Book Title: Studies in Indian Philosophy
Author(s): Dalsukh Malvania, Nagin J Shah
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad

View full book text
Previous | Next

Page 155
________________ 12; Studies in Indian Philosophy the second type of events, events of remembering a past cognitive event. This is, at least one of the good reasons for the reluctance of the non-Jaina philosophers to regard a memoryexperience as a pramā, an event of knowing. I wish to connect the above argument with the traditional arguments found in the śāstras. The tradition of the non-Jaina philosophers (in this, the Mimāņsakas, some Naiyāyikas and the Buddhists agree, see Sukhlalji, p. 45) argues that a cognitive event becomes an act of knowing if it grasps or reveals a fact that has not been revealed or grasped before (cf. a-gļhitagrā. hitva). In other words, a fact not known before is supposed to be grasped by an act of knowing. An act of remembering therefore can hardly qualify to be an act of knowing unless, of course, the very fact of my knowing the original fact was not known to me before. If the veracity of a cognitive act is made dependent upon its grasping a novel fact, then another act, which repeats the first in the sense that the fact grasped in the first is the same as that in the second, cannot claim the property 'veracity'. For we cannot kill a bird more than once. An act of correct remembering is thought generally to be a repeat performance in the above sense. But the property 'veracity', as we have already seen, is not transmissible from the first act to the second. The second act may copy or repeat the first as far as the grasping of the same fact is concerned, but it cannot copy the other property, viz., that of grasping a hitherto ungrasped fact. For then it would not be a copy or repeat performance, and not an act of what we call remembering Take the case of an original painting by one of the masters. There may be bad copies or even a set of 'perfect' copies of the painting. But the perfect' copy can copy everything of the original but not its originality, for then it could not be a copy by definition. Remembering in this way can never have the 'novelty' that is expected of an act of know. ing But there is something more to this point. Suppose, in our example, a doubt arises whether the first painting, which Jain Education International For Private & Personal Use Only www.jainelibrary.org

Loading...

Page Navigation
1 ... 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352