________________
On the Quadruple Division of the Yogaśāstra
327
(who is anyway an extremely remarkable author). In justifying the question kimlaksanam of the mūla, referring to prameyam 108, he explains that what is meant is a particular « object of valid cognition » (prameyaviseşa) defined by him, thus 109: y a dvişa yam tatt vajñānamanya jñānānu payogitvena i vanih sreyasangam bhavati, mithyājñānam ca samsāram pratanoti, tatpram eyam 1: « Object of valid cognition is that the tattvajñāna of which forms a means for [attaining] liberation without being of any use for [the acquisition of] other knowledge 110, and the mithyājñāna (i.e. false knowledge) [of which] extends Samsāra ». Bhāsarvajña adds the further explanations 111:
tad eva tatt vato jñātavy am sarvadā bhāvitavy am (read: bhāvayitavyam) ca / na tu kita sa mkhyā dy api prameyam teşām jñānasya nih sreya sānu payogitvāt / 112 taccaturvidham: heyam, tasya nirvartakam, hānam ātyanti kam, tasyo pāya iti /. « This is that has to be known according to its true nature and what has always to be kept present. The number of beetles, and similar things, however, does not equally represent an object of valid cognition113, because knowing them is of no use for [attaining] liberation. This [object of valid cognition] is of four kinds, viz. (iti) that which is to be avoided, that which brings it (i.e. the former) about, absolute avoidance [and] the means for [attaining] it (i.e. absolute avoidance) ».
108. N(yāya) Bhūş(ana), ed. by. Svāmī Yogindrānanda, Benares, 1968, p. 436.1 f.
109. NBhūş 436.11-12; passages which literally agree with formulations of the Nyāyasära are printed in spaced type.
110. Similarly Nyāyamañjari (ed. by K. S. Varadacharya, ORI Series no. 46, Mysore, 1969). 22.5-6: ātmāpavargaparyanta- (read: ātmādyapavargaparyanta-) dvādaśavidhaprameyajñānam tāvat anyajñānānaupayikam eva sākşād apavargasādhanam iti vaksyāmah (viz. at the beginning of the prameyabhāga); for anyajñānānau payikam Cakradhara (Nyāyamañjarigranthibhanga, ed. by Nagin J. Shah, L.D. Series 35, Ahmedabad, 1972) gives the following explanation (5.12-14): anyajñānam anaupayikam advāram anupāyo yasya / upāya evau payikam iti svārthe vinayādipäthät thak hrasvas ca (cf. Pān. 5.4.34 and Ganapatha 211.3) / anyajñānasya vānupāyah sad apavargasadhanam na punaḥ pramānādijñānam iva prameyajñānopāyatayety arthan // It is, of course, the second of these explanations which has to be accepted; the expression used in the NBhüş, viz. anyajñānānupayogitvenaiva, is unequivocal in this respect; what is meant in both cases is to point out that the prameyajñana differs from the knowledge acquired with the help of means of valid cognition, etc., in that the former is of direct importance for liberation.
111. NBhūş 436.14-16.
112. The formulations in the Nyāyasāra are slightly different, viz. na ca kitasankhyādi tajjñānasyānu payogitvät.
113. The editor of the NBhūş refers here to Pramāņavārttika 2.33: tasmād anuştheyagatam jñānam atra vicāryatām/ kitasamkhyāparijñānam tasya nah kvopayujyate //.
