Buddhist Theory of Perception.

• Author: HATTORI, MASAAKI
• Position: Review

Buddhist Theory of Perception. By C. S. VYAS. New Delhi: NAVRANG, 1991. Pp. ix + 177. $18.

The present book has the subtitle: "with special reference to Pramana-varttika of Dharmakirti." In the preface (p. v) and in a section in chapter 2 (p. 19), the author claims that the present work is an attempt to explore the doctrines of the Dignanga-Dharmakirti school in the light of the pramana-varttika (PV) and its commentaries. It, however, does not seem that the author was well prepared for making such an attempt.

It is unfortunate that the author is not well informed on important achievements in the field of Dharmakirti studies published from the 1960s onward. In the section intended to explain "the place of PV in Dharmakirti's seven works" in chapter 2 (pp. 16-18), the author makes the following remark: Since the Pramanaviniscaya (PVin) is a summary of PV which is an extensive commentary on Dignaga's Pramanasamuccaya, "the limitations of a commentary are conspicuous" in it; on the other hand, the Nyayabindu (NB), which is an independent treatise on the principles of logic, "is free from the fetters of the self-chosen loyalty to the master." Thus he states, "it is probably because of this that the term abhrantam (non-illusive) has been unmincingly added in the NB definition of pratyaksa...." Had the author referred to T. Vetter's work on PVin, ch.. 1, which appeared in 1966, he could have ascertained that the term abhrantam is adopted also in the PVin definition of pratyaksa. [1] Regarding the relation of PVin to PV and that of NB to PVin, an acceptable explanation is given in E. Frauwallner, "Die Reihenfolge und Entstehung der Werke Dharmakirti's," in Asiatica: Festschrift Friedrich Weller (Leipzig, 1954), 142-54. Obviously the author is unaware of this article.

In the same section, the author mentions the names of some post-Dharmakirti scholars of the logico-epistemological school of Buddhism, but he states nothing about the mutual relationship between them. It is evident that he derived his information from D. Malvania's introduction to Pandita Durvekamisra's Dharmottarapradipa (Patna: K. P. Jayaswal Research Inst., 1955), pages xxvii if., because wrong information contained in it is kept by the author unaltered. Karnagomi should be changed to Karnakagomin. Kalyanaraksita is a name wrongly reconstructed by S. C. Vidyabhusana from the Tibetan dGe (b)srun(s). The correct name is Subhagupta (cf. E. Frauwallner, "Dignaga und anderes," in...