Studies of Nyayabhusana(11)
            The discussion as described in NBhus on the object (alambana)
                      of the qualified cognition (visistajnana)

                                                          Shodo    YAMAKAMI
                                  (Summary)

   Unlike the Buddhist logicians, the Naiyayikas insist that pratyaksa  should
be qualificative (savikalpaka) by nature, so it should be described as qualified
cognition (visistajnana)--- for example, "devadatta",  "dandin" and so on, qualified
with some qualifiers  such as name, danda and so on respectively.
   In this paper, I try to clarify the Naiyayikas' standpoint as described in NBhus
with regard to the question of what is the object(alambana)of visistajnana.
Bhasarvajna, examining every possible object of visistajnana, concludes that it is
the qualified (visesya) only. If both the qualifier (visesana) and the qualified
were an object on equal terms, we would have the cognition of "danda and man",
not that of "dandin" ( the person who has a danda). Although the qualified has
many qualifiers, its cognition must, according to avayavin-theory of Nyaya and
Vaisesika School, have a single object. And many qualifiers should be sahakarins
(co-operating causes) together with memory of name,  knowledge of relation  between
the qualifiers and the qualified and so on. This conclusion of  Bhasarvajna, thus,
may be said to be an inevitable consequence resulting from perception theory and
avayavin-theory of this school.
   This portion of NBhus appears rather complicated and inconsistent. In order to
get some reasonable understanding, I deliberately classify this portion into two
parts : i.e. the former is for the opponent refutation and the latter for Bhasarvajna's
reply against it. The following is the synopsis of this portion.

0. Cognition resulting from qualificative perception (savikalpaka-pratyaksa) illustrated
   [173.10 - 14]
1. The opponent views : examinations about object(alambana) of qualificative cognition
   (visistajnana = resulting cognition of savikalpaka-pratyaksa) [173.15 - 174.16]
(1)The qualified (visesya) alone can not be an object of qualificative cognition. [173.16 - 21]
  a.The cognition "dhumavan ayam pradeso" is not known.
  b.The cognition "agniman ayam pradeso" could be absurdly attained by pratyaksa.
(2)Both the qualifier and the qualified can not be the basis. [173.21 - 23]
(3)The view of some that in case of pratyaksa the qualified alone is an object,
   while in case of anumana both the qualifier and the qualified  being an object.
   [173.24 - 28]
(4)The qualifier alone can not be an object. [173.28 - 174.16]
2. Bhasarvajna's answer : object of qualificative cognition is the qualified only.
   [174.17 - 176.06]
(1)Examination of "dhumavan ayam pradeso" [174.17 - 24]
(2)Examination of "agniman ayam pradeso" [174.24 - 175.26]
  a.Is it already accepted as anumana? [174.24 - 175.02]
  b.The reason that the qualified is supersonsous is not meaningless.[175.02 - 14]
  c.The cowness (gotva) can not be the only qualified.[175.15 - 26]
(3)The qualified alone is an object also in case of the cognition "it is variegated
   (citram)". [175.26 - 176.06]

トップページに戻る