________________
126
Review
mon treats this problem very elegently, examining its various definitions and their probable defects. She also gives different views on the nature of probandum and probans and about the number of steps of a syllogism accepted by different schools.
The nature and scope of other Pramānas like Pratyakşa, Upamāna, Arthāpatti, Sabda, Abhāva and others, form the subject matter of the chapter XI. Though the narration of Pramaņas in this chapter, has no direct connection with dialectics, it is very useful in understanding the process of thinking of Indian mind, where at some stages the dialectics is bound to creep in. In dealing with the concept of Nirvikalpa and Savikalpa Pratyakşa, the writer also touches the problem of theories of error. The trea. tment of Abhāva, though brief is worthy of note for its clear and interesting presentation (pp. 452-56).
The writer has rightly devoted one whole chapter to the study of *Tarka' that plays vital role in Indian dialectics, especially to justify and corrobarate the validity of a Vyāpti. "Tarka signifies the reasoning by the method of redcuctio ad absurdum,”-she observes and then explains its functions. The difference between Tarka and Anumāna, the status of Tarka as an independent pramāņa-all these and other points are distinctly stated and explained.
Chapter XIII is devoted to the most important problem of philosophy i.e. is knowledge possible? The Idealists and Realists are vehemently oppossed in their respective approach to the nature of the world and validity of knowledge. It is natural, therefore, that dialectics is manifested with all its colours in this particular aspect of philosophy. Besides Madhyamikas the sceptics fully exploit this subject and indulge in subtlest and sometimes most violent arguments. Dr. Solomon has shown here Indian scepticism in its true height. She has elaborately presented this with profuse excerpts from Jayarāsi's Tattvopaplavasimha and Sri Harśa's Khandanakhandakhādya.
After the reading of this chapter it becomes difficult to maintain interest in the next chapter that presents various theories of truth in Indian philosophy. Because the dialectical ferment of the previous chapter continuously hovers in the reader's mind, and the discussions fail to gain any ground here. Even the controversy of Prāmāṇyavāda seems to be a repetition so far as the line of argumentation is concerned. Would not it have been better if this chapter had preceded the previous one ?
In the third part of vol. II, the writer notices in detail the growth of dialectical criticism in the philosophical as well as other works of India.
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
