Indian Logic Part 01

Author(s): Nagin J Shah
Publisher: Sanskrit Sanskriti Granthmala

Page 24

INTRODUCTION
15
knowledge of the twelve prameyas posited by his school is derived from scripture alone. What follows is still more curious. For now Jayanta proceeds to underline 'the utility of the padārtha pramana. But instead of simply saying that the four pramānas posited by his school are an authentic means of valid cognition, he argues that the authoritative character of a scripture is established with the help of an inference while the formulation of a relation of invariable concomitance so essential for all inference inevitably requires the help of perception so that the three pra māņas verbal testimony, inference and perception hinge together; to this is added that the fourth pramāna analogy too is of use in certain practical cases. 19 Here again Jayanta is presenting his case in a rather topsyturvy forni. For his own treatment of pramāna makes an orderly progress by first covering perception, then inference, then analogy and lastly verbal testimony - while handling scripture as a particular case of verbal testimony. True, Jayanta's coverage of verbal testimony is inordinately lengthy and in the course of it there appears that theologically motivated fourth Chapter, but even then no impression is here created as if the investigation into, perception, inference and analogy is just preparatory to the investigation into verbal testimony. Nor is an impression created as if the investigation into verbal testimony is primarily aimed at demonstrating that Vedas are a composition by God and not an authorless composition. As a matter of fact, the demonstration in question (occurring towards the beginning of the fourth chapter is of a modest bulk: (significantly the demonstration of the allied metaphysical thesis that God exists and that a word is not an eternal substance - a demonstration occurring in the third Chapter-is much more lengthy and that unmistakably proves that Jayanta's genuine interest lies in philosophical rather than theological problems). The simple reason why Jayanta is presently over-emphasizing the importance of the problem of verbal testimony in general and scriptural testimony in particular is that he has persuaded himself that the primary concern of the Nyāya school is to vindicate the validity of Vedic testimony. "The same attitude leads him to say that the fourteen padārthas samsaya etc. are posited by his school because they are of help