Friends, for those of you who teach Indian philosophy regularly and may be teaching in the fall, I wanted to give notice that Stephen Phillips and my translation of the Nyāyasūtra with early commentaries will be out in September. Hackett has an early webpage up now, and it will be fleshed out in coming months: https://www.hackettpublishing.com/new-forthcoming/new-2017-titles/the-nyaya-sutra
We’ve done our best to make this as accessible as possible for undergraduate teaching without sacrificing accuracy. It is also select: we have included the portions thought most relevant to direct philosophical engagement with the school in the least cumbersome way.
I thought I’d mention it now since some people may be looking for Nyāya materials they can use in the classroom, and we sometimes have to do our course prep fairly early in the summer in anticipation of the fall semester.
That’s great! Looking forward to it!!!!
Many thanks for the info and congratulations!
(Please be so kind as to announce it once again in September)
Great! Does it have the whole bhāṣya? I found that the Nyāya Bhāṣya on sūtras I.1-10 made for a really good introduction to Indian logic, and it would be great to have a better translation than the Gangopadhyaya.
It has much of the Bhāṣya, but not all of it. For 1.1.1-10, it has most of it, along with a great deal of the Vārttika, and select passages from the Tātparyaṭīkā (for example, in defending conceptualized perception as veridical even has he allows for nirvikalpika pratyakṣa under NS 1.1.4).
The way we’ve structured the book, 1.1.3-8 are in our chapter 1 (Knowledge Sources). In fact the entirety of our chapter 1 is those sūtras with commentaries.
Our chapter 9 (on debate) then goes into more detail with the sūtras on the specific argument components (pratijñā, hetu, etc.) along with (mostly, but not exclusively) the Bhāṣya.
Congratulations! I look forward to trying this out in some of my courses!
I can report that Matthew sent me a draft of chapter three awhile back, and it looks like just the right balance between accuracy and accessibility that is sorely lacking in most existing sources for teaching Indian philosophy in undergraduate courses.
I second what Ethan said. I test-ran parts of the book in a class on Indian philosophy of language and the students found it one of the most accessible translations in the course. They were able to engage with the material rather than stumbling over parenthetical interpolations or lengthy Sanskritized sentences
(Stephen was my advisor and Matt is my friend and fellow alum at UT, so perhaps I cannot be entirely without bias. But the student response speaks for itself.)