HISTORICITY OF INDIAN PHILOSOPHY: KEY RESEARCH ISSUES

Abstract

B a c k g r o u n d . The article reveals the key methodological problems of historical and philosophical research of the creative heritage of Indian thinkers. The first of them is the definition of criteria for recognizing the philosophical component in the content of the intellectual discourse of Indians, reflected in the literary heritage that does not lose its relevance and has been developing for several millennia. The second is the prospects for the historical study of Indian philosophy and the arguments and counterarguments of this approach.

M e t h o d s . We used general scientific methods, such as analysis, synthesis, comparison and description to reveal specific problems of the methodology of studying the history of Indian philosophy. An interdisciplinary approach was implemented, which made it possible to use the best practices of historians, methodologists of science and philologists.

R e s u l t s . The definition of the criteria for the historicity of the original source in historicist theories is inextricably linked with the definition of the criteria for its philosophic nature, in particular, in the works of Chattopadhyay D. and Ruben V. The vulnerability and relevance of historicist concepts in modern times argues for the expediency of recognizing the relative autonomy of questions: "What is philosophical?" and, "What is historical?" in the methodological substantiation of research on the history of Indian philosophy.

The lack of a clear and distinct historical identity in the Indian cultural tradition has deprived researchers of the reliance on periodization that would have been formed by the Indians themselves during the development of their philosophical thought. This explains the significant differences between the most well-known methods of periodization of Indian philosophy, among other things, in the works of Radhakrishnan S., Biardo M., Franco E. At the same time, the widespread attitude among Indians to the original texts as timeless and unquestioningly authoritative, the lack of signs of "Paradigm revolutions" in the Kun interpretation of this lexeme, led to the rejection of periodization of Indian philosophy, for example, in the works of Chatterjee S. and Dutt D. And a critical reinterpretation of the tradition of periodization of the history of philosophy in the Western world became the basis for the original periodization of Plott J. Due to the lack of verifiable grounds for asserting the objectivity of the historical process as a whole, researchers are free to create certain ways of their own periodization of the history of Indian philosophy in accordance with the needs of their research and with a clear recognition of their convention and instrumentality.

C o n c l u s i o n s . The basis of the discussion about the historicity of Indian philosophy in modern times is the question: is it justified to talk about history when it is not about distinguishing the modern from the outdated? The vulnerability of the assumption that it is possible to study the works of representatives of a tradition that has been going on for several millennia, without taking into account the specifics of the specific historical situation of the time and the conditions of their creation, encourages us to recognize the expediency of observing the principle of historicityin the research of Indian philosophy. The historical approach in the study of Indian philosophy is not the only possible one, but it fully meets the modern needs of scientific discourse and can be recognized as one of the priorities.