________________
Darsana
449
late cognition only. In the case of inarticular cognition both are on the same level. Darśana of a person in the first stage of spiritual development (gunasthāna) is just like that in the fourth or further stages.
But, Abhayadeva divides darśana also into samyak and mithyā. He does not care whether it leads to any judgement or not, He says that every cognition, whether articulate or inarticulate is samyak, if its upholder is a samyagdrsti and it is mithyā in the reverse case.
We have mentioned above the Agamic view about the validity of darśana. Umāsvāti? has advocated the same view. With the advent of logical period the question of samyak and mitbyā changed into pramāna and apramāna and the criteria also changed from subjective to objective. The question arose whether in respect of the object darśana is pramāṇa, apramāņa or something beyond the two.
All the Jaioa logicians accept decision or judgement as the essential condition for pramāņa. They express it through different terms like adhyavasāya vayavasāya niscaya or nirnaya etc. By this they wanted to exclude the Buddhist perception from the category of piamäna; but it held true in the case of darśana also. Consequently, darśana was not included into pramāņa. Māņikyanandins and Devasūriu go to the extent of calling it pramāṇabhāsa (invalid cognition ) and specify its exclusion from the category of pramāņa.
Abbayadevas bas accepted darśapa as pramāna, but his interpretation of sanmati follows the Agamic school.
Yašuvijaya6 in bis Tarkabbāsā excludes darśana from the category of pramāņa. But, in Jõāpabindu be accepts it as 1. Tativārthabhāşya 2/9 2. Pramāṇamımāṁsā p. 5 3. Parlkşāmukha I. 27 4. Pramāṇanaya Tattvāloka I. 5. Sanmati Țikā p. 553 6. Jaina Tarkabhāsā p. 1
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
