________________
ON THE PROBLEMS OF KNOWLEDGE
117
Paurānikas, add two more - viz. sambhava (probability) and aitihya (tradition)- to those six. In the Maạimekhalai it is said that according to Vedavyāsa, Krtakoji and Jaimini there are ten sources of knowledge. Here we get two new designations, namely, svabhāva and pariseşa.. These two independent pramānas recognised by these authors seem to be what others have treated as two particular types of anumāna-viz. syabhāyānumāna and seşayat anumana. Th. Stcherbatsky notes that the followers of Caraka increase the number of the sources of knowledge upto eleven. 61 The Jaina logicians accept only two sources of knowledge-viz. direct and indirect. 62
Principles that determine the different numbers of the types of the sources of koowledge : Here the question naturally arises as to what are the different principles that determine the different numbers of the types of the sources of knowledge. Dinnāga, Dharmakirti and their followers declare that as many are the types of the sources of knowledge as are the types of the objects of knowledge.63 For these Buddhists there are only two types of objects viz. the unique particular (svalaksana) and the universal (sāmānyalaksana). The Mimārsakās seem to hold that not on the types of objects but also the types of the causal aggregates of knowledge determine the number of the types of the sources of knowledge 64 To this position the Naiyāyikas add that the types of the results of knowledge also determine the number of the types of the sources of knowledge.65 The Jainas are of the opinion that it is only the different natures of knowledge that determine the number of the types of the sources of knowledge. The knowledge possesses either of the two natures-vividness and blurredness. Hence even the sources of knowledge are two -- direct and indirect. 66
Rejection or inclusion of the sources not independently accepted : Those who accept a lesser number of the types of the sources of knowledge than the one accepted by others will have to answer two questions : (i) as to whether for them those other types of sources are no sources at all and (ii) if they are sources but not independent ones they are to be brought under which accepted type.
For the Cārvākas perception alone is an independent source of knowledge. All other sources are no sources at all. The Budd.
