Ratnakīrti's Proof of Exclusion by Patrick McAllister (review)

Eleventh-century Buddhist philosopher Ratnakīrti has garnered increasing scholarly interest over the past two decades. The conciseness and logical precision of his work, which encapsulates arguments from the lengthier works of his teacher, Jñānaśrīmitra, make him a convenient window into the last phase of Buddhist philosophy in India. We now have reliable translations of most of the extant philosophical works of Ratnakīrti, and a number of studies have explicated his philosophical views on a range of issues. Patrick McAllister's recent book, Ratnakīrti's Proof of Exclusion, makes an important contribution to this growing body of scholarship by providing not only a clear and precise translation of the Apohasiddhi, but also a new critical edition of the text, and an extensive analysis of Ratnakīrti's formulation of the theory of exclusion. McAllister thereby advances significantly our understanding of Ratnakīrti's views on the ontological status of universals, his theory of language, and his account of conceptual cognition.

The theory of exclusion (apoha) is a distinctive aspect of the tradition of Buddhist philosophy tracing back to Dignāga and Dharmakīrti, which embraces a radical nominalism holding that ultimately only absolute momentary particulars exist. The apoha theory is designed to provide an account of the meaning of general terms by appealing to the exclusion of others (anyāpoha) as an alternative to positing real universals. On this view, the word "cow" is able to refer to all particular cows, not because of the presence of a universal, cowhood, in all the particulars, but rather because the word "cow" signifies the exclusion of all those particulars that are not cows. This theory was the subject of much debate over several centuries both within Buddhism and with opponents from the Nyāya and Mīmāṃsā traditions. McAllister's thorough study sheds light not only on Ratnakīrti's late formulation of and argument for the theory, but also on its development during the period from Dharmakīrti to Jñānaśrīmitra.

The book begins with a concise discussion of Ratnakīrti's central philosophical views, setting the context for the exposition of the theory of exclusion. McAllister then undertakes an extensive examination of all available manuscripts of the Apohasiddhi, providing a new critical edition of the text in transliteration with references to all variant manuscripts, which is likely to become the definitive edition for future scholarship. The translation itself aims for scholarly precision over readability, but succeeds admirably in achieving both. References to a detailed outline of the argument are provided in the margins, helping the reader find a clear path through the dense and detailed thicket of arguments and objections considered in the text. The extensive footnotes offer a wealth of references to both modern scholarship and to the works of earlier Buddhist authors and their opponents, setting the arguments into their proper historical context. This goal is also advanced in the fourth chapter, which offers comments on selected passages from the text, tracing key elements of Ratnakīrti's argument through a range of earlier authors, not only from Buddhist sources, but also the works of their Nyāya and Mīmāṃsā critics, often providing translations of key passages. Many other relevant passages from Dharmakīrti, Śāntarakṣita, and Kamalaśīla are translated in an appendix, revealing much about the evolution of the theory of exclusion.

One notable feature of the translation is that the square brackets, prominent in many scholarly translations, have been printed in a lighter grey. These brackets are used to signal words, implicit in the original, that have been added by the translator. This stylistic tendency has been criticized by some for inhibiting the readability of translations, including Parimal Patil, who emphasized this point by publishing his 2011 translation of the Apohasiddhi under the title, "Without Brackets." While the elimination of brackets certainly aids the readability of a text, there...