________________
204
INDIAN LOGIC
thoroughly unexceptionable though also platitudinous. So according to Dharmakīrti the only essential characteristic of cognition is that it cognises itself (Dharmakirti himself emphasizes the point by saying that the relation of 'bearing the same form is possible between any two objects whatever, so that this is not what distinguishes a piece of cognition from what is not cognition)so. But the difficulty with this characteristic is that it contains reference to cognition itself and so cannot serve as a defining characteristic of cognition. Thus judged from the standpoint of formal correctness, Dharmakirti's definition of: cognition turns out to be defective. Yet in the course of describing cognition he has said things that prove to be of material worth in the task of defining cognition. A tolerably correct definition of cognition should be the activity on account of which a particular sensory stimulation becomes the signal for a particular motor response. Thus when, taking its clue from the sensory stimulation caused by a physical object, an organism acts in relation to this object and finds it useful, this clue becomes a confirmed signal for the presence of the object thus proved to be useful; likewise, when under similar conditions the organism finds the object harmful, the clue concerned becomes a confirmed signal for the prsence of the object thus proved to be harmful. In both cases appropriate relationships are established between the concerned elements of the sensory-motor apparatus; it is the employment of these earlier established relationships that constitutes memory, an activity which plays so crucial a role in converting a 'trial and error clue' into a confirmed signal. This much is broadly true of all living organisms but in the case of man something qualitatively new emerges as a result of the employment of words. Thus through a mere verbal instruction a man can be taught to treat a particular sensory stimulation as a signal for the presence of a particular object, useful or harmful, though in this case too better results follow when verbal instruction is accompanied by the actual causing of the concerned sensory stimulation. All this is directly relevant for an intelligent appreciation of Dharmakirti's position. Thus he is of the view that the sensory stimulation produced by an object in a person makes this person cognise this object in its entirety. But Dharmakirti has himself taught that right cognition is that which enables one to undertake successful activity in relation to its object, while it seems obvious that bare sensory. experience enables one to undertake successful activity in relation to its object only when elements of this experience are recognised as a
