Vaishali Institute Research Bulletin 2

Author(s): G C Chaudhary
Publisher: Research Institute of Prakrit Jainology & Ahimsa Mujjaffarpur

Page 60

DEFINING THE PRAMĀNA
51
table to the Jainas, firstly because no blind modification of unconscious principle of intellect can create sentient knowledge, and secondly, it is against our experience to say that intellect or sense can assume the form of an object.
According to the Prabhakaras the function of knower (jñatrogapara) producing knowledge is considered to be pramāņa.. This is refuted by the Jainas on the ground that the entity named as the function of the knower can't be established by any of the pramāņa.?
Like Jainas, Buddhists also define pramaņa in terms of valid cognition and do not regard sense, contact or modification of blind intellect or activity of the cogniser as the means of knowledge. However, the Buddhist contention that cognition of the unique particular (svalakşaņa), being devoid of all constructions, is indeterminate (nirvikalpaka) and there is no determinate perception is unacceptable to the Jainas on the ground that pramāņa must be definite and competent to decide good and bad so as to be empirically useful. Moreover idealistic Buddhists regard identity between cognition and its content as the organ of knowledge, i. e. object and its cognition are not different. This is clearly unacceptable to the Jainas who consider object external and independent of cognition, Cognition reveals itself and the content but des not assume the form of the object because the abstract cogoition can't become concrete. Also in the case of an illusion the cognition, even if it were to assume the objective form, does not become knowledge. Hence Buddhist view of identity between
1. ज्ञानं हि नाम क्रियात्मकं, क्रिया च फलानुमेया, ज्ञातृव्यापारेण फलानिष्पत्तेः
Nyāyamañjari, p. 16. Later on Jayanta concludes Miminsaka's view:
TOT TĀST starfastearateT: FATTA. Ibid. 2. See Nymyakumudacandra, pp, 42-45, and Prameyaka malamūrtanda,
pp. 20,45. 3. हिताहितप्राप्तिपरिहारसमयं हि प्रमाणं ततो ज्ञानमेव तत्
Parikşāmukha, I.2. Sce Pramānamimāṁsā, p. 7; Nyāyakumudacandra, pp. 46-48; Prameya
kamalamārtanda, pp. 32-35, for detailed criticism of the Buddhist vicw4. (i) fagurfanfaat yatmafiona i स्ववित्तिर्वा प्रमाणं तु सारूप्यं योग्तापि वा ॥
Ś antarakṣita, Tattvasamgrahakärikā, 1341. (ii) करणसाधनेन मानशब्देन सारूप्यलक्षणं प्रभाणमभिधीयते
Dharmottara, Nyāyabindutikā on Sūtra 3.