________________
DIGNĀGA'S CRITICISM OF THE SAMKHYA THEORY OF PERCEPTION
15
Ba.) If their (theory of perception should be accepted,) there must be infinite number of sense-organs. They are of the opinion that each sense-organ operates upon its proper object, for the object to be apprehended by other sense does not come within its range. (In sofar as all objects are equally composed of three guņas, as is held by the Samkhyas, they are essentially not distinguished from each other. Accordingly,) the distinction between (five) classes (jäti) of (object, i. e.,) sound etc. is, (accoding to the Sāṁkhyas,) solely due to the increase (upacaya) and decrease (apacaya) of three gunas. (This theory, however, is not without involving difficulties. Although) the sound, (for instance,) is thought to be a single existence (as the object of the auditory sense), there must be, according as (three) gunas increase and decrease, infinite (varieties of sound, such as seven musical notes and the like, inasmuch as these all are recognized as being composed of three gunas.) Hence, one who apprehends the object (through his senses) must necessarily be in possession of infinite number of sense organs, (each of which apprehending its proper object.)
Bb.Or, only one sense-organ (would be sufficient to apprehend all kinds of object). (The Sámkhyas may assert as follows:-) "In that case, (i. e., in case of apprehending various sounds, such as seven musical notes and the like, all sounds) being equally (composed of) three guņas, are grouped under one and the same (sound-) class, (thus being apprehended alike through the auditory sense).” On this assumption, however, not only various sounds but also tangibles and other objects would be apprehended (through one sense-organ, because these also are similarly composed of three guņas). Consequently, only one senseorgan (would apprehend all sorts of object, and other sense-organs would be useless). Despite that there are various objects, three gunas, of which they are composed, remain the same. (In vidication of their theory, the Samkhyas may state the following :-“We need not presume that the number of sense-organ is limited according as the number of object is definitely
4) Cf. J. 62b,3 - 63a,1 (706,2-8).
5) Jinendrabuddhi makes reference to the following Samkhya reasoning: The deaf person, whose auditory sense-organ is defective, is unable to hear sound, although he keeps other nine organs (four buddhindriyas and five karmêndriyas) in good condition. This fact proves that the sound is apprehended only through the auditory sense-organ and not through any other, cf. J. 62b, 4 (70b, 2-3): ji skad du bśad pa "hon pas dban po dgu rnams yod pa na / sgra mi thos te / dehi phyir rna ba kho na sgraḥi yul can te / hdis pags pa la sogs pa rnams ran gi yul hjug par rtogs par byaho" şes so /
6) Both triguna and vişaya are predicated, along with other attributes, to vyakta in SK, k. 11. Cf. Yogabhäşya, ad. IV, 13: sarvam idam gunanam sanniveśa-viseşamätram iti paramarthato gun'atmanah.
7) Cf. J, 63a, 1-7 (70b, 8--71a, 7).
