Page Text
________________
ON VYAPTI
127
a standstill. As for instance, if one doubts that smoke is necessarily produced by fire he would not try to get fire for the purpose of igniting his cigar.22 But this view is not sound because our practice is not based on the absolute certainty of knowledge. Do people have the absolute certainty that the train by which they travel shall not meet with an accident ? They do not have. Yet they travel by the train. This shows that certainty is not essential for our everyday practice.23 The Naiyāyikas seem to be conscious of the fact that the method of agreement, the method of difference, the joint method of agreement and difference, the non-observation of any contradictory instance (vyabhicārāgraha) and even the method of practical contradiction (tarka) could not give us the knowledge of necessity or absolute certainty. So, they posited a type of extra-ordinary (alaukika) perception which involves no sense-operation and yet grasps the necessary and universal connections. To this perception they give the name sāmānyalaksana. This perception enables a cogniser to become directly aware of all the past, future and present instances of a class of objects through observing the 'universal' commonly residing in the objects. When we perceive fire and smoke we also perceive the universals 'fireness and smokeness and through this latter perception we perceive all the actual and possible instances of fire and smoke.24 But this view of the Naiyāyikas is nothing more than a hypothesis formulated in order to solve the problem of induction. It is not a fact of experience.25 Not only the Naiyāyikas but the Jainas also posit some extra-ordinary experience supposed to grasp necessary connections. Even the Buddhist philosopher Prajñākaragupta offers a similar explanation. According to him yogic perception is the means of cognising necessary connections.26 We shall call these theories by one name 'intuition theories. As it was impossible for these ancient philosophers to give up the ideal of certainty and necessity, they took refuge under the shelter of intuition. But to take shelter under intuition is to escape from the difficulty rather than solve it. Again, the intuition of any and every individual person does not possess so much authenticity and universality as to be made the basis of a sound and commonly accepted philosophy. That the connection is necessary cannot be established either by non-observation or by observation - this is endorsed by Dharmakīrti. The observation of positive instances (sapaksas) is not enough to prove that the relation is universal and necessary. The mere non-observation of one object without another in
| SR No. | 006972 |
| Book Title | Indian Philosophy |
| Original Sutra Author | N/A |
| Author | Nagin J Shah |
| Publisher | Sanskrit Sanskriti Granthmala |
| Publication Year | 1998 |
| Total Pages | 162 |
| Language | English |
| Classification | Book_English |
| File Size | 14 MB |