Sambodhi 2002 Vol 25

Author(s): Jitendra B Shah, N M Kansara
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad

Page 12

Vol. XXV, 2002
THE INFLUENCE OF VARIOUS DARSANAS....
the analogy of the Citra-turaga (The horse in a picture, which is taken for a real horse). He explains this cognition as peculiar since it is distinct from pramă as well as aprama58.
7
When one looks at the picture of a horse the cognition is not (i) mithyā (false) since it is the same-unchanged-at all times and is not contradicted, (ii) it is not doubtful (samsaya) because it is certain, (iii) it is not even similarity (sādṛśya) because there is no similarity of limbs etc. Hence just as this cognition of the Citra-turaga is quite distinct from all other cognitions, the cognition of Rama with respect to nata is quite distinct.
This citra-turaga is like the Vikalpa' says Nägeśa59, 'which is defined by Patanjali thus: Śabda-jnānānupātī vastu-śunyo vikalpah/60 'Predicate-relation61 (vikalpa) is without any corresponding perceptible) object and follows as a result of perceptions or of words.' Here too there is no corresponding real horse and yet the abhāsa of a horse is there.
It may be noted that the concept of citra-turaga is probably not a part of Śankuka's theory as represented by Abhinavagupta for the following reasons:
(i) this portion is given only in the square brackets in the G.O.S.Ed of Abh.Bh.62
(ii) it is also not found in the Locana.
(iii) both Locana63 and Abh.Bh.64 give chitra-asva and citra-go analogy respectively, but not as a part of the theory of Sankuka.
(iv) Abh. Bh. and Locana do not refer to this nyāya. They therefore naturally do not confute it while controverting Śankuka's theory,
Coming back to Sankuka's theory we may say that Śankuka was not only guided by the Nyaya Darśana but also by the Yoga Darśana if we admit the citra-turaga-naya as a genuine part of Sankuka's arguments; with this latter he sought to account for the process of identification of the anukarya and the anukartā by the sāmājika. Such a dependence on several darśanas is met with in other theorists also, for wherever their theory contains a loophole they have attempted to plug it by resorting to some other darśana65 or by inventing some more complicated concept.66 As a matter of fact Darśanas, as has been pointed out earlier, were not contradictory in themselves and things were often explained by resorting to one or more of these darśanas without reservation and without incurring any criticism. The most glaring example is that of the adoptation of the concept of Dhvani by the rhetoricians67 from the Paninīya Darśana especially