________________
248. ] Nyāya-Kusumānjali
One who believes that Vyapti, the object of Tarka is realized by Vikalpa-jnana that arises after Pratyaksha should declare whether that Vikalpa-jnana is Pramana or not. In the former case, there arises an occasion of admitting one more Pramana in addition to the two Pramanas- Pratyaksha and Anumana; whereas in the latter case, it is like expecting an issue from an eunuch. ( 11 )
Notes:- It is the Bauddhas that do not recognise Tarka as one of the Pramanas. According to them there are only two Pramanas, the non-reflective perception ( Nirvikalpaka Pratyaksha ) and inference. When they are asked as to which Pramana performs the function of ascertaining Vyapti and if they reply that it is the work of Vikalpaka-inana arising after Pratyaksha, this statement of theirs requires further consideration. If they look upon Vikalpa-jnana as dealing with the same objects as come under Nirvikalpa Pratyaksha, the Vikalpa-inana fails to produce Vyapti-jnana, because it is not even possible for Nirvikalpa Pratyaksha to do so. If they consider that Vikalpa-jnana is independent of Pratyaksha and is not bound to deal with the same objects as come under the province of the latter, there arises a further question as to whether Vikalpa-jnana is Pramana or not. If they recognise this as Pramana, there arises a fallacy in their doctrines of logic, for, they are then forced to accept an additional Pramana. It will be an additional Pramana because it cannot be included in Pratyaksha, as the latter is solely non-reflective,
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
