibetan: མུ་བཞི, Wylie: mu bzhi) is a logical argument(s) of a 'suite of four discrete functions' or 'an indivisible quaternity' that has multiple applications and has been important in the Dharmic traditions of Indian logic and the Buddhist logico-epistemological traditions, particularly those of the Madhyamaka school. Robinson (1957: pp. 302–303) states (negativism is employed in amplification of the Greek tradition of Philosophical skepticism): A typical piece of Buddhist dialectical apparatus is the ...(catuskoti). It consists of four members in a relation of exclusive disjunction ("one of, but not more than one of, 'a,' 'b,' 'c,' 'd,' is true"). Buddhist dialecticians, from Gautama onward, have negated each of the alternatives, and thus have negated the entire proposition. As these alternatives were supposedly exhaustive, their exhaustive negation has been termed "pure negation" and has been taken as evidence for the claim that Madhyamika is negativism.[1] In particular, the catuṣkoṭi is a "four-cornered" system of argumentation that involves the systematic examination and rejection of each of the 4 possibilities of a proposition, P: P; that is, being. not P; that is, not being. P and not P; that is, being and not being. not (P or not P); that is, neither being nor not being. It is interesting to note that under propositional logic, De Morgan's laws imply that the fourth case (neither P nor not P) is equivalent to the third case (P and not P), and is therefore superfluous.

The following is an adaptation of the model of Puhakka (2003: p. 133)[2] with the clear identification of the positive and negative configurations of the Catuṣkoṭi following Ng (1993: pp. 99–105).[3] P stands for any proposition and Not-P stands for the diametrical opposite or the contradiction of P (in a relationship of contradistinction); P and Not-P constitute a complementary bifurcation of mutual exclusivity, collectively constituting an exhaustive set of positions for any given (or determined) propositional array. A propositional array is signified in the model by numerals, traditionally though, propositional arrays were designated 'foot' (Sanskrit: pāda), a lexical item which holds the semantic field: 'line', 'one quartile of śloka'; where 'śloka' (Sanskrit) holds the semantic field: 'verse', 'stanza'.[4] Nagarjuna's Diamond Slivers[edit] Śūnyatā is the ninth 'view' (Sanskrit: dṛṣṭi), the viewless view, a superposition of the eight possible arrays of proposition P [and its 'inseparable contradistinction' (Sanskrit: apoha)]. Positive configuration P Not-P Both P and Not-P Neither P nor Not-P Negative configuration Not (P) Not (Not-P) Not (Both P and Not-P) Not (Neither P nor Not-P) The eight arrays or octaves of the iconographic Dharmacakra represent drishti or traditional views that Shakyamuni countered. These eight arrays may be plotted as coordinates on a multidimensional field which may be rendered as a sphere, a mandala, a multidimensional shunya or zero where shunyata denotes zero-ness. The eight arrays are in a concordant relationship where they each constitute a chord to the sphere. The coordinates are equidistant from the epicentre of shunya where the array of the positive configuration (or hemisphere) and the array of the negative configuration (or hemisphere) constitute two polar radii or diametrical complements, a diameter in sum. These are the 'eight limits' (Wylie: mtha' brgyad; Sanskrit: aṣṭānta) of 'openness' (Sanskrit: śūnyatā),[5] where śūnyatā is amplified by 'freedom from constructs' or 'simplicity' (Wylie: spros bral; Sanskrit: aprapañca).[6][7] Karmay (1988: p. 118) conveys that 'spros bral' is a homologue of 'thig le' (Sanskrit: bindu), where 'spros bral' is literally "without amplification", understood as "that which cannot be displayed".[8]

Puhakka (2003: p. 134-145) charts the stylized reification process of a human sentient being, the spell of reality,[9] a spell dispelled by the Catuṣkoṭi: We are typically not aware of ourselves as taking something (P) as real. Rather, its reality "takes us," or already has us in its spell as soon as we become aware of its identity (P). Furthermore, it's impossible to take something (P) to be real without, at least momentarily, ignoring or denying that which it is not (not-P). Thus the act of taking something as real necessarily involves some degree of unconsciousness or lack of awareness. This is true even in the simple act of perception when we see a figure that we become aware of as "something." As the German gestalt psychologists demonstrated, for each figure perceived, there is a background of which we remain relatively unaware. We can extend this to texts or spoken communications. For every text we understand there is a context we are not fully cognizant of. Thus, with every figure noticed or reality affirmed, there is, inevitably, unawareness. Is this how a spell works? It takes us unawares.[10] Nomenclature, orthography and etymology[edit] The Catuṣkoṭi in Western Discourse has often been glossed, Tetralemma, which is the nomenclature for the Greek form. Both of the variations have similarities but also differences and the traditions were mutually iterating. Antecedents and pervasion[edit] Antecedents of the Catuṣkoṭi have been charted to grammatical structures in the Vedas. The Nasadiya Sukta of the Rigveda (RV 10.129) contains ontological speculation in terms of various logical divisions that were later recast formally as the four circles of catuskoti: "A", "not A", "A and not A", and "not A and not not A".[11] McEvilley (2002: p. 495) maps an interesting case for mutual iteration and pervasion between Pyrrhonism and Madhyamika: An extraordinary similarity, that has long been noticed, between Pyrrhonism and Mādhyamika is the formula known in connection with Buddhism as the fourfold negation (catuṣkoṭi) and which in Pyrrhonic form might be called the fourfold indeterminacy.[12] Gorgias[edit] Gorgias (c 487-376 BCE), the author of a lost work: 'On Nature or the Non-Existent'. This book was lost but was paraphrased by Sextus Empiricus in Against the Professors.[13]

The Catuṣkoṭi was employed particularly by Nagarjuna who developed it and engaged it as a 'learning, investigative, meditative'[22] portal to realize the 'openness' (Sanskrit: Śūnyatā), of Shakyamuni's Second Turning of the Dharmacakra, as categorized by the Sandhinirmocana Sutra. Robinson (1957: p. 294), building on the foundations of Liebenthal (1948)[23] to whom he gives credit, states: What Nagarjuna wishes to prove is the irrationality of Existence, or the falsehood of reasoning which is built upon the logical principle that A equals A.... Because two answers, assertion and denial, are always possible to a given question, his arguments contain two refutations, one denying the presence, one the absence of the probandum. This double refutation is called the Middle Path. [emphasis evident in Robinson][24] Catuṣkoṭi post-Nargarjuna[edit] The Catuṣkoṭi, following Nagarjuna, has had a profound impact upon the development of Buddhist logic and its dialectical refinement of Tibetan Buddhism. Robinson (1957: p. 294) qualifies the import of Nagarjuna's work (which includes Nagarjuna's application of the Catuskoti) due to the embedded noise in the scholarly lineage: "Certainly some of Nagarjuna's ancient opponents were just as confused as his modern interpreters...".[24] This noise may also have co-arisen with Nagarjuna, following the work of Jayatilleke (1967). Catuṣkoṭi paradox: a simple complex[edit] Wayman (1977) proffers that the Catuṣkoṭi may be employed in different ways and often these are not clearly stated in discussion nor the tradition. Wayman (1977) holds that the Catuṣkoṭi may be applied in suite, that is all are applicable to a given topic forming a paradoxical matrix; or they may be applied like trains running on tracks (or employing another metaphor, four mercury switches where only certain functions or switches are employed at particular times). This difference in particular establishes a distinction with the Greek tradition of the Tetralemma. Also, predicate logic has been applied to the Dharmic Tradition, and though this in some quarters has established interesting correlates and extension of the logico-mathematical traditions of the Greeks, it has also obscured the logico-grammatical traditions of the Dharmic Traditions of Catuṣkoṭi within modern English discourse.[original research?]

Jainism has a sevenfold logical architecture, the Syādvāda, which is a formulation to convey the insight of Anekantavada. Brahmajala Sutta: The Supreme Net (What the Teaching Is Not)[edit] Śākyamuni, as remembered by Ānanda and codified in the Brahmajala Sutta 2.27, when expounding the sixteenth wrong view, or the fourth wrong view of the 'Eel-Wrigglers' (Pali: amarā-vikheppikā), the non-committal equivocators, though the grammatical structure is identical to the Catuṣkoṭi (and there are numerous other analogues of this fourfold grammatical structure within this Sutta), the intentionality of the architecture employed by Nagarjuna is not evident, as rendered into English by Walshe (1987, 1995: p. 81): 'What is the fourth way? Here, an ascetic or Brahmin is dull and stupid. Because of his dullness and stupidity, when he is questioned he resorts to evasive statements and wriggles like an eel: "If you ask me whether there is another world. But I don't say so. And I don't say otherwise. And I don't say it is not, and I don't not say it is not." "Is there no other world?..." "Is there both another world and no other world?..."Is there neither another world nor no other world?..." "Are there spontaneously-born beings?..." "Are there not...?" "Both...? "Neither...?" "Does the Tathagata exist after death? Does he not exist after death? Does he both exist and not exist after death? Does he neither exist nor not exist after death?..." "If I thought so, I would say so...I don't say so...I don't say it is not." This is the fourth case.'[14] Literature review[edit] Robinson (1957: p. 294)[15] holds that Stcherbatsky (1927),[16] opened a productive period in Madhyamaka studies. Schayer (1933)[17] made a departure into the rules of inference employed by early Buddhist dialecticians and examines the Catuskoti (Tetralemma) as an attribute of propositional logic and critiques Stcherbatsky. Robinson (1957: p. 294)[15] states that "Schayers criticisms of Stcherbatsky are incisive and just." Murti (1955)[18] makes no mention of the logical contribution of Schayer. According to Robinson (1957: p. 294),[15] Murti furthered the work of Stcherbatsky amongst others, and brought what Robinson terms "the metaphysical phase of investigation" to its apogee though qualifies this with: "Murti has a lot to say about 'dialectic,' but practically nothing to say about formal logic." Robinson (1957: p. 294)[15] opines that Nakamura (1954),[19] developed Schayer's methodology and defended and progressed its application. Robinson (1957: p. 293) opines that the 'metaphysical approach' evident foremost in Murti (1955) was not founded in a firm understanding of the 'logical structure of the system', i.e. catuskoti, for example: Several fundamental limitations of the metaphysical approach are now apparent. It has tried to find comprehensive answers without knowing the answers to the more restricted questions involved - such questions as those of the epistemological and logical structure of the system.[20] Robinson (1957: p. 296) conveys his focus and states his methodology, clearly identifying the limitations in scope of this particular publication, which he testifies is principally built upon, though divergent from, the work of Nakamura: In considering the formal structure of Nagarjuna's argumentation, I exclude epistemology, psychology, and ontology from consideration.... Such extra-logical observations as emerge will be confined to the concluding paragraphs...[21]

A part of his analysis of the emptiness of phenomena in the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā, Nagarjuna critiques svabhāva in several different concepts. He discusses the problems of positing any sort of inherent essence to causation, movement, change and personal identity. Nagarjuna makes use of the Indian logical tool of the tetralemma to attack any essentialist conceptions. Nagarjuna’s logical analysis is based on four basic propositions: All things (dharma) exist: affirmation of being, negation of non-being All things (dharma) do not exist: affirmation of non-being, negation of being All things (dharma) both exist and do not exist: both affirmation and negation All things (dharma) neither exist nor do not exist: neither affirmation nor negation [15

Among R Bahya's principal works was his commentary on the Torah (the five books of Moses), in the preparation of which he thoroughly investigated the works of former Biblical exegetes, using all the methods employed by them in his interpretations. He enumerates the following four methods, all of which in his opinion are indispensable to the exegete: The peshat, the "plain" meaning of the text in its own right. The midrash or the aggadic exegesis. Logical analysis and philosophical exegesis. His aim is to demonstrate that philosophical truths are already embodied in the Bible, which as a work of God transcends all the wisdom of man. He therefore recognizes the results of philosophical thought only insofar as they do not conflict with Jewish tradition. The method of the Kabbalah, termed by him "the path of light," which the truth-seeking soul must travel. It is by means of this method, Rabbeinu Behaye believes, that the deep mysteries hidden in the Bible may be revealed.