Book Title: Indian Logic Part 02 Author(s): Nagin J Shah Publisher: Sanskrit Sanskriti GranthmalaPage 69
________________ 58 INDIAN LOGIC definition as formulated by Isvarakrsna perception is of the nature of the ascertainment of the object concerned; Jayanta objects that this definition would apply to inference, etc. as well inasmuch as they too are after all of the nature of the ascertainment of the object concerned.' Some commentator understood this definition to say that perception is of the nature of the ascertainment of a front-lying object; Jayanta objects that on this understanding too the definition would apply to inference, etc. inasmuch as they too are often of the nature of the ascertainment of a front-lying object. Then Jayanta independently observes : "So far as lucidity is concerned it is present there in all cognition in respect of the object concerned.''3 This implies that somebody had defined perception as a cognition that is lucid in character, a well known procedure of the Buddhists and one that amounts to dogmatically asserting that perception is perception; so understandable is Jayanta's present dissatisfaction with this procedure. Lastly Jayanta considers the following plea offered by the Sankhya philosopher : “Ascertainment of the object concerned is what is common to all types of cognition, so that the non-perceptual types of cognition can be defined by adding appropriate qualifications to the present definition of perception;”?+ Jayanta retorts : “Then why at all offer a definition of perception and not say that perception is that type of cognition which is different from the so many nonperceptual types of cognition.''s Here too Jayanta's attitude is understandable. SECTION TWO : INFERENCE Having completed his treatment of the problem of perception Jayanta takes up the problem of inference. Here too he bases himself on the relevant Nyāyasūtra aphorism but here too his treatment of the problem is highly independent. However, in connection with the problem of inference one more point is to be noted. For as things stood certain important topics connected with this problem Jayanta was bound to discuss elsewhere. E.g., avayava and hetvābhāsa are two independent Nyāya padārthas, the former meaning the steps to be employed while offering inference in the course of a debate', the latter meaning 'pseudo-probans'; and these two important topics.connected with the problem of inference Jayanta discusses while coming to coverPage Navigation
1 ... 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236