________________ Miszellen zur erkenntnistheoretischen Schule des Buddhismus 181 explains in fragment 14: bhuta utpannah ...5. bhutavacanam aprajatasyesvaradeh ... ... nityasya pratisedharthame, and ends with an analysis of the compound as a dvandva: pramanan casau bhutas ceti pramanabhutah. While it is quite clear that Jinendrabuddhi explains the meaning of obhuta under the influence of Dharmakirti's interpretation, his analysis of the compound as a dvandva results in a strange meaning of the term: the Buddha is accordingly said "to be a means of valid cognition, an authority, as well as to have become". In other words, the second member of the compound is no longer understood as an equivalent of the copula - now being understood with the first member of the compound, pramana, - but as a predicate in its own right. Thus the term combines two predicates of the Buddha: he is an authority (pramana) and he has become (bhuta). It is evident that Jinendrabuddhi tried in this rather forced way to reconcile Dharmakirti's interpretation of the word obhuta- with the fact that Dignaga's compound does not show a con-formation. This means that, following VETTER, we indeed have to translate the term pramanabhuta in Dignaga's mangala as "who is a pramana" but as interpreted by Dharmakirti and the following tradition the term must be translated as "who has become a pramana". 4 Ibid., 100. 5 The Tibetan text continues: ... byun ba ces pa'i don to, where byun ba may translate either *pradurbhuta or *prajata. 6 Cf. ibid., note 18 for this sentence.
