________________
AUTHORITY AS A SOURCE OF KNOWLEDGE
113
the Vedas only. It does not recognise secular testimony as an independent source of knowledge. The Vedas, according to Sānkhya, are neither eternal, nor composed by a person, nor God. They are spontaneous revelation of truth to the enlightened seers. They are self-evident (Fa:garu). Thus, we can say that Sankhya also is an intuitionist in this respect.
The Vaiśesika does not admit testimony as a separate source of knowledge and includes it into inference. The validity of testimony, the Vaišeşika argues, depends upon reliability of the author. The Vedas also do not possess intrinsic validity. They are valid because they are composed by God and He is omniscient and faultless.
Gautama defines testimony as the instruction of a trustworthy person, having immediate knowledge of moral law (P) and competent to guide others in the path of duty. He divides testimony into two kinds, viz., testimony about perceptible objects and the testimony about imperceptible objects. The modern Naiyayikas divide it into secular (for) and scriptural (àfa). As far as the validity of perceptive or secular testimony is concerned it is not intrinsic. In regards to imperceptible objects it is intrinsic.
This survey of Indian systems leads us to the following conclusions :
1. There are three types of authority; personal, intuitional and traditional. The personal authority is again of two types; that related with the person of extraordinary knowledge and that with the person of ordinary knowledge. As far as the authority of a person with
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
