Online Program Book

This is the preliminary program for the 2024 in-person Annual Meeting, hosted with the Society for Biblical Literature in San Diego, CA - November 23-26. Pre-conference workshops and many committee meetings will be held November 22. If you have questions about the program, contact annualmeeting@aarweb.org. All times are listed in local/Pacific Time.


	A23-322 Jain Studies Unit Theme: Between Tradition and Modernity: 19th, 20th and 21st Century Jain Mendicant Leaders Saturday, 3:00 PM - 4:30 PM Convention Center-29D (Upper Level East) Anil Mundra, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, Presiding This panel focuses centrally on the seminal role that Jain mendicant leaders of the 19th, 20th and 21st centuries have played in translating tradition into modernity, thereby transforming their notions of this binary altogether. It examines and compares four highly influential 20th- and 21st-century Jain Śvetāmbara and Digambara mendicant leaders, and their multiple methods of adapting Jain practices for the modern period which often depend upon an engaged Jain lay community. Despite having outsized influences on the transmission, translation, and adaptation of the Jain tradition into the modern period, no panel to date has taken a microscopic look at the actions and sensibilities of influential Jain mendicant leaders who have reshaped the Jain religious landscape as we know it today. By doing so, we come to appreciate the fluidity of the categories of “tradition” and the “modern,” and understand that both are at play and reconceptualized. Venu Mehta, Claremont School of Theology Fortifying the Tradition through the Icon: Ātmārāmajī Mahārāj’s Vision for Reforming Jainism in Modern India Abstract Ātmārāmajī Mahārāj (1837-1896) is the popular name of the Jain ācārya Vijayananda Surī, a Śvetāmbara Mūrtipūjaka Jain mendicant leader in the late 19th century. Ātmārāmajī saw the need for reforming Jainism in the western and northern parts of a colonized India in response to the growing influence of Hindu practices and ideals and to the aniconic sentiments of the Sthānakavāsīs (non-image worshipping Jains) and a contemporary Hindu reformation leader Dayānanda Sarasavatī (1824-1883) of the Ārya Samāj, a Hindu Indian reform movement. By exploring Ātmārāmajī’s The Chicago Praśnottara (1892-93) and Ajñānatimīra-bhāskara (1882) as well as his own autobiographical accounts found in various sources, this paper discusses how Ātmārāmajī navigated the tradition of the Jain mūrti-pūjā—practices associated with worshipping an icon that form the ritual praxis of particular Jain sects—through the modern period as part of his vision to reform Jainism in the modern period. Pratibha Pragya, Florida International University Mahāprajña’s Exegetical Approach in Ācārāṅga-bhāṣyam Abstract This paper investigates the exegetical approach of Śvetāmbara Terāpanthi leader Ācārya Mahāprajña (1920-2010) in order to illustrate how a learned Jain mendicant leader adapted his exegetical style for a modern context. Mahāprajña’s commentary on the canonical text of the Ācārāṅga Sūtra or his Ācārāṅga-bhāṣyam reinterprets ancient Jaina descriptions of ascetic practice and proposes a new format for understanding scripture tailored for a contemporary audience. He strongly believed that it is difficult to understand Jaina canonical literature without understanding Vedic, Buddhist and Āyurvedic sources. He was explicit about the sources and constructive method of his modern exegetical practices, divorcing himself from the traditional approach set by the oldest commentaries of the Niryukti, which the poetic compositions of older Jain commentators followed. I argue that his reliance on an “end-note” type of commentary (ṭippaṇa), rather than proposing a mere textual adaptation of the chosen text, redefined contemporary approaches to scriptural exegesis. Corinne Smith, SOAS University of London Kānjī Svāmī: The Transmission of the Adhyātmik Tradition in the Modern Era Abstract This paper discusses the role of technology in the dissemination and preservation of the teachings of Kānjī Svāmī (1890 – 1980). His religious career as an independent Jain leader began in the 1930s, delivering daily lectures on adhyātma, and most frequently on the Samayasāra of Kundakunda. I argue that the community’s use of technology and updating to the latest modes was significant in spreading these teachings into the modern age. Kānjī Svāmī was well-known for his oratory skills and never composed a single written work during his career. His followers certainly exploited the oral nature of Kānjī Svāmī’s teachings to great effect via audio recordings which began from the 1950s onwards using different analogue formats through to the digital age. Keeping pace with the latest technological trends and advancements allowed the preservation and transmission of oral content to audiences, which contributed to the successful growth of the movement. Lynna Dhanani, University of California, Davis Preserving Knowledge: Jambūvijaya and the Jaisalmer Bhaṇḍār Abstract This paper will show how the learned Jain scholar-monk Jambūvijaya (1923-2009) opened the archives to the West while simultaneously revamping indigenous understandings of knowledge-preservation through his enormously successful cataloguing, scanning, copying, and digitizing efforts at the Jaisalmer bhaṇḍār or Jain manuscript libraries located at the Jaisalmer Fort in the Rajasthani desert. Western and Asian scholars, such as Daniel Ingalls, Paul Dundas, Nalini Balbir, Shin Fujinaga, John E. Cort, Maria Heim, and dozens of others, benefited from Jambūvijaya’s intellectual prowess, curiosity, and generosity from the 1950s onward. Jain studies, specifically, would not have advanced without his manuscript cataloguing work, critical editions, and independent writings. His willingness to use modern methods alongside traditional ones and engage local and international scholars opened the treasures of the Jaisalmer bhaṇḍār (and other Jain libraries) to the world. Despite such influence and output, there remain limited studies of his collective influence on Jain and Indological studies.
	A23-417 Hindu Philosophy Unit and Tantric Studies Unit Theme: Book Panel on Loriliai Biernacki’s The Matter of Wonder: Abhinavagupta’s Panentheism and the New Materialism (OUP, 2022) Saturday, 5:00 PM - 6:30 PM Hilton Bayfront-Aqua Salon AB (Third Level) Elaine Fisher, Stanford University, Presiding This roundtable brings together several scholars to discuss Loriliai Biernacki’s recent book The Matter of Wonder: Abhinavagupta’s Panentheism and the New Materialism (Oxford University Press, 2022) in the broader context of South Asian philosophies of materiality. What does it mean for a thing to be “material”? What is the relationship between matter and consciousness? What does it mean to speak of the divine as immanent within the material world? How might premodern thinkers like Abhinavagupta contribute to contemporary philosophies of materiality and the recovery of wonder? Participants will discuss these questions and engage with Biernacki’s book from a variety of perspectives, including Śaiva Tantra, Sāṃkhya, and Jainism, followed by a response from the author. Panelists Lynna Dhanani, University of California, Davis Sundari Johansen Hurwitt, California Institute of Integral Studies John Nemec, University of Virginia Sthaneshwar Timalsina, San Diego State University Responding Loriliai Biernacki, University of Colorado
	A24-117 Hindu Philosophy Unit Theme: The Nyāya Argument for God’s Existence: A Philosophical Roundtable Sunday, 9:00 AM - 11:00 AM Convention Center-28D (Upper Level East) Shankar Nair, University of Virginia, Presiding Followers of the Nyāya school famously held that the existence of God (īśvara) can be established through inference. Their best-known argument is deceptively simple: the world must have an intelligent maker (kartṛ) because it is an effect (kārya), like a pot. This roundtable will focus on Jayanta Bhaṭṭa’s formulation of the argument in the Nyāyamañjarī (āhnika 3; critical edition by Kataoka [2005]); Jayanta offers a relatively early (9th c.) defense of the inference from kāryatva (“being an effect”), written in characteristically lucid prose. The session will bring together several scholars to analyze and debate Jayanta’s argument. The goal of the format is to create a space for lively and rigorous discussion, rather than traditional paper presentations. A handout with the original Sanskrit and an English translation of selections from Jayanta’s text will be provided. Panelists Parimal G. Patil, Harvard University Rosanna Picascia, Swarthmore College Nilanjan Das, University College London Michael Allen, University of Virginia Business Meeting Michael Allen, University of Virginia, Presiding Parimal G. Patil, Harvard University, Presiding
	A24-302 Buddhist Philosophy Unit, Global-Critical Philosophy of Religion Unit, Hindu Philosophy Unit, Jain Studies Unit, Philosophy of Religion Unit, and Yogācāra Studies Unit Theme: Translation Workshop: Akalaṅka's Aṣṭaśatī and Its Non-Jain Interlocutors Sunday, 3:00 PM - 4:30 PM Convention Center-30A (Upper Level East) Karin Meyers, Mangalam Research Center, Presiding This interactive session will workshop the translation-in-progress of one of the most important and challenging texts on the Jain theory of non-one-sidedness (anekāntavāda). The Eight Hundred (Aṣṭaśatī, c. 8th century CE) of the Digambara philosopher Akalaṅka is a Sanskrit commentary on Samantabhadra’s Examination of an Authority (Āptamīmāṃsā, c. 6th century CE). The Āptamīmāṃsā marks a seminal moment near the turn of the second millennium when the representatives of various philosophical schools entered into Sanskrit debate with each other. The selected section, which we will distribute in the original and our translation, refutes doctrines of one-sided ‘existence’ and ‘non-existence’ propounded by non-Jain philosophical opponents. Whereas Samantabhadra’s text is already translated and studied in English, Akalaṅka’s commentary is not. In an effort to foster lively and productive exchange, the translators will join the audience to work through the primary text in reading groups, after some introductory remarks. Specialists in philosophies that Akalaṅka engages will then unpack the allusions and arguments (Sāṁkhya, Mīmāṃsā, and Yogācāra Buddhism) prior to a general discussion and feedback on the translation. This is a unique panel format that will engage constituencies beyond Jain Studies and facilitate concrete improvements to a work-in-progress. Panelists Ana Bajzelj, University of California, Riverside Marie-Helene Gorisse, University of Birmingham Jane Allred, University of Alberta Jinesh Sheth, University of Birmingham Anil Mundra, Rutgers University, New Brunswick Jayandra Soni, University of Innsbruck Responding Dan Arnold, University of Chicago Karen O'Brien-Kop, University of Roehampton Andrew Ollett, The University of Chicago Raja Rosenhagen, California State University, Fresno
	A24-314 Hindu Philosophy Unit Theme: Kumārila's Critique of Yogācāra Sunday, 3:00 PM - 4:30 PM Hilton Bayfront-Cobalt 500 (Fifth Level) Charles Goodman, State University of New York, Binghamton, Presiding The Mīmāṃsā author Kumārila was one of the most formidable and determined critics of the Yogācāra philosophy and of the tradition of Buddhist epistemology that emerged within it. This session explores several aspects of his biting and brilliant critique and discusses what we can learn from it, both for our understanding of South Asian intellectual history and for philosophy today. Key topics to be discussed include the Buddhist concept of conventional truth, idealism, the dream argument, the "self-awareness" (svasaṃvedana) doctrine of Yogācāra and the memory argument for it, and whether an anti-realist, non-referential view of language can be internally consistent. Andrew Towers, Binghamton University (SUNY) Metaphysics and the Problem of Language: Ślokavārttika as a Guide for the Interpretation of Yogācāra Abstract In vv. 3 - 83 of the Nirālambanavāda chapter of the Commentary in Verses (Ślokavārttika), Kumārila mounts a powerful critique of Yogācāra in the form of a response to the dream argument. This critique engages at the level of both metaphysics and philosophy of language. Kumārila argues that a Yogācārin who denies that our concepts have external percepts, based on the analogy of a dream, can make sense neither of goal-oriented motivation nor of perceptual error. And he turns the dream argument against itself, deftly arguing that its rejection of referential views of language deprives the proponent of the argument of the ability to understand either the argument itself or any aspect of Sanskrit debate. Since participants in South Asian debates were held accountable for representing each other’s arguments accurately, Kumārila’s account of Yogācāra may shed light on scholarly conversations about how to interpret the meaning of key Yogācāra teachings. Malcolm Keating, Smith College Kumārila against Instrumental Falsehoods Abstract In a brief exchange with his Buddhist opponent in the Nirālambanavāda (vv. 154-59), Kumārila argues that (non-referring) expressions like “the horn of a hare” cannot bring about correct ideas. His commentator, Uṃveka, understands this as having implications for the Buddhist conception of upāya, skillful means, and of saṃvṛtisat, conventional reality. Keating's paper unpacks Kumārila’s reasoning and considers its implications for both Buddhist opponents and the Mīmāṃsā hermeneutic project, which relies on arthavāda, motivating speech, that some have characterized as convenient fictions. Charles Goodman, State University of New York, Binghamton Computer Simulations and Conventional Truth: Responding to Kumārila's Double Critique Abstract This paper explores how defenders of Yogācāra might be able to respond to Kumārila’s critique by drawing on later developments in Buddhist philosophy and contemporary developments in technology. Examples of computer simulations, especially multiplayer games, show that environments in which everything that appears is an illusion can be characterized by both misperception and goal-oriented motivation, so long as they also exhibit intersubjectively robust causal regularities. Meanwhile, the spectacular self-destruction of the dream argument shows that a Yogācārin cannot afford to characterize conventional truth as false simpliciter. In this dialectical context, a key role could be played by the later distinction drawn by Buddhist epistemologists between a cognition’s being non-mistaken (abhrānta) and the distinct property of being non-deceptive (avisaṃvādaka). John Taber, University of New Mexico Does Cognition Illumine Itself? Abstract It is a central claim of Yogācāra philosophy, defended by Dignāga and Dharmakīrti, that a cognition must apprehend itself in order to apprehend an object. Some believe this idea – known as the “self-awareness” (svasaṃvedana) doctrine – also to be central to certain European philosophical traditions (German idealism, Husserlian phenomenology). Building on previous work by Birgit Kellner and Alex Watson, this talk analyzes a key passage from Kumārila’s Ślokavārttika, Śūnyavāda chapter (vv. 179cd ff.), that critiques Dignāga’s so-called memory argument for this thesis – namely, that when one remembers something, one also remembers experiencing it. The passage reveals the complexity and sophistication of a Hindu-Buddhist controversy already at an early stage. Responding Birgit Kellner, Austrian Academy of Sciences
	A24-317 Language, Poiesis, and Buddhist Experiments with the Possible Seminar Theme: Emergent Forms: Buddhist Poetical Language and Its Contexts, Session 1 Sunday, 3:00 PM - 4:30 PM Convention Center-1B (Upper Level West) Roy Tzohar, Tel-Aviv University, Presiding Did poetical language and Buddhism co-create each other around the turn of the Common Era in South Asia? If so, how? And what are the implications for the beginnings of Indic literature and for the development of Buddhist, Vedic, Jain, and other literary and religious traditions of Asia? Our seminar hosts four research presentations on sources from early to early medieval South Asia, bringing them into conversation with each other through formal responses and general discussion. In this first session, Stephanie Jamison and Charles Hallisey examine the Rig Veda, Therīgāthā, Theragāthā, and other texts to revisit the historical problem of the beginnings of Indic literature and the role of Buddhist sources in contributing to forms of poiesis. Laurie Patton's and Thomas Mazanec's responses will broadly contextualize their presentations and raise questions in light of major scholarly paradigms concerning the history and development of Indic and Chinese literature. Stephanie Jamison, University of California, Los Angeles “Kāvya in the Dark Ages: The Source and the Missing Link” Abstract In this paper, building on earlier work of my own, I will argue that the art poetry that dominated Classical Sanskrit literary culture, kāvya, has as its stylistic source the elaborate and self-conscious style of the earliest Sanskrit text, the Rig Veda. Despite the large chronological gap between the Rig Veda and Classical kāvya, and the apparent absence of this genre in Sanskrit in the intervening centuries, a missing link can be identified in the discourses of power in Middle Indic languages and in early Buddhist literary works. Both the similarities in poetic devices and the shaping of subject matter will be addressed, with ample examples. Charles Hallisey, Harvard University Before Literature: Poeisis in the Poems of the First Buddhist Women and Men Abstract In his The Language of the Gods in the World of Men (2006), Sheldon Pollock argues that Buddhists played a key role in the “the astonishing expansion of the discursive realm of Sanskrit in the century or two around the beginning off the Common Era” (75). This is not only a historical issue. Pollock begins his exploration of this expansion self-consciously by saying, “To speak of beginnings, especially literary beginnings, is to raise a host of conceptual problems” (75). This paper explores how we see important literary beginnings in the Therīgāthā and the Theragāthā, collections of poems of the first Buddhist women and men, and how we can see in them traces of the protean emergence of Literature as a cultural form of poeisis in South Asia. This conceptual exploration focusing on Pali texts suggests that the historical problem of the beginnings of Literature in India is ripe for reconsideration. Responding Laurie Louise Patton, Middlebury College Thomas Mazanec, University of California, Santa Barbara
	A24-419 Language, Poiesis, and Buddhist Experiments with the Possible Seminar Theme: Emergent Forms: Buddhist Poetical Language and Its Contexts, Session 2 Sunday, 5:00 PM - 6:30 PM Convention Center-1B (Upper Level West) Nancy Lin, Institute of Buddhist Studies, Presiding Did poetical language and Buddhism co-create each other around the turn of the Common Era in South Asia? If so, how? And what are the implications for the beginnings of Indic literature and for the development of Buddhist, Vedic, Jain, and other literary and religious traditions of Asia? Our seminar hosts four research presentations on sources from early to early medieval South Asia, bringing them into conversation with each other through formal responses and general discussion. In this second session, Andrew Ollett and Aleksandra Restifo respectively examine the cultivation of kāvya by Buddhist poets in the first three centuries of the common era, and how Jains envisioned aesthetic experience in the context of renunciation through early dramatic literature. Laurie Patton's and Thomas Mazanec's responses will broadly contextualize their presentations and raise questions in light of major scholarly paradigms concerning the history and development of Indic and Chinese literature. Andrew Ollett, The University of Chicago Other Kuṣāṇa-period Poets Abstract Aśvaghōṣa is a good candidate for the “first author” of Sanskrit literature: the first historical person who is remembered to have composed a literary text. (Earlier authors composed non-literary texts, and earlier literary texts are attributed to non-historical persons.) Of course this is not quite true: Aśvaghōṣa belonged to a community of Buddhist monks who had, for several generations, been experimenting with writing kāvya. Although very little of their work survives in Sanskrit (or other languages, such as Gandhari, in which it was composed), this talk will examine the cultivation of kāvya by Buddhist poets other than Aśvaghōṣa in the first three centuries of the common era: Saṅgarakṣa (ca. 125 CE), Mātr̥cēṭa (ca. 125 or 230 CE), and Kumāralāta (ca. 250 CE). I am primarily concerned with the general outlines of their literary program, evinced by the formal features of their works and their explicit statements about literature and speech. Aleksandra Restifo, Florida International University The Effect of Drama: Towards a Theory of Aesthetic Experience in Early Jainism Abstract Renunciant traditions are known for their ambiguous views on drama since aesthetic experience distracts mendicants and laypeople from the right path rooted in equanimity and self-discipline. Having recognized the powerful effects of drama, however, Jains developed some of the earliest theories on drama and aesthetics, which they imbued with social and ritual efficacy. For instance, in the Piṇḍanijjuti, a drama about the world-emperor Bharata encourages five hundred kṣatriyas to renounce the world. In the Rāyapaseṇiya, a devotional performance by the god Sūriyābha represents a ritual internalization of the Jina’s biography. Through the analysis of these and other examples from early Jain literature, this paper argues that Jains envisioned aesthetic experience produced by drama and poetry as a source of social and ritual transformation, which affected individuals and communities. Responding Laurie Louise Patton, Middlebury College Thomas Mazanec, University of California, Santa Barbara Business Meeting Roy Tzohar, Tel-Aviv University, Presiding
	A24-439 Yogācāra Studies Unit Theme: Abhidharma and Yogācāra Sunday, 5:00 PM - 6:30 PM Hilton Bayfront-Aqua Salon AB (Third Level) Laura Guerrero, The College of William & Mary, Presiding This panel will explore the relationships between Abhidharma and Yogācāra traditions of Buddhism. In particular, this panel aims to examine the continuities and discontinuities between the two traditions either historically, philosophically, or both. Ching Keng, National Taiwan University Are Cognitive objects Pure or Impure? A Dispute from the Saṃdhinirmocana-sūtra Abstract In the Buddhist path toward liberation, cognitive objects serve as a double-edged sword: on one hand, they prompt cognitive and emotional attachments that hinder sentient beings from attaining liberation; on the other hand, they are essential for guiding one toward the liberating knowledge that alone serves as the key to liberation. This paper draws from the Yogācāra theory of three natures (trisvabhāva-nirdeśa) outlined in the Saṃdhinirmocana-sūtra to suggest that the key to resolving the above tension is the idea of pure dependent nature. When the dependent nature (i.e., cognitive objects) is detached from the imagined nature (i.e., concepts superimposed on cognitive objects), cognitive objects are perceived through non-conceptual perception. Only through non-conceptual perception of objects can further seeds of names and concepts be avoided in the storehouse consciousness. In essence, a proper mode of perceiving cognitive objects paves the way for their elimination. Chihying Wu, University of California, Berkeley Subjectivity from Abhidharma to Yogācāra Abstract This paper analyzes theories on subjectivity and how they changed from Abhidharma scholasticism to Yogācāra philosophy of mind. One of the most common and fundamental themes in Buddhist intellectual discourses is the denial of self (anātman). Throughout history, Buddhist thinkers have attempted to account for subjectivity, while rejecting self as the basis for perhaps the most intrinsic and ineradicable feature of our existence. The Sarvāstivāda-Sautrāntikas maintain the reductionist approach to self and explain our sense of self through the function of the mental factor, the view of self (satkāyadṛṣṭi). However, under this Abhidharmic model subjectivity is at best episodic and sporadic. The Yogācāra thinkers then proposed the theory of the afflicted mentation (kliṣṭaṁ manas) which constantly ruminates and is responsible for the sense of self. This paper investigates the transition from the Abhidharma to the Yogācāra model and the intellectual context in which this transition emerged. Szilvia Szanyi, Oxford University Fundamental (dis)agreement: Sthiramati on the Abhidharmic view of the nature and objects of consciousness Abstract Sthiramati is a prominent commentator of the Yogācāra tradition, however his contributions to tackling key issues in Buddhist philosophy are often overlooked in scholarship. In his commentary on Vasubandhu’s Triṃśikā, the Triṃśikāvijñaptibhāṣya, Sthiramati claims that one of the purposes of Vasubandhu’s work is to reject the ‘extreme doctrine’ of the Ābhidharmikas that “just like consciousness, the object of consciousness also substantially (dravyatas) exists”. Although Sthiramati sides with the Ābhidharmikas (over the Mādhyamikas) in accepting that consciousness substantially exists, he denies the same status to the objects of consciousness. This talk investigates Sthiramati’s attempt to adhere to fundamental Abhidharmic presuppositions in philosophy of mind and perception while criticizing and reinterpreting the Ābhidharmikas’ view that the object-condition (ālambana-pratyaya) of consciousness is a mind-independent entity. With regard to his critique, I pay special attention to how Sthiramati combines various metaphysical and epistemological considerations used for a similar purpose in Vasubandhu’s and Dignāga’s works. Business Meeting Douglas S. Duckworth, Temple University, Presiding Jingjing Li, Leiden University, Presiding

You are here

Online Program Book