1. Dignanga, Pramana Samuccaya Chapter 1 Earnst Steinkelner

Dignāga's Pramāņasamuccaya, Chapter 1

A hypothetical reconstruction of the Sanskrit text with the help of the two Tibetan translations on the basis of the hitherto known Sanskrit fragments and the linguistic materials gained from Jinendrabuddhi's Țīkā

by

Ernst Steinkellner

Dedicated to

Masaaki Hattori

on the occasion of his 80th birthday

www.oeaw.ac.at/ias/Mat/dignaga_PS_1.pdf

(April 2005)

I

Contents

Introduction III-IX

Text: Pramāņasamuccaya 1, 1-44 1-23

Analysis 24-29

Abbreviations and Literature 30-35

II

Introduction

Dignāga's last work, the Pramānasamuccaya, was composed shortly before 540 CE as a

concise summary of his many epistemological, logical, dialectical, and polemical treatises, of

which almost all are lost. It is composed in verses to which are added short explanations in

prose (Vrtti) that mainly serve to provide the polemical or argumentative context. This work

founded a fascinatingly rich and influential tradition of Buddhist epistemology and logic. The

text has not yet been found in its original Sanskrit form. Hope, however, remains that it is still

extant among the Sanskrit manuscripts in Tibet, the access to which slowly becoming more

open.2

Because of its importance for the Indian history of ideas in general, as evident from the

numerous references and citations in late classical Indian philosophical literature, scholars

tried to fill this deplorable gap very early on, not only by collecting the available fragments of

1 It is my opinion that this explanatory part in prose should not be considered an independent work, but this is not the place to present my reasons for this assumption in any detail. The traditional and the scholarly separation of the stanzas of the Pramānasamuccaya and its prose parts as a Vrtti on these, however, is still useful for bibliographical reasons and references, and I therefore follow this usage, but think that this distinction should not be understood as hypostatizing two originally separate works. 2 Cf. STEINKELLNER 2004. To my present knowledge the text has not yet been identified in any of the collections in the TAR. This may, however, be due to the fact that until now almost only the palm-leaf manuscripts have been subject to the attention of the curators of Tibet's cultural relics. Paper manuscripts, even if containing Sanskrit texts, are not yet considered culturally as valuable as those on palm-leaves. They are, therefore, not only in the ambivalent position of being less protected, on the one hand, and being treated less greedly, on the other, but also give us a reason to hope that may contain long-lost texts. For example, from the catalogue of Prof. Luo Zhao Dignāga's Nyāyamukha is known to exist in the Potala as part of a bundle of paper manuscripts which also contains other unique Sanskrit texts, but it was not photographed, evidently because of its assumed minor value in naddition to the fact of being partly burnt. It thus does not seem to be contained in the China Tibetology Research Center's collection of photocopies at this time. Since a fairly large amount of manuscripts produced in Nepal or Tibet have been written on paper, it will be necessary to make the authorities in charge of these documents in the TAR aware of the fact that not only palm- leaf manuscripts, but also paper manuscripts may contain valuable Sanskrit texts and should therefore also be protected.

III

this work, but also by reconstructing the text itself with the help of the fragments, the Tibetan

translations, and Jinendrabuddhi's commentary, which until very recently was also only available in its Tibetan translation. These activities began already with Satischandra

Vidyabhusana in his dissertation History of the Mediæval School of Indian Logic (Calcutta

1909, pp.82-89; cf. also A History of Indian Logic, Calcutta 1921, pp. 274-285), and continued in the publication of first collections of fragments by H. N. Randle (RANDLE 1926) and Rangaswamy Iyengar (IYENGAR 1927), which were followed by many others. 3

Three major efforts have been undertaken in the past to reconstruct, restore, or retranslate the text,4 up to now largely only of its first chapter if we disregard individual passages: by H. R. Rangaswamy Iyengar in 1930, by the Muni Jambūvijaya in 1961, 1966, and 1976, and by Masaaki Hattori in 1968. Their works differ in method, style and extent, and clearly represent

three stages of progress. While the Sanskrit text in Iyengar's pioneering attempt still consists

almost entirely of retranslations from the Tibetan translations, the discovery and publication of new sources in the following decades, above all by Rāhula Sānkrtyāyana, helped Hattori to

reconstruct and Jambūvijaya to both reconstruct and retranslate in a much more substantial

and reliable way.

The Jaina Muni Jambūvijaya's edition of Candrānanda's Vaišeșikasūtravrtti (1961) and his

reconstruction of Mallavādin's Dvadaśāram Nayacakra with the edition of Simhasūri's

commentary Nyāyāgamānusāriņī (1966, 1976) added new fragments and information to those

fragments already known. In the footnotes and in various appendices he added fragments,

reconstructions, retranslations of the Pramānasamuccaya stanzas and the Vritti, as well as retranslations of Jinendrabuddhi's commentary on these passages to the two editions. Prof.

Hattori collected all known primary material, thus building upon the materials published by

Jambūvijaya in1961 and 1966, and also introduced numerous parallel passages, particularly from the traditions of Dignäga's opponents, in his substantial notes to the first complete

translation of the first chapter together with an edition of the two Tibetan translations. In

3 Cf. HATTORI 1968: 16 with note 82. For further literature containing fragments and other information on the text up to 1993 cf. the entries 1.15 and 1.16 in STEINKELLNER/MUCH 1995 as well as its new on-line continuation under the address http://www.istb.univie.ac.at/cgi-bin/suebs/suebs.cgi. * The terms used in this connection by scholars should be clearly distinguished. "Reconstruction" (or "restoration, reconstitution") is only possible if a large amount of original linguistic materials is available from citations or commentaries. When offering a "reconstruction", the original linguistic material should be clearly distinguished from those parts of the text for which no original wording has been found so far. These parts may either be filled in with a "retranslation" of the Tibetan translation into Sanskrit which is, if possible, typographically differentiated, or by adding the Tibetan text as such, or even by adding a modern, e.g., English

IV

addition, Prof. Hattori added six unnumbered pages of text written in his own hand (inserted between pp.238 and 239) as a sample of a reconstruction of the PS with the Vrtti for the first twelve stanzas, i.e., the siddhānta. To produce this text he collected the attested Sanskrit

words and passages, and added, for all parts not yet attested in the original Sanskrit, the

corresponding Tibetan translations.

The present attempt represents yet a further stage in this process of regaining the Pramānasamuccaya insofar as it was possible to include new linguistic materials from Jinendrabuddhi's commentary. The original Sanskrit text of this commentary, the

Pramāņasamuccayațīkā, is preserved in a single palm-leaf manuscript kept in the collection at Norbulingka, registered and first described by Prof. Luo Zhao in 1984, and which was subsequently photographed, presumably in 1987. Photocopies of this commentary are presently kept in the library of the China Tibetology Research Center (CTRC), Beijing. The codex itself may have been moved meanwhile to the Tibet Museum in Lhasa. The photocopies are the basis of both a diplomatic and critical edition of Jinendrabuddhi's text, one of the subjects of an agreement on scholarly cooperation between the CTRC's Institute of Religious Studies and the Institute for Cultural and Intellectual History of Asia of the Austrian Academy of Sciences. The editions, starting with Chapter 1 ("On perception"), will be published in Beijing and issued jointly in all probability in 2005. This is to be the first volume of a new series entitled "Sanskrit Texts from the Tibetan Autonomous Region".

The pratikas, explanations and paraphrases in Jinendrabuddhi's commentary greatly expand and improve our knowledge of Dignäga's text, and thus yet another up-to-date presentation of this 'text in progress' seems justified. It was, of course, necessary right from the beginning of

the work on the commentary, in which I was joined by Helmut Krasser and Horst Lasic, to provide a hypothetical reconstruction of the text being explained to base our work on, to provide a chāyā so to speak of that being explained. This was, in fact, the beginning of the

text presented here. During the course of reading the commentary this chāyā was much

improved upon. After the completion of our work it would have been desirable to edit Dignäga's text in the light of the new knowledge gained including detailed documentation of all references not only of the fragments known so far, but also of the new linguistic materials. What this would have meant will be clearly demonstrated by the reconstruction of the second chapter being prepared by Horst Lasic under the same conditions but with an appropriately

translation of the Tibetan text. In the latter case we can only hope to be able to grasp the meaning. In all three

V

more rigorous and comprehensive method of documentation which I cannot now afford to

invest. In consideration of the possibly short time my age leaves me and of the greater importance of other projects I have in mind, I have decided for a more pragmatic and less

time-consuming mode. Information already existing in the works of Jambuvijaya and Hattori

on fragments, reports and contextual, mostly polemical material is not repeated. Only newly

identified materials are indicated. However, new materials from the Țīkā are also not specifically identified if they belong to the narrower commentarial context that can be expected, because in the critical edition all linguistic material assumed to be imported from

the Pramānasamuccaya(vrtti) is in bold print and easily visible. Thus, the source is indicated

only for words and passages that are found in sections of the PST that are not actual

commentary.

Since the presented text is a hypothetical proposal only and will hopefully be improved upon

in the future, I also refrain from supporting the retranslated parts with arguments. In general I followed the following principles:

When a portion of text, either a passage or a word, is testified by the PST, variants from available Sanskrit fragments and deviations from the Tibetan translations (T meaning that the

translations of V = "Vasudhararakşita" and K = Kaņakavarman can considered to be the

same) are not reported. As a rule K has a better translation and is therefore the version

preferred as a basis of the retranslation.

Where the two translations differ strongly, the retranslation may be based on either V or K. In

such cases a small superscript or is added at the end of a sentence or phrase as valid for

the preceding syntactic group, or if within a sentence, as valid for only the preceding word.

In addition to the above-mentioned partial reconstructions of the first chapter, the following

complete or partial translations are available: HATTORI 1968: 23-172 (English translation of

the complete chapter with annotations and including all available Sanskrit materials), FRAUWALLNER 1956: 391-394 (introduction and German translation of kk. 11-13 with the

Vrtti), FRAUWALLNER 1968: 62-83 (analysis, Tibetan texts, German translation and Sanskrit fragments of the Mīmāmsā section) and DREYFUS / LINDTNER 1989: 36f. (English translation of kk. 8cd-11ab). In addition, several partial translations into Japanese are available: MIYASAKA 1956 (Vaiśeşika section), KITAGAWA 1958 (Nyāya section) and HARADA 1992 (Nyāya section).

cases we can never be certain of the original wording. VI

Complete or partial editions of the Tibetan translations are available in: HATTORI 1968: 173- 237 (complete edition of both V and K) and FRAUWALLNER 1968 (only the Mīmāmsa section of both V and K).' An only recently identified and interesting partial sKu-'bum version which deviates considerably from V and K was edited in YAITA 2004.

Considerable progress in the interpretation of Dignāga's Mīmāmsā polemics has been

achieved in John Taber's recent publication of a richly annotated and thoroughly explained translation of the pratyaksa chapter of Kumārila's Ślokavārttika (TABER 2005). This chapter's focus is mainly on Dignāga's polemics. Thanks to Karin Preisendanz who received an early copy I had the chance of quickly appreciating Taber's profound interpretations, but was unable to incorporate possible consequences from his work into the present work. In the case of new insights into the meaning of certain points raised by Dignāga, it may be necessary to improve upon my analysis for the section presented below.

Editorial conventions:

. Bold script is used for the ślokas and for words from the śloka used in the prose.

· Italics are used for all retranslated text, i.e., text that has not been attested as such.

· Underlining is used for personal names and text titles as well as pronouns referring to them. · Parentheses ( ... ) contain retranslations that are possibly superfluous. . Pointed brackets <... > contain text emendated in the critical edition of the PST.

· Slashes / within parentheses present alternative retranslation proposals. · Superscript question marks' indicate more substantial uncertainty.

· An aAsterix * after a concluding danda marks a śloka in which the individual words are

more or less firmly attested, but not in the sequence proposed.

Sandhi is applied within the ślokas which are considered to be a unit, even if their parts are separated by text in prose, but is not applied between the last and first words of adjacent prose and metrical sections. Vowel sandhi is not applied between attested words and retranslated

words written in italics, nor between bold and non-bold words. The necessity of vowel sandhi is, however, indicated by a subscript +.

5 Cf. also the entries in STEINKELLNER / MUCH 1995: 11f.

VII

Metrical problems:

The kārikās of this first chapter's siddhānta section (kk. 1-12) are completely attested.

Difficulties arise in the less well attested second section (kk. 13-44) in which Dignāga summarizes his polemics against the pratyaksa definitions of the Vādavidhi, the Nyāya-, Vaiśeşika- and Mīmāmsāsūtras together with their early commentaries, and against the Sānkhya system that is represented by the Sastitantra and its tradition of commentaries as

well as by Mādhava.

These difficulties are corollary to the advantages gained by the considerable increase of

attested linguistic matter now available. In most cases only parts of the ślokas are attested

through citations or pratikas. The logical sequence of the arguments indicated by these

attested parts is clearly defined by the introductory and/or explanatory (Vrtti-)text in prose which separates these parts from one another. In addition, words from Jinendrabuddhi's explanations can be claimed for the śloka where gaps remain between attested parts. In these

cases the sequence of words as well as their syntactic form are not always certain and can/must be adjusted to metrical requirements. The same holds true when only retranslations

from the Tibetan can be offered. Here, however, even the words themselves can/must be

chosen and adapted according to metrical needs, if the context does not provide any hints for

the use of particular words.

Even under these favourable conditions the ślokas cannot be reconstructed without

suggesting a few vipulās.6 In general I think I have managed to avoid any metrical irregularities, vipulās, however, I introduced. In the well-attested ślokas of the first chapter only the following vipulā occur: ma-vipulā (14c, 40c) and na-vipulā (34c). The reconstruction of some ślokas was only possible by introducing a few more: ma-vipulā: 22c, 28c, bha-vipulā: 36a, and na-vipulā: 43c.

Analysis of contents:

The structure of the contents and arguments in this first chapter is shown clearly by its division into paragraphs in Hattori's translation and through some explanations in the notes,

6 In accordance with the rules summarized in STEINER 1996: 248.

VIII

and, for the Mīmāmsa section, in Frauwallner's survey of the contents (FRAUWALLNER 1968:

63-65). Karl Potter's recent summary ( POTTER 2003: 328-337) is based on Hattori's divisions. For an example of the traditional Tibetan analysis cf. the sa bcad of rGyal tshab

Darma rin chen prepared by Fumihito Nishizawa (NISHIZAWA 1997). The analysis presented

in the appendix below differs from these inasmuch as it outlines the entire contents of Dignäga's work following the logical structure of its presentation and argument in detail, thus trying to impart both the contents and the relationships between the different paragraphs. This kind of analysis was originally developed by Professor Frauwallner for his reading notes on

Indian philosophical literature. It is, in fact, a close relative of the more refined examples of

the Tibetan sa bcad method without the latter's specific historical and exegetical

considerations.

...

The internet provides a simple tool to share this stage of recovery with interested colleagues. The on-line presentation of this working hypothesis as a summary of the current stage of progress will, in addition, hopefully not only facilitate improvement upon my proposals by other scholars, but may also enable them to find additional testimonies more easily. For future

improvements of the text presented please mail to [email protected].

Finally I would like to thank Helmut Krasser, Horst Lasic, and Toru Tomabechi for their invaluable help, from preparing electronic files from my handwritten text at the beginning of our common work on Jinendrabuddhi to preparing the final PDF format, and, above all, for

their many contributions towords improving the present product.

I would also like to thank the presidency of the Austrian Academy of Science which, in

cooperation with the Austrian Federal Ministry of Education, Science and Culture, enabled

my temporary concentration on research that I have enjoyed for the past three years, as well as the Austrian Science Fund which supported the series of projects that have allowed me to create a scholarly environment over many years from which this contribution is a small offshoot.

Vienna, April 2005 Ernst Steinkellner

IX

Pramāņasamuccaya 1. 1-44

Pramāņasamuccaya 1.1-3 1

pramāņabhūtāya jagaddhitaișiņe praņamya śāstre sugatāya tāyine pramāņasiddhyai svamatāt samuccayaḥ karișyate viprasṛtād ihaikataḥ | 1 ||

atra bhagavato hetuphalasampattyā pramāņabhūtatvena stotrābhidhānam prakaraņā- dau gauravotpādanārtham. tatra hetur āśayaprayogasampat. āśayo jagaddhitaișitā.

5 prayogo jagacchāsanāc chāstrtvam. phalam svaparārthasampat. svārthasampat suga- tatvena trividham artham upādāya praśastatva, artham surūpavat, apunarāvrttyartham sunastajvaravat, niḥśesārtham supūrņaghatavat. arthatrayam caitad bāhyavītarāgaśai- kşāśaikșebhyah svārthasampadviśesaņārtham. parārthasampat tāraņārthena tāyi- tvam.

10 evangunam śāstāram praņamya pramāņasiddhyai svaprakaraņebhyo nyāyamu- khādibhya iha samāhrtya pramāņasamuccayah karisyate parapramāņapratiședhāya svapramāņaguņodbhāvanāya ca, yasmāt pramāņāyattā prameyapratipattir bahavaś cātra vipratipannāḥ.

tatra

15 1pratyaksam anumānam ca1 pramāņe

te dve eva. yasmāt

lakșaņadvayam

prameyam

na hi svasāmānyalaksaņābhyām anyat prameyam asti. svalakșaņavișayam ca praty-

20 akșaņ sāmānyalaksaņavișayam anumānam iti pratipādayișyāmaḥ.

yat tarhīdam anityādibhir ākārair varņādi grhyate 'sakrd vā tat katham. asty etad grahaņam, kim tu

tasya sandhāne na pramāņāntaram

svasāmānyalaksaņābhyām hy avyapadeśyavarņatvābhyām varņādi grhītvānityatayā 25 cānityam varņādīti manasā sandhatte. tasmān na pramāņāntaram.

na ca | 2 |

punaḥ punar abhijñāne

yad asakrt tad evārtham praty abhijñānam, tathāpi na pramāņāntaram. kiņ kāra- nam.

1-1 PSȚ B 53b1f (chapter 2)

2 Pramānasamuccaya 1.3

'nișțhāsakteḥ

yadi sarvam jñānam pramāņatvenesyate, evam pramāņam anavasthitatvena syāt.

smṛtādivat|

smṛtir eva smrtam. tad yathā smrtīcchādveșādaya pūrvādhigata arthe na pramā- ņāntaram, tadvat. 5

tatra

pratyaksam kalpanāpodham

yasya jñānasya kalpanā nāsti, tat pratyaksam. atha keyam kalpanā nāma.

nāma jātyādiyojanā | 3 |

2yadrcchāśabdesu nāmnā viśisto 'rtha ucyate dittha iti. jātiśabdeșu jātyā gaur iti. 10 guņaśabdesu guņena śukla iti. kriyāśabdesu kriyayā pācaka iti. dravyaśabdeșu dravyeņa daņdī vișāņīti2.

atra kecid āhuḥ - sambandhaviśista iti. anye tu - arthaśūnyaiḥ śabdair eva viśișto 'rtha ucyata iti icchanti. yatraisā kalpanā nāsti tat pratyakșam.

atha kasmād dvayādhīnāyām utpattau pratyakșam ucyate na prativișayam. 15

asādhāraņahetutvād akșais tad vyapadiśyate

na tu vișayai rūpādibhiḥ. tathā hi vișayā manovijñānānyasantānikavijñānasādhāra- ņāh. 3asādhāraņena ca vyapadeśo drsto3 yathā bherīśabdo yavānkura iti. tasmād upa- pannam etat pratyaksam kalpanāpodham.

abhidharme 'py uktam - caksurvijñānasamangī nīlam vijānāti no tu nīlam iti, 2 arthe 'rthasañjñī na tu dharmasañjñī iti.

katham tarhi sañcitālambanāḥ pañca vijñānakāyāḥ, yadi tad ekato na vikalpayanti. yac cāyatanasvalaksaņam praty ete svalaksaņavișayā na dravyasvalakșaņam iti.

tatrānekārtha janyatvāt svārthe sāmānyagocaram | 4 |

anekadravyotpādyatvāt tat svāyatane sāmānyavișayam uktam, na tu bhinneșv 25 abhedakalpanāt.

2-2 Additional citations listed in FUNAYAMA 1992: note 121. 3-3 Cee PST 175,11f

Pramāņasamuccaya 1.5-8 3

āhuś ca

„dharmiņo 'nekarūpasya4 nendriyāt sarvathā gatiḥ |

5,6svasamvedyam hy16 anirdeśyam rūpam indriyagocaraḥ5 | 5 |

evam tāvat pañcendriyajam pratyaksajñānam nirvikalpam.

5 paramatāpeksam cātra viśeșaņam, sarve tv avikalpakā eva.

mānasam cārtharāgādisvasamvittir akalpikā

mānasam api rūpādivisayālambanam avikalpakam anubhavākārapravrttam rāgādișu ca svasamvedanam indriyānapeksatvān mānasam pratyaksam.

tathā

10 yoginām gurunirdeśāvyavakīrņārthamātradrk2 || 6 ||

yoginām apy āgamavikalpāvyavakīrņam arthamātradarśanam pratyakșam.

yadi rāgādisvasamvittiḥ pratyaksam, kalpanājñānam api nāma. satyam etat.

kalpanāpi svasaņvittāv isțā nārthe vikalpanāt |

tatra vişaye rāgādivad eva apratyaksatve 'pi svam samvettīti na doșah.

15 evam tāvat pratyakșam.

bhrāntisaņvrtisajjñānam anumānānumānikam | 7 |

smārtābhilāșikam ceti pratyakșābham sataimiram

tatra bhrāntijñānam mrgatrsņādisu toyādikalpanāpravrttatvāt pratyakābhāsam, samvrtisatsu arthāntarādhyāropāt tadrūpakalpanāpravrttatvāt. anumānatatphalādijñā-

20 naņ pūrvānubhūtakalpanayeti na pratyaksam.

atra ca

savyāpārapratītatvāt pramāņam phalam eva sat | 8|

na hy atra bāhyakānām iva pramāņād arthāntaram phalam. tasyaiva tu phalabhūtasya jñānasya visayākāratayā utpattyā savyāpārapratītih. tām upādāya pramānatvam upa-

4 PSȚ 177,8 5-5 PST 90,13 6-6 PSȚ 177,7

1 hi PSV ad PS 1.40ac; PSȚ 177,7 : tu PSȚ 90,13 2 āvyavakīrņā PSȚ 56,12f, 14 : °āvyatibhinnā° Vibh 1913, TAV 54,14f.

4 Pramāņasamuccaya 1.8-11

caryate nirvyāpāram api sat. tad yathā phalam hetvanurūpam utpadyamānam hetu- rūpam grhņātīty kathyate nirvyāpāram api, tadvad atrāpi.

svasamvittiḥ phalam vātra

dvyābhāsaņ hi jñānam utpadyate svābhāsam vișayābhāsam ca. tasyobhayābhāsasya yat svasamvedanam tat phalam. kim kāraņam. 5

tadrūpo hy arthaniścayaḥ

yadā hi savișayam jñānam arthaḥ, tadā svasamvedanānurūpam artham pratipadyata itam anistam vā. yadā tu bāhya evārthaḥ prameyah, tadā

vișayābhāsataivāsya3 pramāņam

tadā hi jñānasvasamvedyam api svarūpam anapeksyārthābhāsataivāsya pramāņam. 10

yasmāt so 'rthaḥ

tena mīyate | 9 ||

yathā yathā hy arthākāro jñāne pratibhāti śubhāśubhāditvena, tattadrūpah sa vișayaḥ pramīyate4. evam jñānasamvedanam anekākāram upādāya tathā tathā pramāņaprame- yatvam upacaryate. nirvyāpārās tu sarvadharmāḥ. 15

āha ca

yadābhāsam prameyam tat pramāņaphalate punaḥ

grāhakākārasamvittyos5 trayam nātaḥ prthak krtam || 10 |

atha dvirūpam jñānam iti katham pratipādyam.

vișaya jñānatajjñānaviśeșāt tu dvirūpatā 20

vișaye hi rūpādau yaj jñānam tad arthasvābhāsam eva. vișayajñāne tu yaj jñānam tad vișayānurūpajñānābhāsam svābhāsam ca. anyathā yadi vișayānurūpam eva vișaya- jñānam̧ syāt svarūpa vā, jñānajñānam api vișayajñānenāviśistam syāt.

na cottarottarāņi jñānāni pūrvaviprakrstavișayābhāsāni syuḥ, tasyāvișayatvāt. ataś ca siddham dvairūpyam jñānasya. 25

3 visayābhāsātaivāsya PSȚ 72,1; Vibh 2211 (yul gyi snan ba 'di ñid 'di V, yul gyi snan ba ñid de 'di'i K) : vişayākārataivāsya PVA etc. (HATTORI 1996: 1041.64) 4 pramīyate TSP ('jal bar byed T) : pratīyate PVA 5 °samvittyoh PST 76,8f em. (°samvinnor PSTMs; NR 114,31; Kā 1. 238,14; ŚVV 139,23; NM 1. 189,5; 2. 495,10) : °samvittī Vibh 2211, 2291; cf. HATTORI 1968: 1071.67)

Pramāņasamuccaya 1.11-14 5

smṛter uttarakālam ca

dvairūpyam iti sambandhaḥ. yasmāc cānubhavottarakālam vișaya iva jñāne 'pi smṛtir utpadyate, tasmād asti dvirūpatā jñānasya svasamvedyatā ca.

kim kāraņam.

5 na hy asāv avibhāvite || 11 |

7na hy ananubhūtārthavedanasmrtī7 rūpādismrtivat.

syād etat - rūpādivaj jñānasyāpi jñānāntareņānubhavaḥ. tad apy ayuktam, yasmāj

jñānāntareņānubhave 'nișțhā

anavasthā iti tajjñāne jñānāntareņa,anubhūyamāne. kasmāt.

10 tatrāpi hi smrtiḥ

yena hi jñānena taj jñānam anubhūyate, tatrāpy uttarakālam smrtir drstā yuktā. tatas tatrāpy anyena jñānena-anubhave ' navasthā syāt.

vișayāntarasañcāras tathā na syāt sa ceșyate | 12 ||

tasmād avaśyam svasamvedyatā jñānasyābhyupeyā. sā ca phalam eva.

15 tathā pratyaksam kalpanāpodham iti sthitam.

tadanantaram parapraņītam pratyaksam parīksyate.

na vādavidhir ācāryasyāsāro veti niścayaḥ

anyathāvayavaproktes tena asmābhiḥ parīkșyate | 13 ||

na hi vādavidhir ācāryavasubandhor athavā, ācāryasya tatrāsāraniścaya. katham.

20 anyathāvayavaprokteḥ. tenāsmābhir api pramāņādisu kiñcit parīksaņīyam.

8tato 'rthād vijñānam pratyaksam8 iti.

atra

tato 'rthād iti sarvaś ced yasya tat tata eva na

7-7 Cf. Vibh 2447 : ... arthavedanam vinārthasmrter ayogād ... 1152.8 (NV, NVTȚ, DNCV) 8-8 Ce Vādavidhi (cf. HATTORI 1968:

6 Pramāņasamuccaya 1.14-16

yadi tata ity anena sarvaḥ pratyaya ucyate, 9yasya vişayasya jñānam tad vyapadiśya- te9, na tat tata eva bhavati, nālambanapratyayād evodpadyate, 10caturbhiś cittacaittāḥ hi10 iti siddhāntasambhavāt.

ālambanaņ cet smārtādijñānam nānyad apekșate | 14 |

yadi tato 'rthād ity anena vișayamātram, smrtyanumānābhilāsādijñānam apy ālamba- 5 nāntaranirapeksam. na hy agnyādijñānam dhūmādāv ālambyotpadyate.

11rūpādisu tv ālambanārtho vaktavyaḥ. kim yadābhāsam teșu jñānam utpadyate, tathā ta ālambanam ity uktā atha yathāvidyamānā anyābhāsasyāpi vijñānasya kāra- nam bhavanti.11

tataḥ kim iti cet, yadi yathābhāsam tesu jñānam utpadyate, tathā sañcitālambana- 1 tvāt pañcānām vijñānakāyānām samvrtisad evālambanam iti.

kāmam nīlādyābhāsesu vijñānesu tato 'rthād utpannam vijñānam pratyaksam syāt. tathā hi teșu tatsamudāye prajñaptisaty api dravyasadākāro labhyate. dravyasankhyā- dyākāreșv api tu prāpnoti. ta eva hi dravyāditvena ābhāsante.

12atha yathā vidyamānā kāraņam6 bhavanti12, evam sati dravyādișu prasangadoso 15 na syāt, tathā teșām asattvāt. evam tu yasya tad vyapadiśyata ity etan na prāpnoti. na hi pratyekam tesu jñānam. pratyekam ca te samuditāḥ kāraņam, na tatsamudāyaḥ, prajñaptisattvāt.

tad evāha

yadābhāsaņ na tat tasmāc citālambam hi pañcakam 20

yatas tat paramārthena na tasya vyapadiśyate |15 |

ity antaraślokah.

13yāvac caksurādīnām apy ālambanatvaprasangah. te 'pi hi paramārthato 'nyathā vidyamānā nīlādyābhāsasya dvicandrādyābhasasya ca jñānasya kāraņībhavanti. 13

artharūpaviviktam ca na vācyam 25

sarvam jñānam artharūpavyatirekeņāśakyam vyapadestum.

9-9 Cf. PST 93,9f 10-10 Ce AK 2.64a 11-11 HATTORI 1968: 117f2.15,16; STEINKELLNER 1989: 178f 12-12 Cf. above and HATTORI 1968: 117f2.15,16 13-13 Ci PVP 251a5f (Ce' in PVV 206,26-207,2; Re in PVA 339,19f; cf. HATTORI 1968: 1202.26; STEINKELLNER 1989: 178ff)

6 gźan du snań yań śes pa'i rgyur possibly only glossed in K

Pramāņasamuccaya 1.16-17 7

vișayo 'sya ca

sāmānyarūpanirdeśyas tasmān na vyapadiśyate || 16 ||

pañcānām vijñānānām vișayas tatsāmānyarūpeņa vyapadiśyate, na tu svarūpeņa vya- padiśyate. sāmānyarūpeņa rūpāditvena vyapadiśyeta. tasmāt pañcānām vijñānānām

5 vișayo na śakyo vyapadestum iti vādavidheh.

naiyāyikānām tv 14indriyārthasannikarșotpannam jñānam avyapadeśyam avyabhi- cāri vyavasāyātmakam pratyakșam14 iti.

atrāpi viśeșaņāny ayuktāni, yasmāt

indriyārthodbhave nāsti vyapadeśyādisambhavaḥ |

10 viśesaņam hi vyabhicārasambhave kriyate. na cāstīndriyabuddher vyapadeśyavișaya- tvam, anumānavișayatvād vyapadeśyasya. anirdeśyatve cāvyabhicāraḥ. na hīndriya- buddhiḥ sarvā nirdestum śakyate. tasmād viśesanavacanam naiva kartavyam.

na ca vyabhicārivișayatve, manobhrāntivișayatvād vyabhicāriņaḥ.

vyavasāyo 'pi hi niścayaḥ. sa sāmānya ādivad gavādi no vikalpya adarśanān na

15 sambhavati.

athāyathārthādijñānanivrttaya ucyate, 15tathāpy ayuktam viśesanam15. avyabhicārāc ca7. sarvā hīndriyabuddhiḥ svārthamātragrāhiņī.

etena uktavikalpo 'pi pratyuktah, yad uktam 16vyavasāyātmakam iti vyavasāya- kāryam 16 iti. na hy asti sāksād ayathārthādijñānakāryam indriyabuddhau.

20 athāpy avyapadeśyādigrahaņam tasya jñānasya svabhāvapradarśanāya, tan na, pratyaksalaksaņavācyatvāt tasya cendriyārthasannikarșeņa eva siddhatvāt. jñānasva- bhāvanirdeśyatve ca guņatvadravyānārambhakatvaniskriyatvākāśādyavisayatvasyāpi nirdeśyatvād atiprasangaḥ.

sarvatra ca sannikarşotpannam pratyaksam istau rūpaśabdayoh

25 sāntaragrahaņam na syāt prāptau jñāne 'dhikasya ca || 17 |

17na hīndriyanirantare gandhādau17 sāntaragrahaņam drstam, nāpy adhikagrahaņam iti

14-14 Ce NSū 1.1.4 15-15 PSȚ 102,10 16-16 Re NSū-commentary (cf. PST 98,4f) 17-17 PSȚ 106,12f

7 Jinendrabuddhi saw also a Ms without ca (cf. PST 102,9).

8 Pramāņasamuccaya 1.18-19

bahirvrttitvād upapannam eva. bahir hy adhisthānād vrttir indriyadvayasya. ata upapannam tadvisayasya sāntarādhikagrahaņam api ity cet, tad apy ayuktam, yasmāt

adhisthānād bahir nākșam

siddham iti vākyaśesah. 18adhisthānadeśa evendriyam, tatra cikitsādiprayogāt18. ata indriyād eva vicchinne 'rthe grahanam. 5

saty api ca bahirnirgate

na śaktir vişayeksaņe

anyathādhisthānapidhāne 'pi vișayagrahaņam syāt. tataś caksuḥśrotrayor adhisthā- nāntahsthitayor evāsannikrsya visayeksanāt sāntarādhikagrahanam yuktam.

pañcānām cendriyatve 10

na sukhādi prameyam vā

vetigrahanam vāśabdāt pramāņāntaropādānam. yad dhi lingādyabhāve svasukha- duhkhecchādveșaprayatnesu grahaņam, tad apramāņam iti sukhādīnām prameyatā na syāt, tasya vā pramāņasya pramāņāntaratvam upasankhyeyam19.

mano vāstv indriyāntaram |18 | 15

athavā manasa evendriyatvam vācyam tatsannikarșotpannasya pratyaksatva- siddhyartham.

aniședhād upāttam ced

athāpi paramatasyāpratișiddhasya siddhau manasa indriyatvam anisedhād upāttam eva. asti hy ekesām mate manasa indriyabhāvāyattih. tathā 20

anyendriyarutam vrthā

yadi pareņa pathitasya manaso 'pratiședhād indriyatvam, tato ghrāņādīni indriyāny ucyanta itizo nirdeśo vrthā syāt, apratiedhād eva siddhatvāt.

jñānasya cārthāntaraphalavādinah pramānatve

niścite 'rthe phalābhāvo 25

niścayātmakam hi jñānam pramāņam. tatpramānotpattāv arthādhigamāt phalābhā- vaḥ syāt.

18-18 Ci' ŚVV 130,20f 19 Cf. the pūrvapaksa in NV 35, 15-22 which is based on PS(V) 1.18c. 20 Cf. NSū 1.1.12

Pramāņasamuccaya 1.19-21 9

viśesaņajñānam pramāņam. yat sāmānyādiviśesanajñānam, tat pramāņam, yac ca dravyādiviśesyajñānam, tat phalam iti cet, tat

bhinnatvān na viśeșaņe || 19 |

bhinnam viśesanam viśesyād bhinnam. 21na hy anyavișayasya pramāņasyānyatra pha-

5 lam yuktam21. yathā khadiravisayam chindatā cchedanena na palāśacchidā drstā.

viśesyajñānahetutvāt tadvișayatvam apy astīti cet, na, atiprasangāt. evam hi sarvakārakasankarah syāt, viśesyajñānahetutvena tatkaraņatvāt. tasmāt yasya karma- ni vyāpārakhyātiḥ, tasyaiva tatphalatvam yuktam.

api ca

10 na tatra ca

tatra viśesaņe ' dhigantavye phalābhāvaḥ pramāņābhāvo vā.

dvayam tac cen

athāpi tad eva viśesanajñānam pramāņam prameyam ca dvayam api bhavet. tad yathā svātmādhigamamātre prameyam ca bhavati grahītā ca.

15 na viśesye 'pi vartate

evam hi viśesyajñāne 'pi pramāņam prameyam cobhayam prāpnoti, yady arthāntare 'pi jñānajñeyayoh pramāņam prameyam ca syāt. svādhigame tu jñānasya ātmavat tasyaiva ubhayabhāvah. viśeanajñānam ātmanā samānam ity ubhayam na yujyate.

evam tarhi prameyādhigame yā ajñānasamśayaviparyayajñānanivrttiḥ, sā pha- 20 lam bhavisyati. tad apy ayuktam.

ajñānādi na sarvatra

sarvatra tāvad ajñānāder bhāvaniyamo nāsti, kvacid ābhogamātreņa jñānotpatteh.

bhavatu nāmājñānādih, tathāpi

nivrttir nāsatī phalam || 20 |

25 nivrttir ity ajñānādyabhāve kriyate. sāsatī na phalam, tasyāh prameyabhavāyukta- tvāt.

evam tāvan naiyāyikānām pratyaksam ayuktam.

vaiśesikānām sautram tāvat kenacit sambandhena dravye22 nispannam pratyaksa- lakşaņam iti - 23ātmendriyamanorthasannikarșād yan nișpadyate, tad anyad23 iti.

21-21 Cf. PSV introducing PS 1.21ab 22 PST 118,6 23-23 VSū 3.1.13

10 Pramāņasamuccaya 1.21

kecit tu pramāņāt phalam arthāntaram icchanti - asādhāraņakāraņatvād indriyār- thasannikarsah pramāņam pratipattavyak iti. anye tu - prādhānyād ātmamanahsan- nikarsaḥ pramāņam iti.

evam ca 24samśayanirņayayor nişpattiḥ pratyaksalaingikābhyām jñānābhyām vyā- khyātā24 iti yad uktam, tad virudhyate. na tulyam catustayasannikarșajajñānena 5

nirņayajajñānam, vicārapūrvakatvān nirņayasya pratyaksasya ca vișayālocanārtha- tvāt. 25vișayālocanamātrārtham hi catustayasannikarșajam25. tatra kuto vicāraḥ.

indriyārthasannikarsapramānavādino 'natideśa eva syāt. indriyārthasannikarșa- pramānavādino hi kim etad iti jighrksāyām satyām sarvathāgrahaņaprasangaḥ, sarvā- tmanā sannikarșāt. 10

ātmamanahsannikarsavādinaś ca vișayabhedo pi. 26na hy anyavișayasya pramā- ņasyānyatra phalam26 iti pūrvam uktam.

- 27sāmānyaviśesāpeksam dravyagunakarmāpeksam ca pratyakșam27 iti na yujyate, yasmād indriyārthasannikarsotpannasya

28vișayālocanārthatvān na sandhānam viśesanaiḥ28| 15

indriyabuddhau svārthamātragrāhikatvād viśesaņaiḥ saha sandhānam na,upapadyate. idam asya sāmānyam dravyādi vety avaśyam arthadvayam grhītvā tathā samban- dhah kalpyate. tena matublopād abhedopacārād vā grhyate. tac ca smārtenākrsya viśesaņam manobuddhau upapadyate. anyathā hi surabhi madhuram iti grahaņam api pratyaksam syāt. na cārhati evam, viśeșaņaviśeşyayor bhinnendriyagrāhyatvāt. 20

yadi ca ekam dravyam anekendriyagrāhyam iti, tathā

29naikam

rūpādivad anekam syāt. rūpādişu hy anekendriyagrāhyasyaikatvam na kvacid api drstam.

rūpādyabhedo vā 25

yady anekendriyagrāhyam apy abhinnam işyate, rūpādy api dravyavad ekam syāt.

drstam cen

24-24 Cee VSū 10.3-4 25-25 PST 122,9f 26-26 PSV ad PS 1.19d 27-27 Cf. VSū 8.6-7 28-28 PSȚ 176,13f 29-29 k.21c-22b; also Ci NR 137,18f

Pramāņasamuccaya 1.21-22 11

ete yadi evam - 30bhinnendriyavişaye dravye abhedajñānam drstam eva bhāvaguņa- tvayor iva30. na rūpādisu. tasmād ekānekasiddhir iti (Itasmād rūpādișv ekatvāneka- tvaprasango 'siddha itiv), abhedajñānam tathā drstam, kim tu

nendriyeņa tat || 21 |

5 na tad indriyadvāreņendriyāntaravișaye jñānam. kutah.

31akşānekatvavaiyarthyāt831

yadīndriyāntaravisaye pi indriyāntarasya grahaņaśaktir isyate, rūpādisv anekendri- yakalpanāpārthikā.

athāpi syād - rūpādīnām bhedasadbhāvād ekam indriyam na grahaņaśaktimad iti, 10 tad apy ayuktam. kasmāt. indriyam hi

svārthe bhinne 'pi śaktimat29 |

svārthe nīlādibhedena sankhyādibhedena ca bhavanmatena bhinne 'pi indriyam śaktimat, na tv indriyāntarārthe, indriyāntarārthatvenaiva rūpabhinnasparśavat, yataś cakşuşāgrahaņam (tasyaK). tad yadi cakșuḥ sparśanagrāhyam api dravyam grhņāti, 15 indriyāntarārtho 'pi cakșușaḥ svārtha ity abhyanujñātatvād bhinnasyāpi nīlāder iva sparśāder api caksușā grahaņaprasanga iti na bhinnatvam anekendriyagrāhyatve hetuḥ, kiņ tarhīndriyāntarārthāgrahanam.

yadi cābhinnam apy artham anekam indriyam grhņīyāt, rūpādīnām pratyekam api

sārvendriyatvaņ āpnoti

20 dravyavat. evam hi rūpādayo 'nendriyagrāhyāḥ prāpnuvanti.

32na santy ete dosāh. rūpādayas tesu svaviśeșaniyāmakāḥ. 33tadabhāvād33 indriyabud- dhīnām nīle 33vyabhicāra33,32 iti cet, katham tesām niyāmakatvam. 32yasya rūpatvā- bhāvaḥ, na tasya caksurgrāhyatvam. tadvat sparśādīnām api svasvavișayaniyāmaka- tvam32. tathā sparśanacaksusām vrttir

25 na dravyādau

na hi dravyasankhyādikarmasu rūpatvasparśatve isyeta iti na syāt tesām sparśanena cakșușā ca grahaņam.

30-30 Cf. PSV ad PS 1.23d, end 31-31 Cf. PSV ad PS 1.41cd 32-32 Ce'e VSuBh? (cf. PREISENDANZ 1994: 510-512; 1994a: 882 with n. 66) 33-33 Cf. VSū 4.1.11

8 °vaiyarthyāt PST 126,1 : °vaiyarthyam PSV on PS 1.41cd, NR

12 Pramāņasamuccaya 1.22-23

34evam tarhi yasya rūpatvam, tac caksusā grāhyam. tasmāt sparśādāv api tadvan niyāmakatvena viśesaḥ. evam ca rūpatvādyabhāvād dravyādisu niyamābhāvah syād 34 iti cet,

tathā sati | 22 |

35tadabhāvād 5

avyabhicāra35 iti sūtravirodhaḥ. rūpatvādeḥ śabdādāv abhāvād avyabhicāra ucyate, na rūpatvāde rūpādau bhāvadvāreņa.

yuktyāpi ca iyam kalpanā nopapadyate, yasmāt

abhāvatvād agrahasya+

indriyāntareņāgrahaņam hi grahaņābhāvah. sa katham rūpatvādinā kriyate. syāt tu 10 hetvabhāvād grahaņābhāvah. tasmād rūpatvādīnām niyāmakatvam na yujyate.

yat tarhi dravyādisv abhedajñānam drstam, tat katham iti cet,

+anyagocaram

36cakşuhsparśanābhyām bhinnam vișayam upalabhyānyad eva tatsahacarasamudāya- vișayam smārtam abhedajñānam utpadyate36, 37rūpādyagrahe tadbuddhyabhāvāt37. 15

38tathā viśesyān svair indriyair bhinnān upalabhyārthāntaravyavacchedavișayam abhedena sarvatra mānasam jñānam upajāyate. na bhāvaguņatvayoḥ pratyakșam. tasyānupalaksaņāt pratyakșābhimāna eșa kutarkikānām 38.

tulyagocaratestā ced

syād evam, viśesaņaviśesyayos tv avaśyam tulyendriyavişayatvam abhyupagan- 20

tavyam, tadagrahe tadbuddhyabhāvād iti cet, evam sati

anișțam anușajyate |23 ||

yady ubhayasya tulyendriyagrāhyatvam, 39dravyagunakarmāny api dravyavanti39 iti bhāvavad dravyam sārvendriyam syāt. tathā 40ekadravyatvān na dravyam bhāvah 40, bhāvasya sārvendriyatvāt. 25

dravyavrtteḥ bhāva ekadravyas tadvān ucyata iti cet, na, abhinnatvāt. abhinno bhāvaḥ sarvatra dravyādibhāve na pratișidhyate. tathā hy uktam - 41guņakarmasu ca

34-34 Ce'e VSūBh? 35-35 Cf. VSū 4.1.11 36-36 Ci VNȚ 27a8f. (cf. STEINKELLNER 1985); TSP2 59,8f .; ŚVȚ 342, 14f; TR 41,14-16 (cf. STEINKELLNER 1990: 210; PREISENDANZ 1994: 190f.) PREISENDANZ 1994: 194f.) 37-37 Ce' AKBh 190,6f. (cf. 38-38 Ci TR 41, 16-19 (cf. STEINKELLNER 1990: 210) 39-39 Cf. VSū 1.1.7 40-40 Cf. VSū 1.2.8-9 41-41 VSū 1.2.10

Pramāņasamuccaya 1.23-24 13

bhāvān na karma na guņa41 iti. yadi ca dravye vartamāna eva ekadravyah, nānyatra vartamāna ekadravya iti, bhinnaḥ syāt.

yadā ca cakșuhpratyakseņa agnim usno <'yam> iti grhņāti, tadā sparśo 'pi cākșușa syāt. na caivam.

5 tasmād 42bhāvagunatvavad bhinnendriyagrāhyatve 'py abhinnam dravyam 42 iti na yujyate.

yady evam, bhinnendriyagrāhyatvād apy anekatvavāde

anekānto

drsto hy ekendriyagrāhyatve 'pi dravyaguņakarmanām bhedo nīlādibhedaś ca. anan-

10 tareņāpi ca indriyeņa grahaņabhedān nīlādișu bhedo drstaḥ. 43yad yadabhāve 'pi bhavati, na tasya tat kāranam 43 iti nendriyabhedo 'nekatve hetur iti cet,

'nyathokta tan

bhinnendriyagrāhyatvād anekatvam uktam, naikendriyagrāhyatvād ekatvam, yato 'nekāntaḥ syāt. na cātrānekāntaḥ. na hi bhinnedriyagrāhyatvād eva anekatvam ucya-

15 te, kim tarhy anekatvam eva.

44anantareņāpi ca indriyeņa 44 iti yad uktam, atra

na sarvam sādhyam ucyate

na hi - sarvam anekam indriyabhedād ity uktam, kim tarhi - yatrendriyabhedah, tad anekam iti. na buddhibhedo 'py anyatve kāranam niidhyate.

20 api ca

akşābhede 'pi dhībhedād bhede 'bhedaḥ kuto 'nyathā || 24 |

yatra cānantareņāpīndriyeņa dhībhedān nānātvam ucyate, tatrendriyabhede grahaņa- bhede ca ekam iti nāvakāśah.

etena guņādișu pratyaksajñānam apy apoditam veditavyam. tad api hi

25 svādhārasambandhadvāreņa catustayādisannikarșād evotpadyate.

yathā ca na sarvatra sannikarsāj jñānotpattih, evam naiyāyikapratyaksaparīksā- yām 45 uktam.

evam vaiśesikāņām pratyakșam api sadoșam.

42-42 Cf. PSV ad PS 1.21d' 43-43 Ce' VVi frg. 16a (cf. Frauwallner 1957: 124, 140; also NMu (KATSURA VI: 59) 44-44 Cf. PSV ad PS 1.24a' 45 Cf. PS 1.17c-18b with PSV

14 Pramāņasamuccaya 1.25

kāpilānām tu 46śrotrādivrttiḥ pratyaksam46 istam. 47śrotratvakcakșurjihvāghrā- ņānām manasādhisthitā vrttiḥ śabdasparśarūparasagandhesu yathākramam grahaņe vartamānā pratyaksam pramāņam47 iti.

tesām punar indriyāņām

anavasthā9+ 5

tair hi 48anindriyāntaragrāhyavisayatvenendriyāņi svavișayaviniveśāny 48 abhimatā- ni, traiguņyotkarșāpakarșamātrabhedāt śabdādeḥ bhinnajātīyatvāt. ekaśabdasyāpi guņotkarsāpakarșamātrabhedenānantyād grāhakam indriyam anantam abhyupeyam.

atha vā

+indriyaikyam vā 10

atha tatra traigunyābhedād abhinnajātīyatve śabdaviśesagrāhakavat sparśādīnām api grāhakatvāt prāptam ekam evendriyam, sarvatra traiguņyasyābhedāt. na hi trai- guņyavyatirekeņa śabdajātir asti, yā śabda eva bhavati na sparśādauv.

katham nāsti, yadā sattvādisamsthānabhedāt śabdādayo bhidyante. abhinnajāti- śabdesu samānam samsthānam sparśādibhyo 'samānam ca. sā jātih śrotravrtter 15

grāhyam, tathā sparśādisv api. tato na yathoktadoșaprasanga iti cet,

tathāpi caksuhsparśanayoh samānavisayatvam prāptam, yatah samsthānam

dvigrāhya

dīrghādisamsthānasya caksuhsparśanayor drstatvāt svavisayaviniveśavyāghātaḥ.

śabdādayaś ca na śrotrādigrāhyāh syuh. kutah. samsthānam 20

na trigocaraḥ |

samsthānasya śrotrajihvāghrānāgrāhyatvadrstatvātk śabdarasagandhā na praty- akşāh syuḥ.

samsthānakrtam ca jātibhedam icchataḥ samsthānā bahava

samānadeśā āpannā 25

ekendriyavişayajātyanatikrameņa tadbhedajātibahutvād bahavah samsthānāh samā- nadeśatvam prāptāḥk

46-46 Re Saștitantra (cf. PSȚ 136,2) 47-47 Ce Sastitantra (cf. PST 136,2-4) 48-48 Re Șastitantra (cf. PSȚ 137,7; 162,7f; STEINKELLNER 1999: ST 3 and 15)

9 indriyānavasthā PSȚ 138,10 (pratīka)

Pramāņasamuccaya 1.25-27 15

tulyasamsthānesu ca suvarņādi darvyalankārādișu

abhedo

samsthānatulyatvād āpannam ekatvam suvarņādiśabdādisattvādijātīnām. tathā ca svavişayavrttyabhāvaḥ

5 indriyavrttir jātimātragrāhikā vā jātiviśistasukhādigrāhikā vā.

yadi jātimātragrāhikā, arthasya

na svabhāvagrk10 || 25 ||

samsthānamātragrāhakatve śabdādīnām sukhādisvabhāvāgrahaņam prasajyeta. yas- mād drstā mandaprakāśa upalabhyamānasya samsthānamātrasya arthasvabhāvānu-

10 palabdhih. samsthānamātragrāhakatve

arthabhedāgraho

śabdāder viśesagrahaņam na syāt. tathā hi vīņāśabdabherīśabdetyādibhedāgrahaņam syāt, tatra samsthānāntarābhāvāt.

'rthe vā yathā ceto vikalpikā|

15 svārthaviśistasya tadviśesasya grahaņād manovrttivat svavisaye vikalpikā syāt.

atha samsthānaviśistasukhādigrāhikā, tathāpi

tadavasthā

manovrttivad vikalpikaivety arthah.

sukhādīmś ca11 pratyekam samuditam vā grāhikā syāt.

20 tatra na tāvat pratyekam. indriyavrttīnām svavișaye niveśāt śabdādi grāhyam,

na sattvādi

na hi sattvādi pratyekam śabdādisvabhāvam. tasmān na te śrotrādivrttigrāhyāh.

nānanyatvāt (sukhārthayoh)12 | 26 |

yasmāt śabdādibhyo 'nanyat sukhādi, (tasmātk) śabdādivat tad api grāhyam.

25 ananyac13 cen na vā kāryam

10 But cf. arthasvabhāvāgrahaņam PSȚ 141,13 (pratīka) (cf. HATTORI 1968: 1525.16) 11 Or sukhādīnām ca : sukādīmś ca PSȚ 142,15 (pratīka!) 12 No support for this supplementation except from context ! 13 ananyac em. : nānyac PSȚ 143,9 (pratīka)

16 Pramāņasamuccaya 1.27-28

yadi sattvādi śabdāder ananyat, abhinnaśabdādi na kāryam, sattvādi na śabdādeḥ kāraņam. yad uktam - 49sattvam śabdakāryam praty ākhyāya śabdātmanā vyavati- sthamānam49 ityādi, tad api virudhyeta.

sattvādīnām vā parasparābhedaḥ śabdādi vānekam eva (/śabdāder vānekatvamV) syāt, kāryakāraņayor abhinnasvabhāvatvād iti vikalpārtho vāśabdaḥ. 5

api ca

ananyatve 'pi na grāhyam 14

yady api sukhādi śabdāder ananyat, tathāpi 50tatparamāņuḥ api na grāhya 50 iti praty- ekam na grāhyam, tanmātrādi vā. na ca yad indriyārthād ananyat, tat sarvam indri- yārtho bhavati, kāryatvādigrahaņe sāmānyavisayatvaprasangāt. 10

tathā tāvan na pratyekam grāhyam.

atha samuditam grahaņe, tathāpīndriyavrttih sarvā syāt

citrākārā 15

na bhinne grāhye 'bhinnākāram grahaņam yuktam, tadvaśena grāhyāparicchedāt. drstam ca śabdādisv abhinnam grahaņam. 15

sukhādivișayatva indriyāņām

samārthatvam

indriyāņām samānavisayatvam syāt, na svavișaye vrttitvam. vișayāntare sukhādīnām abhinnajātitvāt. tena ekendriyatvaprasangaḥ.

nanu ca samsthānaviśistān grhņāti51 ity uktam iti, tathokte na yuktam uktam, 20 yataḥ

naikānugamadarśanam | 27 |

anekasamsthānabhedenaikasyām rūpajātau grahaņān naikasamsthānānuvrttir drstā. tatra samsthānabhedāj jātibheda iste sa evendriyānantyaprasangah.

atra ca ekesām 25

49-49 Ce Șastitantra (cf. PSȚ 143,11f; STEINKELLNER 1999: ȘT 6, beginning) 50-50 Re Sānkhya (cf. FRAU- WALLNER 1953: 404; HATTORI 1968: 1545.31) 51 Cf. PSV introducing PS 1.25b'

14 pāda b (pratīka in PSȚ 144,10) is unmetrical !! 15 PSȚ 144,14 has sarvā syāc citrākārā as pratīka by combining Vrtti and pāda a.

Pramāņasamuccaya 1.28-31 17

sānkhyānām bheda istaś ced

pūrvesām kāpilānām abhimatātikramāt sānkhyanāśako mādhavas tv āha - 52naiva hi śabdādilaksaņebhyaḥ trikebhyaḥ sparśādilaksaņās trikajātayo 'bhinnāḥ, abhinnānām hīndriyāntareņa grahaņam ayuktam. tasmāt sukhādīndriyavișayesu bhinnajātayo 5 yadvaśena svavişayaviniveśatvam indriyāņām 52 iti.

sa cābhinnah svaviśesesv iti

aksānantyam prasajyate

yadi sukhādīndriyajātivişayajātibhedasiddhyartham pūrvasiddhāntād atikrāntah, tadā spasțatareņa nyāyena asmābhir vyākhyeyah.

10 53ekaikarūpāh sarvatra pradhānam anavah prthak |* 28 |

sukhaduhkhamohaśabdasparśakriyādibhedena bhinnānām jātitaḥ sarvagatānāņ paramānavaḥ pradhānam ity ucyante.

kāryarūpās tu laksyante samprayogaviśeșatah |

tathā samprayogaviśesāt svajātyanatikrameņa kāryarūpā indriyavisayatvena pratipa-

15 dyante 53.

aņūnām tu trirūpatve kāryam ekam kuto gatam |* 29 |

śabde śabda iti sukhādivyatirekena yā'bhinnā buddhir utpannā bhinne 'nekasvā- bhāvye na yujyate. ki kāraņam.

vijātipariņāmo hi samprayoge 'pi nesyate *

20 trayasamprayogān naikībhāvah, sānkhyānām jātibhedāt. ekaśabdavācyās tu naika- svabhāvāh santi.

atha - 54yad utkatam trikasvabhāve śabde sukhādikam jighrksitam vā tad indri- yasya vişayah syāt54.

anīpsite dvirūpatve syāt kāryasyaikarūpatā | 30|

25 yadi ghrāņena śabdagrahaņanirapeksā buddhiḥ sukhādīnām anyatame vartate, tadā sa eva ātmaikaḥ syāt. kim kāraņam.

indriyārtho viśito hy anekarūpe 'pi vastunaḥ

52-52 Cer Mādhava (cf. PSȚ 145,10-146,6) 53-53 Re Mādhava (cf. PSȚ 147,9-15 and 147,17-148,7) 54-54 Cer Mādhava

18 Pramāņasamuccaya 1.31-33

anekarūpe hi śabdādau yasmin buddhir vartate, sa evendriyasya visayah. sa caika eva. samānaś ca sparśādișu iti so 'yuktaḥ.

tasmād varaņ prahāņāt sānkhyester ekaikarūpatā | 31 |

pūrvaprasiddhasānkhyadarśanād viśistataram satyam evaV. kāryasya jātibhedaḥ ekaikarūpāt kāraņād utpattih kalpyate. evam na vijātīyakāryam ārabhate. na trikā- nām ekarūpatā.

yady api śabdādigrahanamātra indriyavrttih pratyaksam, tathāpi na sarvaprame- yavişayam pramāņam. kutah.

aśesavisaye vrttipramāņasyāvidhānataḥ |

indriyavrttisamvedakasya manaso lingādim antareņa pramāņānabhidhānān nyūnatā. 1 tadvṛttisamvedanam pramāņānyatame nāntarbhavati.

naișa dosaḥ. 55smārtam hi tad vrttisamvedanam55 kāmādivat. yathoktam - 56smrti- pratyaksavyavasāyaviśeșa56 iti. tasmād indriyajñānam bāhye 'rthe pratyaksam, indri- yavrttau tv anantaram smārtam iti cet,

smārto nananubhūtatvad 15

anantaram manasaindriyavrttigrāhakah smārto na yuktah, pūrvam ananubhūtatvāt.

yugapad dve bhavişyatah || 32 |

57 indriyavyavasāyatadanubhūyamānamanasor yugapad abhivyaktir upagatā57 iti cet, 58evam ca16 avişayanimitto visayī syāt58.

sa ca, +apramānam 20

sa ca, ,indriyānubhavaḥ pratyayaḥ pramāņam nokta iti vrttāv api pramānāsiddheh saiva nyūnatā. svasamvedyatvāt kāmādișu smārta iti na dosah. 59smrtipratyakșavya- vasāyaviśeșa59 ity andhapadam evaitat.

tathā hīndriyārthe 'pi smārto na sambhavati anantaram60, manasā ananubhūtatvāt.

na hi manasā bāhyārthah pūrvam anubhūtah 25

hānir vā smrtir apy anyadarśane *

55-55 PST 157,2 56-56 Ce Sastitantra (cf. STEINKELLNER 1999: ȘT 10 and 11) 57-57 Ce Șaștitantra (?) 58-58 PSȚ 153,3 59-59 Ce Șastitantra (cf. above n. 56) 60 Cf. PST 157,13

16 evam ca PSȚ 158,1 (pratīka) : evam api PSȚ 153,3

Pramāņasamuccaya 1.33-35 19

indriyavrttimātrānubhūtatvād ananubhūte vā smārto hānir vā iti vāśabdo vikalpār- thah. katham hānih. yadi 61indriyavrttisahajo bāhye 'rthe manaso 'nubhava61 ișyate, yad uktam - 62naikārthakāriņor indriyayoḥ kalpane sāmarthyam asti62 iti, tad vyāhan-

yate.

5 naișa doșaḥ. smārtādhikavyavasāyapradarśanārtham hi sahavyavasāyakriyā prati- şidhyate. saha tu siddha eva 63kim bāhyeșv artheșv indriyamanobhyām saha vyavasā- yāḥ63 iti vyavasāye praśnaḥ, 64sāmprate kāle kenacid indriyeņa yuktam yadā mano bhavati64 iti prāg uktatvāt.

tathāpi

10 smrter adhikam uktauv

yadi smārtasya adhikoktyartham bāhyārthe manasā saha pratișidhyate, tathā 65yathā caindriyavyavasāye mano 'nuvyavasāyam kurute, evam mānasam vyavasāyam indriyam samvedayata65 ityādi tasya

yaghāto

15 tena bāhyārthe smārtas tan nāsti.

yadi mano bāhyārthe vastuto vartate, tathāpi

'nyākșam apārthikam | 33 |

indriyāntarāņām bāhyārthe vrttiḥ apārthikā prāpnoti manasā pumso 'rthaḥ krta iti.

tathā vișayasvabhāvagrahaņāsāmarthyān na sānkhyapratyaksam pramāņam.

20 mīmāmsakānām tu 66satsamprayoge purusasyendriyānām buddhijanma tat praty- aksam66 iti.

tatra

sad ity asadvyudāsāya na niyogāt sa gamsyate |

samprayogo hi niyamāt sata evopapadyate || 34 |

25 asadvyudāsārtham na satprayogo yuktaḥ.

pratiyogy atha nirdisto

61-61 Cf. PST 163,3f (Re Șastitantravrttib) 62-62 Ce Sastitantra (cf. STEINKELLNER 1999: ȘT 18 and 13) 63-63 Ce Sastitantra (cf. STEINKELLNER 1999: ȘT 13) 64-64 Ce Saştitantra (cf. STEINKELLNER 1999: ȘT 16) 65-65 Ce Sastitantra (cf. STEINKELLNER 1999: ȘT 7) 66-66 Ce MSū 1.1.4 (first part)

20 Pramāņasamuccaya 1.35-37

atha - indriyāņām67 samprayoga ity uktau kena samprayoga iti cintāyām pratiyog- isamprayogo gamyate, tadartham sadgrahaņam iti, tathāpi

viśisto 'kşasya kathyatām

indriyasya viśista eva,arthah pratiyogī vaktum yuktam.

athāpi syāt - 68atra ātma,āder manahsannikarso vaktavyah. sa ca sāmānyena sadgrahaņād ukta68 iti, tad apy ayuktam.

sanmātram sannikarse nākalpyam yata udāhrtam69 35 |

sanmātrasya puruseņa sannikrstatvam (sāmānyenaV) siddham, yasmād asati tasyā- vrttih. ye 'pi hi mrgatrsnādipratyaksābhāsāh asantah, na taiḥ saha kasyacit samprayo- gaḥ. deśaviśese tu sūryopatāpād utpannā viśesā avyapadeśyāś caksurbuddhisanni- 10

karşād vināpi tadarthena (sāmārthyātK) krameņa bhrāntasya manovijñānasya kāra- ņam. 7otato na tannişedhāya sadgrahaņam yuktam70.

atha, 71+indriye sīdati yo yasya vā syāt praśastatā71

72,73yo yasminn indriye sīdati, anyatrāvrtteḥ73, tena tatsamprayogah. yo vā yasya,in- driyasya praśasto yogyatvena samyag uktah, tena tatsamprayoga72 ity uktam. 15

tat sīdaty anyad apy atrāñjanādeś ca praśastatā |* 36 |

tad iti vacanam upanyāsārtham. antarā74 api rajahprabhrtaya indriye sīdanti, na kevalam artha eva, indriyasya praśastāś ca,añjanapādalepa,ādayo 'pi. atas tatsam- prayoge 'piV pratyakşatā syāt.

naivam bhavisyati. yathā gamanād gaur iti vacane nānyad api gacchad gauḥ syāt, 20 tathārtha eva sadanāt san syāt, nānyat. tathā praśastasyāpi vaktavyam iti vișama upanyāsah, yataḥ

rūdhāv evamvikalpe 'pi17 śabdo 'ksavisaye na sah

gośabdo gamanād gavi rūdhah. na ca evam sacchrutiḥ sadanāt praśastatāyā vā indriyārthe rūdhā. tasmād evamvikalpe 'pi na sacchabdo yuktaḥ. 25

67 Cf. PSȚ 169,10f 68-68 Re MSūBha(?) (cf. Re in PSȚ 169,9-10) 69 Scil. in PS 1.34 70-70 PSȚ 170,5 71-71 Ci'e PST 172,10f 72-72 Ce MSūBha(?) (cf. PSȚ 171,10-13, where a Mimāmsaka defends the etymolo- gies in PS 1.36ab against Dignāga). 73-73 Ci PSȚ 171,10 74 Cf. PST 171,6

17 Cf. grags la de ltar brtags na 'an K (correction inserted in Q 107a7)

Pramāņasamuccaya 1.37-40 21

75sarvārthasamprayoge18 ca yad drstam19 rūpaśabdayoḥ || 37 |

vicchinnaprthuvi jñānam20 tan nairantaryabādhakam2175

yadi hi sarvārthesv indriyaprāptih, yad rūpaśabdayoh vicchinnagrahaņam indriya- pariņāmādhikagrahaņam ca tan na syāt, indriyanirantaragandhādisu tayor adarśa-

5 nāt.

buddhikāraņasāmagrīm uktām muktvā pramānatah | 38 ||

yatah sā+

vrttikāro hy arthāntaraphalavādy76 āha - 7buddhijanmano 'nyan na drśyam kāryam iti 78yato buddhijanma, tat pratyaksam78 ity uktam. atra ca yathoktātmādisamprayo- 10 gāt samskāra-ādivato22 buddhikāraņam anyan nāsti, yat pratyaksam eva nirdeśyam77.

+atheyam eveti

atha vā kāraņasāmagry eva pratyaksam uktā,

buddhi janmeti kim punaḥ

evam - satsamprayogah purusasyendriyāņām pratyaksam ity alam uktam syāt. tad 15 yata utpannam iti vikalpya kim buddhijanmanā.

kim ca

arthendriyamanahpumssamyogah23 samskāravān yadā || 39 |

buddhyutpādakasāmagry uktā pratyakseņa tat katham

sarve hi tāni samuditāni nāksam prati vartante. yo 'pi hi kalpayet - 79indriyārtha-

20 sannikarsaḥ pratyaksam79 iti, tasyāpi dvisthatvād nendriya eva vartanīyam ity akal- paneyam.

8ogaur evāyam aśva evāyam iti yato yanniścayo jāyate, tat pratyaksam80 iti yad uktam, tad apy ayuktam.

75-75 Ci VMMS 1053,33f (cf. FRAUWALLNER 1968: 73 [no source stated]; BECHERT 2004: 55) 76 Cf. PSV introducing PS 1.42b 77-77 Ce MSūVa (cf. FRANCO/PREISENDANZ 1995: 82-84) 180,10 (cf. PSV ad PS 1.41cd, end) 79-79 Re MSūVa (cf. PSȚ 175,5f) 78-78 Ci PSȚ 175,14; 80-80 Re MSūVa (cf. PSȚ 176,1)

18 sarvārtha° PSȚ 173,5 : samprāpta° VMMS 19 drstam em. (cf. mthon ba yi K) : istam VMMS 20 °prthuvijñānam (FRAUWALLNER) : °prthivījñānam VMMS 21 nairantarya° (FRAUWALLNER, °nair- attaryya° VMMS) : nairantaryasya PSȚ 173,4 (pratīka!) 22 On the questionable ādi cf. FRANCO/PREI- SENDANZ 1995: note 11. 23 samyogah m.c. for sannikarşaḥ (cf. yogaḥ, PSȚ 175,11, as synonym in this context).

22 Pramāņasamuccaya 1.40-42

gotvādiyogāc cārtho gotvāditvena pramīyate || 40 |

na cendriyadhiyaḥ sāmarthyam asty arthesu yojane |*

tvanmatyā 81indriyadhiyo gotvamātradarśanasya tadāśrayadarśanasya ca śaktir asti, na tu tayor anusandhāne81. na ca vināpi sambandhena gavādiniścayo yujyate. tasmān mānaso viśesaņaviśesyayor abhidhānābhidheyayoś ca sarvo 'bhedopacāravikalpaḥ, 5 nendriyadhīḥ.

kim kāranam. 82svasamvedyam hy anirdeśyam rūpam indriyagocarah82

anekadharmo 'pīndriyārtho yo 'sādhāraņena,ātmanendriye 'vabhāsamānas tad- ābhāsajñānotpattihetuḥ, sa pratyātmavedya eva jñānasvāmśavat. sa tadātmanā- śakyanirdeśah, nirdeśyasya sāmānyavisayatvāt. 10

atha punaḥ sāmānyākāreņāpi so 'rtha indriyavisaye sati sarvathā vișayaḥ syāt,

83sarvathā nārthavijnāne sthita pratyaksadhīr bhavet83 * 41 |

84pratyaksaśabdo hi trişu vartate pramāņajñānavisayesu. tatra pramāņe mukhyo 'nyayor upacāritah. tatra vişaye pratyaksameyatvāt pratyaksopacārah. jñāne 'kșam prati vrtteḥ pramāņatulyatvāt pratyaksopacāraḥ84. yadi ca dhī rūpādisāmānyākārā- 1 lambanā, sendriyanirapeksā'bhedopacārapravrttā nākșaparatantrā syāt.

sarvathā ca,arthavijñānam icchato rūpa,ādīnām guņatvasattājñānād indriyāntara- vișaye sañcāra ity 8aksānekatvavaiyarthyam85 iti prāg86 uktam. tasmād asādhāra- ņam eva vişayasvarūpam indriyagocarah.

tathā tāvad 87yato buddhijanma, tat pratyaksam87 ayuktam. 20

buddhijanma yadīsyeta

yasya 8sbuddhijanma eva pratyaksam śrūyata88 ity āśankā, tam pratyudgamyottaram vaktavyam. arthāntaraphalavādinā89

phalam anyan na labhyate |

katham krtveti cet, 25

buddhāv eva hi jatayam tato 'nyan na phalam bhavet 42

81-81 Re MSūVa (cf. PSȚ 176,8-9) 84-84 Re MSūBha (cf. PSȚ 178,2-4) 82-82 PS 1.5cd 83-83 Cf. PST 178,6f 85-85 Cf. PS 1.22a 86 Cf. PS 1.21d'-22a 87-87 Ce MSūVa (cf. PSV ad 1.39a') 88-88 Re? ("traditional" interpretation of MSū 1.1.4 [cf. FRAUWALLNER 1968: 64]; cf. ŚV, pratyaksa, 56. 89 Cf. PSV ad 1.38c-39a' (there as attribute of the Vrttikāra!); metrical in V and K, but should belong to the Vrtti (cf. HATTORI 1968: 1706.44).

Pramāņasamuccaya 1.42-44 23

adhigamo hi phalam avasitam. sa cet pramāņam, buddher ananyatvāt phala,abhā- vaḥ.

90buddheś ca yadi janma,anyat samavāyaḥ svakāraņe

sa pramāņam sa tu kuto

5 janma vaiśesikānām phalasya svakāraņe samavāyaḥ sattā,ādisamavāyo vā. tatra yadi tāvat samavāyoV buddhijanmesyate, 91samavāyaḥ pratyakșam prāpnoti91. tasya ca nityatvād na kutaścid utpadyate. tasmād ubhayathāpi sa pramāņam na yujyate.

'tha,ananyatvam apārthakam || 43 |

yadi buddher janma,ananyat, evam buddhir eva pratyaksam iti janmagrahaņam

10 apārthakam 90.

buddhijanmani pumsaś ca vikrtir yady anityatā|

yadi ca buddhijanmani pumān pūrvāvasthām vikrtya pramātrtvenesyate, evam saty anityaḥ pumsah syāt. tac cānistam.

athāvikṛtir ātmāyam pramāteti na yujyate || 44 |

15 avikrtau buddhijanmani pumso 'pramātravasthāyā aviśistaḥ pramātrtvena na yujyate.

evam parābhimatam pratyaksam atra pramānam nopapadyate dosavac ca vākyam.

prathamah paricchedah.

90-90 Ri ŚVȚ 1. 228,22-26; ŚVV 133,8-12 91-91 Cf. PSȚ 180,7 (Re MSūBha?)

24

Analysis of Pramāņasamuccaya, chapter 1

0. Mangala: salutation (1ab) and purpose (1cd) 1,1-13 0.1 0.11 explanation 1,3-13 explanation of the Buddha's attributes 1,3-9 0.12 explanation of the purpose: establishment of the (means of) valid cognitions (pramāna) and refutation of other theories 1,9-13

1. The number of (the means of) valid cognitions is two: perception and inference (2ab') 1,12-2,5 1.1 reason: there are only two objects, the particular (svalaksaņa) and the general (sāmānyalakșaņa) (2'b-c') 1,14-20 1.2 refutation of further kinds of (means of) valid cognitions 1,21-2,5 1.21 cognition of the combination (sandhāna) of a particular and a general (2'c-d') 1,21-25 1.22 repeated cognition (asakrdabhijñāna) of the same object (2'd-3b) 1,26-2,5

2. The nature of (the means of) valid cognitions (3c- end of chapter 2) 2,6 -...

2.1 Perception (pratyakşa) 2,1- 23,16

2.11 Dignāga's theory (svamata) 2,6-5,15

2.111 Definition: "a cognition free of conception (kalpanāpodha)" (3c) 2,6-3,4 2.1111 definition of conception (kalpanā) (3d) 2,9-14 2.11111 five kinds of concepts: association with name, genus, quality, action, substance 2,10-12 2.11112 the reference of words 2,13-14 2.1112 the reason for the name pratyaksa is the specific cause (4ab) 2,15-19 2.1113 the definition is not incompatible with Abhidharma statements 2,20-26 2.11131 and not incompatible with Abhidharma statements on the objects of sense-cognition (4cd) 2,22-26

2.1114 the object of sense cognition (5) 3,1-4

2.112 appendix to the definition 3,5-20 2.1121 kinds of perception 3,6-15 2.11211 mental perceptions (mānasa): object-awareness (arthasamvitti) 3,6-14 2.112111 and self-awareness (svasamvitti) (6ab), yogic perception (6cd) self-awareness of concepts (7ab) 3,12-14 2.1122 apparent perceptions (pratyakşābha) (7c-8b) 3,16-20

2.113 Means (pramāņa) and result (phala) of perception 3,21-5,14 2.1131 cognition is result; it is instrument only metaphorically as it arises with the shape of an object (8cd) 3,21-4,2 2.1132 or: self-awareness is the result of a perception with its two aspects (ākāra), that of itself and that of an object (9-10) 4,3-5,14 2.11321 proof of the two aspects of cognition 4,19-5,3 2.113211 from the difference between the cognition of an object and the cognition of this cognition (11ab) 4,20-25 2.113212 from later recollection of the cognition of an object (11c) 5,1-3 2.11322 proof of self-awareness (svasamvedana) 5,4-13

25

2.113221 from the possibility of recollection only of something cognised (11d) 5,5-13 2.1132211 supportive arguments of impossible implications 5,7-13 2.11322111 infinite regress on the assumption of another cognition to cognise the cognition of an object (12ab) 5,7-12 2.11322112 cognition could not shift between objects (12cd) 5,13

2.12 Refutation of other theories 5,16-23,16

2.121 Vasubandhu's Vādavidhi 5,17-7,5 2.1210 preamble: Vādavidhi is not a work of Vasubandhu or a work of immature character (asāra) (13) 5,17-20 2.1211 Definition: "a cognition on account of that object (tato 'rthāt)" 5,21 2.1212 Refutation 5,22-7,5 2.12121 if "object" means the object-condition (ālambana), this definition contradicts the Abhidharma theory of four conditions (14ab) 5,22-6,3 2.12122 if "object" means only the object-condition, memory etc. would also be perception (14cd) 6,4-6 2.12123 object-condition refers to either the content or the cause of cognition 6,7-24 2.121231 if it means the content, the cognition would have merely a conventional content, its object being an aggregate 6,10-14 2.121232 if it means the cause, this contradicts the Vādavidhi's idea that a cognition is named for its content, for the cause is the 6,15-24 2.1212321 single atoms not cognised as such (15) the senses would also be object-cognition, being also different when causing apparent perceptions 6,23-24 2.12124 a cognition cannot be designated without reference to its content; designation refers to a universal; the content itself cannot be designated (16) 6,25-7,5

2.122 Nyāya 7,6-9,27 2.1221 Definition of Nyāyasūtra 1.1.4: "Perception is a cognition arisen from a contact between sense and object, is inexpressible, non-deviating, and of determining nature." 7,6-7 2.1222 Refutation 7,8-9,27 2.12221 refutation of the terms (viśeșaņa) 7,8-8,9 2.122211 deficiency of the terms (17ab) 7,9-19 2.1222111 deficiency of "inexpressible" (avyapadeśya) 7,10-12 2.1222112 deficiency of "non-deviating" (avyabhicārin) 7,13 2.1222113 deficiency of "of determining nature" (vyavasāyātmaka) 7,14-19 2.12221131 also if "nature" means "result" 7,18-19 2.122212 uselessness and insufficiency of the terms for defining the nature of this cognition 7,20-23 2.122213 deficiency of "arisen from a contact" (sannikarşotpanna): neither distant nor larger objects could be perceived (17cd) 7,14-8,9 2.1222131 senses do not occur beyond their physical seats (18a) 8,1-5 2.1222132 if they do, they are ineffective or should be able to grasp also hidden objects (18b) 8.6-9 2.12222 the definition is too narrow if only five senses are assumed 8,10-23 2.122221 2.122222 perception of lust etc. (sukhādi) is not included (18c) 8,11-14

2.1222221 or the mind (manas) must be a further sense (18d) 8,15-23 if mind is accepted because not denied, to mention other senses would be useless (19ab) 8,18-23 2.12223 problems in the Nyäya-theory that the means and result of a cognition are different 8,24-9,26 2.122231 if a cognitions as the means already determines, there is no result (19c) 8,25-9,18 2.1222311 if cognition of a qualification is the means and of the qualified

26

2.12223111 the result, the resultant cognition is not of the qualification (19d) 9,1-18 also not, if the cognition of a qualification is to be the cause of the cognition of the qualified 9,6-8 2.12223112 if the qualification is cognised, the qualified is not. Then

2.122231121 there is no result and thus also no means (20a') 9,9-18 if the cognition of a qualification is both means and cognised

2.122232 object, the cognition of the qualified must be the same (20'ab) 9,12-18 the result of a cognition as the cessation of ignorance, doubt and error is not different from the means 9,19-26 2.1222321 because ignorance, etc. do not always occur of necessity (20c) 9,21-22 2.1222322 because cessation as an absence cannot be a result (20d) 9,23-26

2.123 Vaiśeșika 9,28-13,28 2.1231 Vaiśeșika theories 9,28-10,3 2.12311 Definition of Vaiśeşikasūtra 3.1.13: "That (cognition) which is arisen from a contact between soul, sense, mind, and object is (as perception) different (from other means of cognition)." 9,29 2.12312 theories on means and result 10,1-3 2.123121 "some": means is the contact between sense and object, result is the cognition 10,1-2 2.123122 "others": means is the contact between soul and mind 10,2-3 2.1232 Refutation of VSū 3.1.13 10,4-12 2.12321 incompatibility with their śāstra 10,4-12 2.123211 incompatibility with VSū 10.4 regarding doubt and determination as explained by the explanation of percption and inference: determination presupposes conceptual activity (vicāra), thus is not the same as cognition arisen from the fourfold contact; the latter is bare presentation

2.123212 (ālocanamātra) of an object 10,4-7 undesired consequences in the theories of "some" and "others" 10,8-12 2.1232121 under the theory of "some", it follows that an object is

2.1232122 grasped in all aspects 10,8-10 under the theory of "others", means and result would have different objects 10,11-12 2.1233 Refutation of VSū 8.6 and 7 (Cee!): "Perception depends on universals and limitationals as well as on substance, quality and motion": as mere presentation this cognition has no connection with qualifiers; qualifiers and the qualified are grasped by different senses (21ab) 10,13-13,25 2.12331 refutation of this explanation of perception with regard to substance (dravya) 10,21-13,23 2.123311 the object of different senses cannot be one (21c) 10,21-13,6 2.1233111 its cognition would not be sense-perception, for the difference of senses would then be useless (21d-22a) 10,27-12,18 2.12331111 senses grasp variations of the specific objects, but not objects of other senses (22b) 11,9-17 2.12331112 if one substance were grasped by different senses, also colour, etc. would be grasped by all senses (22c) 11,18-12,11 2.123311121 colour, etc. are not restricting their senses through their specific properties, otherwise tactual and visual sense could not function in regard to substance, number and motion (22d') 11,21-12,11 2.1233111211 the assumption that substances can be grasped by any sense because such restricting properties are absent is contradicted by VSū 4.1.11 "Because of their non- existence there is no deviation (of other senses)." (22'd-23a') 12,1-7 2.1233111212 it is also contradicted by reason, since non-grasping through another sense as an absence of grasping cannot be caused by a specific property such as

27

colourness (23'ab') 12,8-11 2.12331113 the object of one substance's cognition is a conceptual construct based on the memory of different sense cognitions (23'b) 12,12-18 2.1233112 undesired consequences with the assumption that the object of one sense can be different as the qualified and the qualifier (23cd) 12,19-13,4 2.12331121 substance would be grasped by all senses in accordance with VSū 1.1.7" ... having substance, ... are common to substance, quality and motion" and VSū 1.2.8-9 (Cee!) "Being is not a substance, because it has one substance." 12,19-13,2 2.123311211 refutation of a Vaiśeșika-interpretation of "because it has one substance" as "because it occurs in substance." 12,26-13,2 2.12331122 if visual perception of fire had the content "it is hot", temperature would also be visible. 13,3-41,11-12 2.123312 to infer the difference of the qualifier and the qualified from 13,7-23 2.1233121 their being objects of different senses is not inconclusive

2.1233122 objection (24a') 13,7-11 refutation: the objection is a futile rejoinder (jāti). (24'ab) 13,12-23 2.12331221 refutation of the assumption that even if the sense is one the object may be different because of the difference of cognitions. (24cd) 13,20-23 2.12332 refutation of the Vaiśeșika explanation of perception (cf. 2.1223) with regard to qualities, etc. 13,24-25 2.1234 Refutation of "arisen from a contact": reference to the Nyāya section (cf. 2.122213, 17c-18b) 13,26-27

2.124 Sāńkhya 14,1-19,19 2.1241 Definition of the Sastitantra: "The function of ear, skin, eye, tongue and nose as directed by the mind is the means of the valid cognition perception when operating towards grasping sound, a tangible, colour, taste and odour respectively." 14,1-3 2.1242 14,4-19,19 2.12421 Refutation according to this definition and the Sankhya theory of the three constituents (guna), a function of senses with regard to their specific objects is impossible (svavişayavrttyabhāva). 14,4-15,4 2.124211 the senses would have to be infinite (25a') 14,4-8 2.124212 or one sense would grasp all objects (25'a) 14,9-13 2.124213 the assumption of a different configuration (samsthāna) of the three constituents for the classes of respective objects is impossible: 14,14-15,4 2.1242131 configurations of something long would be grasped by two senses, the tactual and the visual (25b') 14,17-19 2.1242132 configurations as objects of the other three senses would not be perceived (25'b) 14,20-23 2.1242133 if difference of classes were due to configurations, many configurations would occupy the same place (25'c) 14,24-27 2.1242134 there would be no difference between configurations of different classes (25d') 15,1-4 2.12422 the function of senses is neither possible with regard to a mere class of objects (jātimātra) nor to the three constituents as qualified by a class (jātiviśișțasukhādi) 15,5-18,6 2.124221 in the case of a mere class, i.e. a configuration 15,6-15 2.1242211 the specific nature (svabhāva) of the objects would not be perceived (25'd) 15,6-10 2.1242212 the difference of objects of the same class would not be perceived (26a') 15,10-13 2.1242213 or sense-function would be conceptual (26'ab) 15,14-15 2.124222 in the case of the three constituents being qualified by class- configuration 15,16-16,24 2.1242221 sense-function would also be conceptual (26c') 15,16-18

28

2.1242222 the constituents are grasped neither individually nor collectively 15,19-16,19 2.12422221 not individually 15,20-16,11 2.124222211 because the constituents are not individually the nature

2.1242222111 of sense-objects (26'c) 15,20-16,10 if no difference is assumed, sense-objects could not be an effect of the constituents (26d-27a) 15,23-16,5 2.1242222112 and the constituents would still not be grasped (27b) 16,6-10 2.12422222 not collectively 16,12-19 2.124222221 because each sense-function would have to have similarly various aspects (27c') 16,12-15 2.124222222 all senses would have the same object (27'c) 16,16-19 2.1242223 there is no conformity (anuvrtti) of the senses to the different object-configurations (27d) 16,20-24 2.124223 sense-function is also impossible with regard to configurations of the constituents, if assumed to be different (Mādhava's theory) (28a) 16,25-18,6 2.1242231 2.1242232 because senses would have to be infinite (28b) 17,6-7 detailed refutation of Mädhava's theory 17,8-18,2 2.12422321 Mādhava's explanation: primal matter consists of different atoms configurated by the three constituents; as effects these are sense-objects (28c-29b) 17,10-15 2.12422322 refutation: atoms with three constituents cannot be grasped as a single effect (29cd) 17,16-18,2 2.124223221 transformation of three to one is impossible (30ab) 17,19-21 2.124223222 oneness of the sense-object cannot result from preponderant (utkata) or cognitively intended constituents (30c-31b) 17,22-18,2 2.12422323 Mādhava's idea that different classes of sense-objects result from respectively different atoms is superior to traditional Sankhya, but not the idea that the three constituents are of one nature (31cd) 18,3-6 2.12423 the definition is too narrow (nyūnatā) 18,7-19,18 2.124231 because the function of the mind (manas) would not be mentioned at all in this system (32ab) 18,7-19,15 2.1242311 mental cognition of sense-functions cannot be memory (32c) 18,12-19,15 2.12423111 simultaneous function of sense and mind is impossible (32d) 18,17-19,15 2.124231111 mental cognition of sense-function is not mentioned (33a') 18,20-19,15 2.1242311111 it would contradict the śastra or would be the memory of another seen object (33'ab) 18,24-19,8 2.1242311112 it would also contradict the śastra, if memory were meant to be ascertaining an external object in addition (adhikam) to sense-functions (33cd') 19,9-15 2.124232 if the mind were to function with regard to external objects, other senses would be useless (33'd) 19,16-18

2.125 Mīmām̧sā 19,20-23,15 2.1251 Definition of Mīmāmsāsūtra 1.1.4: "The arising of a cognition when there is a contact of the senses of a person with something existent, that is perception." 19,20-21 2.1252 Refutation by refuting the definition's main terms 19,22-23,15 2.12521 refutation of the term "existent" (sat) 19,22-20,25 2.125211 the term is redundant: it does not serve to exclude something non-existent, for contact occurs only with something 19,22-20,25 2.1252111 existent (34) it does not refer to a specific object as the counterpart (pratiyogin) of a sense (35ab) 19,26-20,12 2.12521111 it does not refer to the counterparts of sense, mind and soul in general (35cd) 20,5-9 2.125211111 it does not serve to exclude the contact with something non-existent 20,9-12

29

2.1252112 sat does not refer to something which "sits" (sīdati) at a sense or which is "apt" (praśasta) to a sense (36) 20,13-25 2.12521121 the word sat is not commonly used (rūdha) for sense (37ab) 20,20-25 2.12522 refutation of the term "contact" (samprayoga) (37c-38b) 21,1-5 2.12523 refutation of the term "arising of a cognition" (buddhijanma) 21,6-23,10 2.125231 in the Vrttikāra's (i.e. Bhavadāsa's) interpretation: "perception (as means) is that from which cognition arises" (38c-39a') 2.1252311 the term "arising of a cognition" would be redundant (39'ab) 21,11-15 21,6-22,20

2.1252312 all relevant causes do not function with regard to the sense (39c-40b) 21,16-21 2.12523121 if the cause is limited to the contact of a sense and an object, still the contact is related to more than the sense 21,19-21 2.1252313 refutation of the interpretation "perception is that by means of which a determining cognition (niścaya) arises", because the senses lack the capacity of connecting a universal with

2.12523131 an object (40c-41b) 21,22-22,19 a cognition of something in all its aspects is not perception (41cd) 22,11-19 2.125232 in the words of the Sūtra: "the arising of a cognition is perception" 22,21-23,10 2.1252321 if "arising of a cognition" is the means, there is no result (42) 22,23-23,2 2.1252322 if "arising" is the means as different from cognition, 23,3-7 2.12523221 the latter would, as a means, be inherent in its cause, and

2.1252323 inherence (samavāya), being eternal, cannot arise (43a-c) 23,3-7 if "arising" is not different, the word is redundant (43d) 23,8-10 2.12524 refutation of the term "person" (puruşasya) 23,11-15 2.125241 if the soul changes (vikrti) with cognition, it is not eternal (44ab) 23,11-13 2.125242 if it does not change, it is not a cognising agent 23,14-15

30

Abbreviations and Literature

General Abbreviations

AJG Śrī Ātmānand Jain Granthamālā ASG Anantaśayanasamskrtagranthāvaliḥ BBS Bauddha Bharati Series GOS Gaekwad's Oriental Series JMJG Jñānapīțha Mūrtidevī Jaina Granthamālā, Sanskrit Grantha K Tibetan translation by Kaņakavarman and Dad pa'i śes rab (Q 5702)1 MESB Miszellen zur erkenntnistheoretisch-logischen Schule des Buddhismus MUSS Madras University Sanskrit Series Q The Tibetan Tripitaka. Peking Edition. Ed. D. T. SUZUKI. Tokyo - Kyoto 1955- 1961. STTAR Sanskrit Texts from the Tibetan Autonomous Region T Tibetan ( V=K) TSWS Tibetan Sanskrit Works Series V Tibetan translation by *Vasudhararakşita and Sen ge rgyal mtshan (Q 5701)1 VÖAW Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften WZKS Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde Südasiens

Primary Literature

AK Abhidharmakośa (Vasubandhu): cf. AKBh

AKBh Abhidharmakośabhāşya (Vasubandhu) - Abhidharmakośabhāșya of Vasubandhu. Ed. P. PRADHAN. (TSWS 8) Patna 1967: K. P. Jayaswal Research Institute.

TAV Tattvārtha(rāja)vārttika (Akalanka): Tattvārtha(rāja)vārttika of Akalanka. Ed. MAHENDRA KUMAR JAIN. (JMJG 10) Benares 1953.

TR Tarkarahasya. Ed. PARAMANANDAN SHASTRI. (TSWS 20) Patna 1979: K. P. Jayaswal Research Institute.

TSP2 Tattvasangrahapañjikā (Kamalaśīla): Tattvasangraha of Ācārya Shāntarakșita with the commentary 'Pañjikā' of Shrī Kamalshīla. Ed. Swami Dwarikadas Shastri. 2 vols, (BBS 1,2) Varanasi 1968.

For the reasons why I do not refer to Profesor Hattori's edition of this text (HATTORI 1968: 174-237) cf. STEINKELLNER 1971.

31

DNC 1 Dvādaśāranayacakra (Mallavādin): cf. JAMBUVIJAYA 1966.

DNC 2 Dvādaśāranayacakra (Mallavādin): cf. JAMBUVIJAYA 1976.

NM Nyāyamañjarī (Jayanta) - Nyāyamañjarī of Jayantabhatta with Tippaņī - Nyāyasaurabha by the Editor. Ed. K. S. VARADĀCĀRYA. 2 vols., Mysore 1969, 1983.

NMu Nyāyamukha (Dignāga): cf. KATSURA [1]- [7]

NR Nyāyaratnākara (Pārthasārathimiśra): Mīmāmsāślokavārtika by Kumārila Bhatta with the commentary called Nyāyaratnākara by Pārthasārati Miśra. Ed. RĀMA SASTRI TAILANGA. Benares 1898-99.

NV Nyāyavārttika (Uddyotakara): Nyāyabhāșyavārttika of Bhāradvāja Uddyotakara. Ed. ANANTLAL THAKUR. New Delhi 1997: Indian Council of Philosophical Research.

NSū Nyāyasūtra

PVA Pramāņavārttikālankāra (Prajñākaragupta): Pramāņavārtikabhāşyam or Vārtikālankāraḥ of Prajñākaragupta. Being a commentary on Dharmakīrti's Pramāņavārtikam. Ed. R. SĀŃKRTYĀYANA. Patna 1953.

PVP Pramāņavārttikapañjikā (Devendrabuddhi): Q 5717b Che 1-390a8.

PVV Pramāņavārttikavrtti (Manorathanandin): Dharmakīrti's Pramāņavārttika with a commentary by Manorathanandin. Ed. R. SĀŃKRTYĀYANA. Patna 1938- 1940.

PS Pramāņasamuccaya (Dignāga)

PSV Pramāņasamuccayavrtti (Dignāga)

PSȚ Pramāņasamuccayațīkā (Jinendrabuddhi): Jinendrabuddhi's Pramāņa- samuccayațīkā Chapter 1. Critical edition by ERNST STEINKELLNER, HELMUT KRASSER, HORST LASIC. (STTAR 1.I) Beijing-Vienna 2005.

MSū Mīmāņsāsūtra

MSūBhª Mīmāņsāsūtrabhāșya used by Dignāga

MSūVa Mīmāņsāsūtravrtti (Bhavadāsa) used by Dignāga

VNȚ Vādanyāyațīkā (Sāntarakșita): Dharmakīrti's Vādanyāya. With the Commentary of Sāntarakșita. Ed. RĀHULA SĀŃKRTYĀYANA. Patna: (Appendix to JBORS 21 and 22) 1935-1936.

VMMS Viśuddhimārgga Mahāsanyaya (Parākramabāhu II): Viśuddhimārggaya ... mahāsanya sahitay. 3 vols., ed. BENTARA ŚRADDHATIȘYA, Kaļutara 1949- 1954.

32

VSū Vaiśeşikasūtra: cf. VSūV

VSūBh Vaiśeşikasūtrabhāşya used by Dignāga

VSūV Vaiśeşikasūtravrtti (Candrānanda): cf. JAMBUVIJAYA 1961.

Vibh Vibhūticandra's marginal notes in PVV

ŚV Ślokavārttika (Kumārila): cf. ŚVV

ŚVȚ Ślokavārttikațīkā (Sucaritamiśra) - Mīmāmsāślokavārttikam Sucaritamiśra- praņītayā Kāśikākhyayā Țīkayā sametam. 3 parts. Ed. K. SĀMBAŚIVA SĀSTRĪ (parts 1,2), V. E. RĀMASVĀMI ŚĀSTRĪ (part 3). (ASG 90, 99, 150) Trivandrum: Government Press 1926, 1929, 1943.

ŚVV Ślokavārttikavyākhyā (Umbeka) - Ślokavārttikavyākhyā tātparyațīkā of Umveka Bhațța. Ed. S. K. RAMANATH SASTRI, revised by K. KUNJUNNI RAJA and R. THANGASWAMY. (MUSS 13) Madras: University of Madras 1971.

ȘT Șașțitantra

Secondary Literature

BECHERT 2004 HEINZ BECHERT: Eine regionale hochsprachliche Tradition in Südasien: Sanskrit-Literatur bei den buddhistischen Singhalesen. Wien 2004: VÖAW.

DREYFUS / LINDTNER 1989 GEORGES DREYFUS / CHRISTIAN LINDTNER: "The Yogācāra Philosophy of Dignāga and Dharmakīrti," Studies in Central & East Asian Religions 2, 1989, 27-52.

FRANCO / PREISENDANZ 1995 ELI FRANCO / KARIN PREISENDANZ: "Bhavadāsa's Inter- pretation of Mīmāmāsūtra 1.1.4 and the Date of the Nyāyabhāşya," Berliner Indologische Studien 8, 1995, 81-86.

FRAUWALLNER 1953 ERICH FRAUWALLNER, Geschichte der indischen Philosophie. II. Band, Salzburg 1953: Otto Müller Verlag.

FRAUWALLNER 1957 ERICH FRAUWALLNER: "Vasubandhu's Vadavidhih," WZKS 1, 1957, 104-146.

FRAUWALLNER 1968 ERICH FRAUWALLNER: Materialien zur ältesten Erkenntnislehre der Karmamīmāmsā. Wien 1968: Hermann Böhlaus Nachf.

33

FUNAYAMA 1992 TORU FUNAYAMA: "A Study of kalpanāpodha. A Translation of the Tattvasamgraha vv. 1212-1263 by Sāntarakșita and the Tattva- samgrahapañjikā by Kamalaśīla on the Definition of Direct Perception," Zinbun: Annals of the Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University 27, 1992, 33-128.

HARADA 1992 WASO HARADA: "Dignāga ni yoru Nyāya gakuha no chikakuron hihan, PS I NPrP & Vrtti no wayaku [Critique of the Nyaya theory on perception in Dignaga, Japanese translation of PS 1 and Vrtti]," Ryūkoku Daigaku Bukkyōgaku Kenkyūshitsu Nenpō 5, 1992,115-95.

HATTORI 1968 MASAAKI HATTORI: Dignāga, On Perception, being the Pratyaksa- pariccheda of Dignāga's Pramāņasamuccaya from the Sanskrit fragments and the Tibetan versions. Cambridge, Mass., 1968: Harvard University Press.

IYENGAR 1927 H. R. RANGASWAMY IYENGAR: "Kumārila and Dignāga," Indian Historical Quarterly 3, 1927, 603-606.

IYENGAR 1930 H. R. RANGASWAMY IYENGAR: Pramana Samuccaya. Edited and restored into Sanskrit with Vrtti, Țīkā and Notes. (Mysore University Sanskrit Publications) Mysore 1930.

JAMBUVIJAYA 1961 Vaiśeşikasūtra of Kanāda with the Commentary of Candrānanda. Critically edited by MUNI ŚRĪ JAMBUVIJAYAJI. (GOS 136) Baroda 1961: Oriental Institute.

JAMBUVIJAYA 1966 Dvādaśāram Nayacakram of Ācārya Šrī Mallavādi Kșamāśramaņa with the commentary Nyāyāgamānusāriņī of Srī Simhasūri Gaņi Vādi Kșamāśramana. Part I. Edited with critical notes by MUNI JAMBŪVIJAYAJĪ. (AJG 92) Bhavnagar 1966: Sri Jain Atmanand Sabha.

JAMBUVIJAYA 1976 Dvādaśāram Nayacakram of Ācārya Šrī Mallavādi Kșamāśramaņa with the commentary Nyāyāgamānusāriņī of Šrī Simhasūri Gaņi Vādi Kşamāśramaņa. Part II. Edited with critical notes by Muni Jambūvijayajī. (AJG 94) Bhāvnagar 1976: Šrī Jain Ātmānand Sabhā

KATSURA [1]-[7] SHORYŪ KATSURA: "Inmyo shōrimonron kenkyu [A Study of the Nyāyamukha], Hiroshima Daigaku Bungakubu Kiyō [1] 37, 1977, 106- 126; [2] 38, 1978, 110-130; [3] 39, 1979, 63-82; [4] 41, 1981, 62-82; [5] 42, 1982, 82-99; [6] 44, 1984, 43-74; [7] 46, 1987, 46-85.

KITAGAWA 1958 HIDENORI KITAGAWA: "Shōri gakuha no genryō (= chikaku) setsu ni taisuru Jinna no hihan [Dignāga's critique on the Nyāya theory of perception]," Nagoya Daigaku Bungakubu Kenkyū Ronshū, Tetsugaku, 21, 1958, 57-73.

MIYASAKA 1956 YŪSHO MIYASAKA: "Juryōron chūso ni tsutaeru Vaiśeșika gakuha no genryoron [The Vaiśeșika theory of perception as transmitted in the commentaries on PS]," Mikkyō Bunka 34, 1956, 53-44.

34

NISHIZAWA 1997 F. NISHIZAWA: Compilation of Tshad ma kun las btus pa'i rnam bśad mthar 'dzin gyi tsha gdun ba 'joms byed rigs pa'i rgya mtsho, in: Basic Studies for Tibetan Buddhism. Sa-bcad of rJe yab sras gsung 'bum (2). (Studia Tibetica 34) Tokyo 1997: The Toyo Bunko, 189-204.

POTTER 2003 KARL H. POTTER (ed.): Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies IX. Buddhist Philosophy from 350 to 660 A.D. Delhi 2003, Motilal Banarsidass.

PREISENDANZ 1994 KARIN PREISENDANZ : Studien zu Nyāyasūtra III. 1 mit dem Nyāyatattvāloka Vācaspati Miśras II. Teil 2. (Alt- und Neu-Indische Studien 46,2) Stuttgart 1994: Franz Steiner Verlag.

PREISENDANZ 1994a KARIN PREISENDANZ: "VSū IV.1.9 and its two Traditions of Interpretation," Asiatische Studien / Etudes Asiatiques 48,2, 1994, 867- 890.

RANDLE 1926 H. N. RANDLE: Fragments from Dinnaga. London 1926: The Royal Asiatic Society. [21981, Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi]

STEINER 1996 ROLAND STEINER: "Die Lehre des Anustubh bei den indischen Metrikern," in: M. HAHN, J .- U. HARTMANN, R. STEINER (ed.): Suhrllekhāh. Festgabe für Helmut Eimer. (Indica et Tibetica 28) Swisttal-Odendorf 1996, 227-248.

STEINKELLNER 1990 ERNST STEINKELLNER, "MESB VIII. Two New Fragments from the Vrtti on Pramāņasamuccaya I 23b - A Supplement to MESB V, " WZKS 34, 1990, 209-210.

STEINKELLNER 1971 ERNST STEINKELLNER: "Review of HATTORI 1996," WZKS 15, 1971, 222-224.

STEINKELLNER 1999 ERNST STEINKELLNER: "The Sastitantra on Perception, a Collection of Fragments," Asiatische Studien 53,3, 1999, 667-676.

STEINKELLNER 2004 ERNST STEINKELLNER: A Tale of Leaves. On Sanskrit Manuscripts in Tibet, their Past and their Future. 2003 Gonda Lecture. Amsterdam 2004: Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences. ["http://www.oeaw.ac.at/ias/Mat/steinkellner_leaves.pdf"]

STEINKELLNER / MUCH 1995 ERNST STEINKELLNER / MICHAEL TORSTEN MUCH: Texte der erkenntnistheoretischen Schule des Buddhismus. Göttingen 1995: Vandenhoek & Ruprecht.

TABER 2005 JOHN TABER: A Hindu Critique of Buddhist Epistemology. Kumārila on perception. The "Determination of Perception" chapter of Kumārila Bhatta s Ślokavārttika. Translation and commentary. London-New York 2005, RoutledgeCurzon.

35

YAITA 2004 HIDEOMI YAITA: "Jinna-cho 'Jyuryoron' Kunbun han chibetto yuku tekisuto [The Tibetan Text of Dignāga's Pramāņasamuccaya, Kumbum edition]," Naritasan Bukkyō Kenkyūjo Kiyō 27, 2004, 77-113.