Vaishali Institute Research Bulletin 2

SR No.: 522602
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: G C Chaudhary
Publisher: Research Institute of Prakrit Jainology & Ahimsa Mujjaffarpur
Publication Year: 1974
Total Pages: 342
Language: English, Hindi
Classification: Magazine, India_Vaishali Institute Research Bulletin, & India
File Size: 7 MB

Page 59

VAISHALI INSTITUTE RESEARCH BULLETIN NO. 2
As both cognition and non-cognition are admitted to be instrument of knowledge in the Nyaya system, Jayanta Bhatta accepts collocation of the two as the nature (Svarupa) of pramăna1. According to the Nyaya an object is not known without its contact with the sense, If objects unconnected with the senses were to be cognised then all the objects will be known, but no object, which is beyond our ken is ever known. Moreover instrument is always different from the subject and object. "I see the jar with the eyes." In this example eye is the instrument which is different from both the agent, 'I' and the act of seeing. Therefore, knowing itself can't be the instrument". To this the Jainas reply that even when eye is in contact with the ether, along with a jar, there is no knowledge of the former. So far as the difference of means and result is concerned it can be maintained otherwise. It is only the sentient cognition, which can, like light, illuminate the object and not the insentient sense-contact. Similarly collocation of different causes including cognition, admitted by Jayanta Bhatta as the means of knowledge, can't be so regarded. Collocation of causes, like sensecantact, is insentient. Only a sentient cause can produce sentient knowledge. Moreover, the collocation will not be a direct cause because it will first produce cognition and then only will lead to knowledge. An indirect cause is not a karana.1
50
The Vaiseṣikas also define pramana as the flawless knowledge." However, the author of the Vyomavati, following the line of the Naiyayikas, regards contact, and cognition as the pramana.
Samkhya and Yoga consider pramaņas to be the modification of intellect, which assumes the form of object. This is also not accep 1. अव्यभिचारिणीमसंदिग्ध ामर्थोपलब्ध विदधती बोधावोधस्वभा सामग्री प्रमाणम्, ataratazama fe ata aq. Nyayamañjarī, p 12.
2. ag afandfanù fa wafgargqafsaffa 24: 1 afa̸ unfagenfq ayrıdıन्द्रियमर्थं गृहणीयात् व्यवहितोऽपि ततोऽर्थ उपलभ्येत, न चोपलभ्यते तस्मादस्ति afa. Nyayamañjarī, p. 69
3. Vide, libid. pp. 66-67.
4. For detailed criticism of the Nyaya view of pramana, See Nyayakumudacandra, pp. 40 41 and Prameyakamalamartanda, p 19.
5. g fal, Kaṇāda Sutra, 9,2.12.
6, Vide Vyomavati on the Prasastapādabhagya, p. 553.
7. (i) सांख्यस्सु बुद्धिवृत्तिः प्रमाणमिति प्रतिपन्नः विषयाकारपरिणतेन्द्रियादिवृत्त्यनुपातिनी बुद्धिवृत्तिरेव पुरुषमुपर जयन्ति प्रमाणम्
Nyayamañjarī, p. 24.
(ii) इन्द्रियप्रणालिकयार्थसन्निकर्षेण लिगज्ञानादिना वा बुद्धेरर्थाकारा वृत्तिजा Samkhyapravacanabhāṣya I. 87.
8. प्रमाणं वृत्तिरेव च Yogavāsistha, p. 30.