________________ xiv INTRODUCTION that its study became essential even for a monk primarily concerned with spiritual discipline and progress. 4. Dharmakirti and his tradition When Acharya Dinnaga-criticised the logical tenets of other philosophical systems, a reaction in the Hindu philosophical systems was but natural. Udyotakara, an exponent of Nyaya philosophy, criticised the views of Dinnaga and established the views of his own system. The same was done by Kumarila, an advocate of Mimamsa. The Jaina Acharyas like Mallavadi also refuted the views held by Dinnaga. Consequently the Buddhist scholars became more cautious with regard to their logical analysis. Dharmakirti was one of them; he analysed the views of Dinnaga thoroughly and carefully. Moreover, he criticised the views of Udyotakara, Kumarila, etc. and stringthened the foundations of Buddhist Logic. His target of criticism was not only the Vedic systems but also some of the subjects of Buddhist scholars like Dinnaga, Isvarasena, etc., whose points did not appeal him. He thus became a real Vartikakara of Dirnaga and firmly established the science of Logic, so essential to expound the Vijnanavada. According to Bu-ston, all the seven works of Dharmakirti are just the Vartikas on the Pramana-samuchchaya. But Dharmakirti himself admits this only in the case of Pramana-vartika and not of others. As a matter of fact, all the works by Dharmakirti are meant to explain the subjects treated in the Pramana-samuchchaya ; and hence, they may be called as the Vartikas upon them. It is an irony of fate that the works of Dharmakirti, which were intended to explain the theories of the Pramana-samuchchaya, should have superseded the original work by their superior merit. The following are the seven treatises by Dharmakirti :(1) Pramana-vartika, (2) Pramana-vini schaya,1 (3) Nyaya bindu, (4) Hetu-bindu,2 (5) Vada-nyaya, (6) Sambandha1 Available in Tibetan only. 2 The commentary on it is extant in Sanskrit but the Text has been retranslated into Sanskrit from Tibetan.
