Book Title: Indologica Taurinensia
Author(s): Colette Caillat, Siegfried Lienhard, Irma Piovano, Saverio Sani
Publisher: Comitato AIT
View full book text
________________
38
Piotr Balcerowicz
tions of validity 21. All these and similar passages prove that there can be no doubt that NA was written after Dharmakirti 22. Furthermore, NA reveals its author's general anticipation of possible criticism, e.g. verses NA 2-323 are meant to combat possible censure that the definition of cognitive criterion (stated in NA 1) is unnecessary. It is rather doubtful that the author of NA, so sensitive as regards possible criticism, might at the same time be the author of STP, so much oblivious of how controversial the verse of STP 2.1 could appear 24 .
3. Leaving aside a possible relationship between pramāṇa and upayoga in both works, let us take a look at the paradigms of valid types of cognition and their division into kinds of cognitive criterion (pramāna).
3.1. Let us begin with NA. We do not find any mention of cognitive faculties (upayoga) or insight / conation (darśana) there in the first place. After formulating the definition of pramāna in the first hemistich 25, NA lcd states that there are only two pramānas: *[Cognitive criterion is) two-fold: perception as well as indirect cogni
21. See BALCEROWICZ (2001a: xvii-xviii). 22. See BHATT (2000) and BALCEROWICZ (2001a: (2001a: iii-xl)). 23. NA 2-3: prasiddhāni pramāṇāni vyavahāraś ca tat-krtah/
pramāņa-lakṣaṇasyôktau jñāyate na prayojanam // prasiddhānām pramāņānām laksanôktau prayojanam/
tad-vyāmoha-nivettiḥ syād vyāmūdha-manasām iha // - - '[Rejoinder:) "Cognitive criteria are well-known and everyday practice is accomplished by them; [therefore) no purpose is known for stating the definition of cognitive criterion". [Reply:] The purpose for stating the definition of cognitive criteria, (although they are) well-known, should be the eradication of disorientation concerning that [definition of cognitive criterion) in the case of the disoriented-minded here.
On this see BALCEROWICZ (2001a: Xv-xvi: 8 4).
24. Another point of divergence is the way STP and NA approach logical issues and their different attitudes towards the question of reasoning and the proof formula (sādhana, pañcavayava-vākya). These issues are discussed at length in BALCEROWICZ (2001b: 360-362).
25. NA lab: pramānam sva-parâbhāsi jñānam, bādha-vivarjitam / - ‘The cognitive criterion is cognition revealing itself and something else [different from it and it is) free from subversion.'
