Semiosis and nāmarūpa: Exploring the Early Buddhist Theory of Signs Through Cognitive Semiotics

Buddhist thought and Peircean semiotics share a concern with how signs shape perception and cognition. From its earliest formulations, Buddhism adopted contemplative practice as a means of liberation from the effects of semiosis—the continuous process of sign interpretation. This article hypothesizes that the Buddhist concept of nāmarūpa (name-and-form) represents this semiosic process. After examining perceptual and sensory processes underlying nāmarūpa, the paper analyzes occurrences of this term, proposes its semiosic functions, and explores how contemplative practice aims to disengage from the power of signs.

Study at a glance

Abstract

This article aims to offer a comparative analysis between Buddhist thought and Peircean semiotics, situating the discussion within the framework of a Buddhist theory of signs that addresses aspects related to perceptual processes and cognitive experience. The influence of signs on cognition is what led Buddhism, from its earliest formulations, to adopt contemplative practice as a means of liberation from the effects of semiosis—an aspect that this paper hypothesizes to be represented by the nāmarūpa dyad. Following an examination of the perceptual and sensory processes underlying the functioning of nāmarūpa, the paper will analyze occurrences of this technical term and propose its semiosic functions, subsequently exploring how contemplative practice aspires to disengage from the power of signs.