________________
The Nyāya Conception of Universals
241
variation or identity of objects has no influence on the character of the cognitions. The difference of cognitional character then can be accounted for by the difference of internal causes only, and not by the difference or identity of objects, which are responsible only for the difference of contents. The Naiyayika's position receives further corroboration from the consideration that difference of character of cognitions is not felt along with the objects, but only by introspection. Were it a character of the object, it should be felt when the object is cognised. The difference of character, perceptual or nonperceptual, cannot therefore be made the ground for denying objective validity to non-perceptual cognitions, since the objects have been shown to have absolutely no bearing upon it.
Let us make a retrospective survey of the Buddhist arguments which have been put forward to negative the objective reality of the universal. The psychological interpretation of conceptual thought as negative fictions has been shown to be contrary to the verdict of experience as well as to the canons of logic. The attempt to controvert the objective foundation of concepts on the basis of positive-cum-negative predication has also been shown by Udayana to be inconclusive and indecisive in its results. The contention based on the difference of contents and qualitative difference of cognitions is aimed at disproving the objective foundation of non-perceptual cognitions. But Udayana has shown that a psychologically more plausible and a logically more satisfactory explanation of the knowledge situations, on which the Buddhist banks, is possible on a realistic basis. The further argument of Jñanaśrī, that synthetic reference of concepts is explicable in terms of negation, has been shown to be inspired by partial observation and imperfect study of the nature of conceptual thought. Udayana insists that the synthetic reference cannot be unfounded and uncaused. Nor can the unitive ideation be due to a plurality of reals which have no common objective bond among them. We shall advert more fully to this theory at a later stage. The attempt to affiliate the unitive meaning of conceptual thought to an identical principle, unrelated to a number of individuals, is equally doomed to failure like the previous hypotheses, because of the
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
