________________
JOLY, 1928)
BOOK-NOTICES
133
tely. The ideas of syllogism and perception are correlative. Thus the treatise offers a careful study of a great subject, and is likely to prove invaluable to students of Indian logic and philosophy.
V.R.R. DIKSHITAR.
later Buddhists, has been made available for French scholars. According to Massonoursel himself the principal merit of this authorised translation be- longs to Mme. Manziarly. It is a well written thesis of eighteen chapters under the different headings of time (kala), space (akdba), knowledge (pramdya), perception (pratyakna), imagination (kal pand), particular essence (admányalaksana), the absolute (paramarthasat). In chapters 9 & 10 the source and results of perception (pramáná) are discussed. Chapter 13 is devoted to an examination of the theory of perceptiou in the Brahmanical systems. The theory of reason (anumdna), and the necessary relation between ideas (wydpti), negative judgments and the law of contradiction are discussed in chapter 14 and the following chapters.
In the opening pages of the work we are told who are the later Buddhist thinkers. These are Vasu. bandhu, Dignåga and Dharmakirti. It is remarked that Vasubhandu's work cannot be ranked as a logical treatise but only a manual of dialectics (Vádavidhana). Still the germs of Dignaga's sys. tem are found dissimulated in many passages of Vasubhandu's Abhidharmakosa. But the credit of founding a definite system of logic is given to Dig Dânga, and it is said that Dharmakirti gave to this system of Dignaga, a definite form. The treatise under review, though excellent and valuable in differ entrospects, suffers from one defect, namely the time and place of these writers have not been discussed in any place except a short paragraph (on p. 2) which says that both Dignåga and Dharmakirti were natives of the south and were Brahmans by birth. It is said that when Dignaga wrote his treatise, the principal schools of philosophy had been formu. lated. For Dignåga opposes the schools of Nyaya, Vaigesika, Sankhya and Mimâmsa. Ac. cording to this thesis Dignaga is indebted to Vasu. bandhu, as Dharmakirti to Dignâga. There is now the theory of Dr S. Krishnaswami Aiyangar of Madras University that, as Dignåga's system so completely agrees with that propounded in the groat Tamil classic Manintekhalal, there is every reason to believe that Dignåga might have been indebted to this treatise and its author on historical end chronological grounds. If this were to be established, it would solve the problem of fixing the date of Manimekhalai.
The present thesis is valuable in the sense that the different views propounded by the Buddhist writers are comparatively studied with the Vedants and Mimmse and other Brahmanical schools. In fundamentals they are not opposed. The Bud. dhist theory of first knowledge is corroborated by Kumarila, who admits different stages preceding the final assimilation of the object by the conscience. Dignaga and Dharmakirti are said to belong to the school of Yogacharas or pure idealists.
The chapter on the theory of reason is interesting. It does not differ from judgment. The essence and function of syllogism are discussed rather elabora
TAMIL LEXicos, published under the authority of
the University of Madras, vol. I in 3 paris (1924-26), pp. xxv and 632; and vol. II (2 parts so far published) (1926-27), pp. 633 to 952. Printed at the Madras Diocesan Press.
Students of Dravidian languages and philology are now to be found in many universities and in learned societies, and growing attention is being given to tho problems of Dravidian antiquities. To these the publication of the Tamil Lexicon by the University of Madras should be welcome. Government has been financing the Tamil Lexicon Office, started so long ago as 1912 and working under the control of the University of Madras which has appointed a special committee to do this work of fupervision. The belated publication of these parts, which constitute about one-third of the whole, and which cover only the vowels and part of the first consonant letter, is all the more welcome. It is expected that the whole book will run to about 3000 pages, and about 100,000 words, and will be completed in about 3 years from now. The plan of the Lexicon, explained in a small booklet issued along with the last of the parts under review, is based on strictly alphabetical arrangement and a transliteration of the words into English, "giving the equivalent pronunciation of Tamil words as written-to help those ignorant of or new to the Tamil alphabet," as otherwise the diversity of the pronunciation of words in the different parts of the country makes a phonetic rendering impossible and only an equivalent of the written worde pobrible. In the compound words, intercalated consonants or semi-vowels resulting from sandhi aro distinctly shown as in Ontu-k-kuti. Compound words are shown in their contracted forms generally; after the English transliteration of each word, the part of speech of the word is indicated in abbreviated form, according to the divisions of English grammar. The derivation is also given in most cases; and in many instances cognate words in the Dravidian languages are given in brackets. The compiling staff takes care to explain that these cognates have only & common Dravidian origin and that they make absolutely no suggestion that either the Tamil words are derived from the other languages or the reverse the case. The avowed object of the Lexicon is "to help foreign scholars in their study of Tamil," and hence the English definitions and meanings of the words are all important and their accuracy and strict grammatical form will determine the reputation and usefulness of the whole work. The English definitions should be such as should be clear, concise and not capable
