Exposition of Pratyaksa and Anumana according to the Dignāga and Dharmakīrti

 

Exposition of Pratyaksa and Anumāna according to the Dignāga and Dharmakīrti

 Dignāga’s definition of Pratyakṣa:

Pratyaksha (प्रत्यक्ष/ perception)  literally means that which is perceptible to the eye or visible, in general usage it refers to being present, present before the eye i.e. within the range of sight, cognizable by any sense organ, distinct, evident, clear, direct, immediate, explicit, express, corporeal; it is a Pramana, mode of proof.

The master logician Dignāga in his Pramāṇasamuccaya presents the definition of pratyakṣa as thus: “pratyakṣam kalpanāpoḍham nāmajātyādyasaṁyutam” i.e. pratyakṣa is that cognition which is free from conceptual construction (kalpanā) that is from the association of name, class character, genus etc. The term ‘kalpanāpoḍha’ means free from conceptual construction which is definitely indicates the nirvikalpaka form of pratyakṣa; which is considered by the Buddhist logicians as the only form of pratyakṣa. According to them, it is only nirvikalpaka pratyakṣa which is real and unerring. The pure particular is the 60 object (ālambana) of nirvikalpaka pratyakṣa. The pure particular is called svalakṣaṇa that is grasped by us in nirvikalpaka pratyakṣa.

 Dharmakīrti’s definition of Pratyakṣa:

Dharmakīrti accepts Dignāga’s definition of pratyakṣa, but adds another epithet ‘abhrānta’ (non erroneous) to it. So his definition becomes: “tatra kalpanāpoḍhamabhrāntaṁ pratyakṣam” i.e. pratyakṣa is that cognition which is free from conceptual construction and which is non-erroneous. The word ‘tatra’ indicates localization (saptamī-arthe), but it is (moreover) used to indicate a selection. Thus the meaning of the sentence is the following one. ‘Tatra’ here means among pratyakṣa and anumāna. Pratyakṣa is here taken as subject and the characteristics of non-constructive and non-erroneous are predicated to it. It is non- constructive and containing no error. Dharmakīrti says, pratyakṣa as a presentation determined exclusively by the object and free from all conceptual constructions (kalpanā). Obviously it is nirvikalpaka knowledge, since savikalpaka knowledge involves the conceptual activity of the mind. Dharmakīrti is of opinion that names and relations are imposed by the mind, while the senses reveal the objects accurately unless they are themselves perverted by organic or extraneous causes. This pure pratyakṣa, free from all traces of conceptual activity, is said to give us the object in its own nature (svalakṣaṇam).

            Dharmaki̅rti recognizes sense perception or sensation as the source of right knowledge. In the third chapter of the Pramānavārtika and first chapter of Nyāya-bindu,  he discusses perception as a source of efficient knowledge which is without imagination and illusion. For him sensation or sense perception arises out of the object of perception. It is an effect of the object of perception. For him, there can be no perception without object of perception and vice -versa. As mentioned above for Dharmaki̅rti perception is described as a causal outcome. The presence of (all) the conditions of cognitions of consists in the presence of an individual entity and the totality of all other conditions of cognition. In his philosophy real cognition is a self complete process which produces self-consciousness in the mind of that individual. So, in his philosophy there are some significant characteristics of perception,

1) Perception according to Dharmaki̅rti is direct sense perception, which possesses efficiency.

2) Perception is the totally. It is different from productive imagination and can be justified by introspection.

3) Direct knowledge means here neither construction (judgement) nor illusion.

4) Perception in Dharmaki̅rti‟s philosophy is has characteristic of conciliation of the object of indirect knowledge.

5) Dharmaki̅rti does not exclude consciousness while explaining direct cognition or perception.

 

Dignāga’s definition of Anumāna:

 Anumāna (अनुमान) means inference. It is described as reaching a new conclusion and truth from one or more observations and previous truths by applying reason. Observing smoke and inferring fire is an example of Anumāna. Anumāna (inference or reasoning) for Dignāga is a type of cognition which is only aware of general attributes, and is constructed out of simpler sensations. Inference can also be communicated through linguistic conventions.

A central issue which concerned Dignāga was the interpretation of signs (linga) or the evidence (hetu) which led one to an inference (anumana) about states of affairs; such as how smoke can lead one to infer that there is a fire. This topic of svārthānumāna (reasoning, literally "inference for oneself") is the subject of chapter two of the Pramāṇa-samuccaya while the topic of the third chapter is about demonstration (parārthānumāna, literally "inference for others"), that is, how one communicates one's inferences through proper argument.

According to Richard Hayes, in Dignāga's system, to obtain knowledge that a property (the "inferable property", sadhya) is inherent in a "subject of inference" (paksa) it must be derived through an inferential sign (linga). For this to occur, the following must be true:

1. The inferential sign must be a property of the subject of the inference. That is, there exists in the subject of inference a property, which is different from the inferable property and which is furthermore evident to the person drawing the inference; this second property may serve as an inferential sign in case it has two further characteristics.
2. The inferential sign must be known to occur in at least one locus, other than the subject of inference, in which the inferable property occurs.
3. The inferential sign must not be known to occur in any other loci in which the inferable property is absent.

 Dharmaki̅rti’s definition of Anumāna

In the philosophy of Dharmaki̅rti, inference is twofold. They are inference for oneself (svārthnūmāna) and inference for others (parārthanūmāna). The first type of inference is internal and the later is verbal. In both of the cases the three aspects of logical marks are to be fulfilled. They are correspondence to the minor premise (pakṣadharmatva), to the major premise (anvaya) and to the contraposition of the major premise. In other words, firstly in order to be a valid inference the object cognized by inference must be present. Secondly it also must be present in all similar instances. Thirdly there must be an absolute absence of the object inferred in all dissimilar or negative cases. He discusses these two types of inference separately in detail in his philosophical works. The distinction between a source of cognition and its result is here just the same as in the case of perception. The usually cited example of direct knowledge in the philosophy of Dharmaki̅rti is of cognition of blue colour. Again, in case of inference the usually cited example is, wherever there is smoke there is also fire. There is smoke in that place. Therefore, there is fire. Here, in the case of perception an individual at first senses or cognizes the object immediately. Following by this sense-cognition, a mental sensation arises out of the same cause. In the third phase cooperation of the object of cognition and the immediately followed proper object of cognition is taken place. Dharmaki̅rti states about three phases in case of inference also. A cognition which is produced (indirectly) through a mark that has a threefold aspect, and which refers to an object, (not perceived, but) inferred – is internal inference. Inference taken place here regarding the object or the predicate can be either negation or identity or causation.

 

Iconographical study of Avalokitesvara, Tara and Maitreya

 Bodhisattvas

Bodhisattvas are beings who have progressed along the path to perfect enlightenment and salvation because they are spiritually advanced. As part of their spiritual work, they choose to convey religious assistance to devout but ordinary mortals. They are sort of like the equivalent of Buddhist "saints" and are especially important in Mahayana Buddhism. To Mahayana Buddhists they are "near Buddha" or “enlightened persons” on the verge of nirvana who purposely stopped short of attaining it, so, like Buddha, they could teach their method to others and help humanity move towards enlightenment. Bodhi means “enlightenment” and sattva means “being." Bodhisattvas remain in close contact with imperfect humans and retain many of their human qualities. The difference between them and mere mortals is that they don't let these qualities pollute their spiritual essence. Bodhisattvas are ranked above gods in some cosmological schemes. According to the (सुखावतिवुहा) Sukhavativyuha, "Bodhisattvas are ten times more beautiful than devas, who are ten times more beautiful than humans". Bodhisattvas are especially important to Mahayana Buddhists. Mahayana temples often feature images of the Bodhisattvas Avalokitesvara, Tara, Maitreya, Amitabha and so on.

Avalokiteśvara

Avalokiteśvara is one of the most popular bodhisattvas in Buddhism. The literal meaning of the bodhisattvas is taken as the potential Buddha. The status of the Bodhisattvas is subordinate got the head position of the Buddha. In the tantric Buddhist pantheon, the bodhisattvas are regarded as ‘g’ whereas Gautam Buddha is regarded as capital ‘G’. The word Avalokiteśvara is made of ava (“down”) +lokita (“to notice”) +īśvara (“lord”) which means “the lord who gazes down at the world. It has been suggested that its original form was Avalokitaśvara with the ending a-śvara (“sound, noise”), which means “sound perceiver”, literally “he who looks down upon sound”. The original meaning of the name fits the Buddhist understanding of the role of a bodhisattva. Now the name Avalokiteśvara is variously interpreted as “the lord who descends,” “he who is enabled to reach the highest understanding,” “master of (inner) light i.e., enlightenment,” “the lord who looks in every direction,” “the lord of what we see” (i.e. the actual, created world), “With a Pitying Look,” “Lord of the World,” and “He Who Looks with the Eyes.”

Avalokiteśvara is depicted and portrayed in different cultures as either male or female. In Tibet, he is known as Chenrezig/ Jänräsig which means “the one who always looks upon all beings (with the eye of compassion)”. As Chenrezig, he is the Four-Armed male Avalokiteśvara, with two hands in the praying gesture while the other two hands hold his symbols, the Crystal Rosary and the Lotus Flower. His female consort is the goddess Dolma (Tārā). In China, he has been transformed into the female deity Guanyin. In Japan and Korea, he is known as Kannon and Gwaneum (or Gwanseeum-bosal) respectively. He is the only Mahāyāna Buddhist deity commonly worshipped in Theravāda. Avalokiteśvara is popularly worshipped in Thailand, where he is called Lokeśvara and in Myanmar, where he is called Lokanāt. Sri Lankans worship him as Nāthadeva (often mistakenly confusing with the future Buddha Maitreya).

Avalokiteśvara is a personification of infinite compassion and mercy, key virtues of Buddhism. Avalokiteśvara’s skilful means are never-ending and he has the ability to assume any form to relieve the suffering of the sentient beings. He quintessentially epitomizes the bodhisattva’s resolution to postpone his own Buddhahood until he has facilitated the liberation of each and every being in any form in any of the six realms of existence (hell-beings, pretas, animals, humans, asuras, and devas). Consequently, he descends to each of these realms to help those who suffer there. Chapter 25 of the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka Sūtra often circulates separately as an independent sūtra, called the Avalokiteśvara Sūtra, is generally accepted to be the earliest literature describing the virtues and doctrines of Avalokiteśvara. The Avalokiteśvara Sūtra was amalgamated into the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka Sūtra (Lotus Sutra) around the third century of the Common Era.

One prominent Buddhist legend tells that once one finds out that the number of suffering beings yet to be saved is overwhelmingly enormous, his head split into eleven pieces. Amitābha Buddha, seeing his plight, caused each piece to become a whole head with which to hear the cries of the suffering. Upon hearing these cries and comprehending them, Avalokiteśvara attempts to reach out to all those who need aid but finds that his two arms are shattered into pieces. Once more, Amitābha Buddha comes to his aid and invests him with a thousand arms with eyes on the palms of each hand (Thousand-Armed Avalokiteśvara Bodhisattva). Consequently, the thousand eyes allowed him to see the sufferings of sentient beings, and the thousand hands allowed him to reach out to help the suffering multitudes. He is also known as the spiritual son of Bodhisattva Amitābha. In this way, the Bodhisattva Avalokiteśvara has occupied a prominent place in Tantric Buddhism.

Tārā

Tārā, Ārya Tārā, or Shayama Tara, also known as Jetsun Dölma  in Tibetan Buddhism, is an important figure in Buddhism. She appears as a female bodhisattva in Mahayana Buddhism and as a female Buddha in Vajrayana Buddhism. She is known as the "mother of liberation", and represents the virtues of success in work and achievements.

Tārā is a meditation deity revered by practitioners of the Tibetan branch of Vajrayana Buddhism to develop certain inner qualities and to understand outer, inner and secret teachings such as karuṇā (compassion), mettā (loving-kindness), and shunyata (emptiness). Tārā may more properly be understood as different aspects of the same quality, as bodhisattvas are often considered personifications of Buddhist methods. Tara, Tibetan Sgrol-ma, a Buddhist saviour-goddess with numerous forms, is widely popular in Nepal, Tibet, and Mongolia. She is the feminine counterpart of the bodhisattva (“buddha-to-be”) Avalokiteshvara. According to popular belief, she came into existence from a tear of Avalokiteshvara, which fell to the ground and formed a lake. Out of its waters rose up a lotus, which, on opening, revealed the goddess. Like Avalokiteshvara, she is a compassionate, succouring deity who helps men “cross to the other shore.” She is the protectress of navigation and earthly travel, as well as of spiritual travel along the path to enlightenment.

In Tibet, she is believed to be incarnate in every pious woman, and the two wives—a Chinese princess and a Nepali princess—of the first Buddhist king of Tibet, Srong-brtsan-sgam-po, were identified with the two major forms of Tara. The White Tara (Sanskrit: Sitatara; Tibetan: Sgrol-dkar) was incarnated as the Chinese princess. She symbolizes purity and is often represented standing at the right hand of her consort, Avalokiteshvara, or seated with legs crossed, holding a full-blown lotus. She is generally shown with a third eye. Tara is also sometimes shown with eyes on the soles of her feet and the palms of her hands (then she is called “Tara of the Seven Eyes,” a form of the goddess popular in Mongolia). The Green Tara (Sanskrit: Shyamatara; Tibetan: Sgrol-lang) was believed to be incarnated as the Nepali princess. She is considered by some to be the original Tara and is the female consort of Amoghasiddhi, one of the “self-born” Buddhas. She is generally shown seated on a lotus throne with her right leg hanging down, wearing the ornaments of a bodhisattva and holding the closed blue lotus (utpala). The White and Green Taras, with their contrasting symbols of the full-blown and closed lotus, are said to symbolize between them the unending compassion of the deity who labours both day and night to relieve suffering. Under the influence of Tibetan Buddhism, the different forms of Tara multiplied to a traditional 108. Tibetan temple banners frequently show 21 different Taras, coloured white, red, and yellow, grouped around a central Green Tara. The figure of the “self-born” Amitabha Buddha is often shown in her headdress, as she, like Avalokiteshvara, is considered to be an emanation of Amitabha.

Maitreya

Maitreya, in Buddhist tradition, the future Buddha, presently a bodhisattva residing in the Tushita heaven, who will descend to earth to preach anew the dharma (“law”) when the teachings of Gautama Buddha have completely decayed. Maitreya is the earliest bodhisattva around whom a cult developed and is mentioned in scriptures from the 3rd century CE. He was accepted by all schools of Buddhism and is still the only bodhisattva generally honoured by the Theravada tradition. The name Maitreya is derived from the Sanskrit maitrī (“friendliness”). In Pali, the name becomes Metteyya, in Chinese Milefo, in Japanese Miroku, and in Mongolian Maidari; in Tibetan, the bodhisattva is known as Byams-pa (“Kind,” or “Loving”). His worship was especially popular from the 4th to the 7th century, and his images are found throughout the Buddhist world; many of them beautifully convey his characteristic air of expectancy and promise. He is represented in painting and sculpture both as a bodhisattva and as a Buddha, and he is frequently depicted seated in European fashion or with his ankles loosely crossed.

Maitreya is typically known as pictured seated, with either both feet on the ground or crossed at the ankles, on a throne, waiting for his time. Maitreya is dressed in the clothes of either a Bhiksu or Indian royalty. As a bodhisattva, Maitreya would usually be standing and dressed in jewels. Usually, Maitreya wears a small stupa in his headdress which represents the stupa of the Buddha Sakyamuni’s relics to help him identify it when his turn comes to lay claim to his succession, and can be holding a Dharmachakra resting on a lotus. A Khata is always tied around his waist as a girdle. He is flanked by his two acolytes, the brothers Asanga and Vasubandhu. The future Buddha Maitreya is also known as Gandhara in the 3rd century CE. Maitreya currently resides in the Tuṣita Heaven said to be reachable through meditation. Sakyamuni Buddha also lived here before he was born into the world as all bodhisattvas live in the Tuṣita Heaven before they descend to the human realm to become Buddhas. Although all bodhisattvas are destined to become Buddhas, the concept of a bodhisattva differs slightly in Theravada and Mahayana Buddhism. In Theravada Buddhism, a bodhisattva is one who is only destined to one day become a Buddha, whereas in Mahayana Buddhism. The bodhisattva is one who has already reached a very advanced state of grace or enlightenment but holds back from entering nirvana so that he may help others. 

Origin and development of images of Buddha and Bodhisattvas

The origin of the image of the Buddha dates back to the Kushana period. As a matter of fact Gautam Buddha rejected the practice of image worship. He propounded the theory of ‘No soul and No God’.  As a result the practice of idolatry god was prohibited by the Buddha for his followers. However, it is an established fact that man is a worshiper by nature. Man worships someone or something out of the respect, regard and reverence. So the followers of the Buddha started worshiping the Buddha first in the form of symbolism. With the passage of time new ideas, innovations and assimilation of culture gave rise to the image making in Buddhism.   

When Buddha died, his body was cremated and divided into several relic caskets that were interred within large hemispherical mounds known as stūpas. The relic of Buddha and other holy figures were the first known examples of Buddhist art. These sacred relics are divided into three categories: Saririka – the physical relics of Buddha; Uddesika – the religious symbols that include the image of Buddha, stupas, Dharmacakra (Wheel of the Dharma); Paribhogika – the articles used by the Buddha. Such stūpas constitute the central monument of Buddhist monastic complexes. Stūpas are enclosed by a railing that provides a path for ritual circumambulation. The sacred area is entered through gateways at the four cardinal points.

These early examples belong to the category of the Pre-iconic phase of Buddhist art that lasted from the 5th to the 1st century BC. In the earliest Buddhist art of India, the Buddha was not represented in human form, he was represented through the aniconic symbols such as the Bodhi tree, an empty throne, the deer, the elephant, the lotus, the lion, the horse with no rider, Buddha’s footprints, the bowl, and the Wheel of Dharma. According to Alfred A. Foucher, these anthropomorphic images of the Buddha are considered a result of a Greco-Buddhist interaction. 

In the first century BC, India’s artists, who had worked in the perishable media of brick, wood, thatch, and bamboo, adopted stone on a very wide scale. Stone railings and gateways, covered with relief sculptures, were added to stūpas. Favorite themes were events from the historic life of the Buddha, as well as from his previous lives, which were believed to number 550. The latter tales are called jatakas and often include popular legends adapted to Buddhist teachings.

The process of image making was state by the invasion by the Alexander of Macedonia. The Greek rule was established in the north-west region of India before the christen era. As a result of that intermingling of the Indian culture with the Greek culture. It is important to note that the image making and image worship was too much prevalent among the Greeks. This sort of dispensation cleared the way for image making and image worship in Buddhism. Thereafter Gautan Buddha sculptured in a human form during the reign of the King Kanishka of the Kushana Empire. In the first century CE brought something completely new to the Buddhist art, the artist started to depict Buddha in human form, and one of the first examples of this was found in the North-West India in the area known as Gandhara, the ancient name for Pakistan. The Gandhara artists combined the Buddhist symbolism with the elements from the Hellenistic world and created a unique style. They created young Buddha with curly hair that resembled the Roman statues of Apollo; they dressed him in the robe that covered both shoulders with heavy folds that reminded of the toga. There are also many representations of Siddhartha as a princely bejeweled figure prior to his renunciation of palace life.

·         Gandharan artists made use of both stone and stucco to produce such images, which were placed in niche like shrines around the stūpa of a monastery.

·         Contemporaneously, the Kushan-period artists in Mathura, produced a different image of the Buddha. His body was expanded by sacred breath (prana), and his clinging monastic robe was draped to leave the right shoulder bare.

·         A third influential Buddha type evolved in Andhra Pradesh (Amaravati and Nagarjunakonda), in southern India, where images of substantial proportions, with serious, unsmiling faces, were clad in robes that created a heavy swag at the hem and revealed the left shoulder. These southern sites provided artistic inspiration for the Buddhist land of Sri Lanka, off the southern tip of India, and Sri Lankan monks regularly visited the area. A number of statues in this style have been found as well throughout Southeast Asia.

·         The succeeding Gupta period, from the fourth to the sixth century CE, in northern India, sometimes referred to as a Golden Age, witnessed the creation of an “ideal image” of the Buddha. This was achieved by combining selected traits from the Gandharan region with the sensuous form created by Mathura artists. Gupta Buddhas have their hair arranged in tiny individual curls, and the robes have a network of strings to suggest drapery folds (as at Mathura) or are transparent sheaths (as at Sarnath). With their downward glance and spiritual aura, Gupta Buddhas became the model for future generations of artists, whether in post-Gupta and Pala India or in Nepal, Thailand, and Indonesia. Gupta metal images of the Buddha were also taken by pilgrims along the Silk Road to China.

The history of the origin and development of image of Buddha has been divided into three periods by the great archeologist John Marshal by the following way:-

1.      Early Buddhist Art: - the early Buddhist art is explained by the symbolical form of Buddhist art.

2.      Middle Buddhist Art: - the middle Buddhist art is known as the fusion of Indian art with the Greek art. In this period the image of the Buddha was sculptured and a new school of Buddhist art such as Gandhara school of Buddhist art sprang into existence.

3.      Later Buddhist Art: - the later Buddhist art witness the different school of Buddhist art such as Mathura, Amaravati and so on. The development of the Buddha images is very important a large number of images of the Buddha were produced in stones, wood, marbles, metals and so on.

In Tantrik Buddhism several Buddhist god and goddess came into existence. It has a well defined Buddhist pantheon. There are numbers of Bodhisattva namely Amitabha, Amitayush, Tara, Matriya, Avalokiteśvara and so on depicted in the manifest of the Buddhist paintings called Tankha. Over the following centuries there emerged a new form of Buddhism that involved an expanding pantheon and more elaborate rituals. This later Buddhism introduced the concept of heavenly bodhisattvas as well as goddesses like Avalokiteśvara, Maitreya, of whom the most popular was Tara. Buddhism evolved the concept of a Buddha of the Future, Maitreya, depicted in art both as a Buddha clad in a monastic robe and as a princely bodhisattva before enlightenment. In Nepal and Tibet, where exquisite metal images and paintings were produced, new divinities were created and portrayed in both sculpture and painted scrolls. Ferocious deities were introduced in the role of protectors of Buddhism and its believers. Images of a more esoteric nature, depicting god and goddess in embrace, were produced to demonstrate the metaphysical concept that salvation resulted from the union of wisdom (female) and compassion (male). Buddhism had traveled a long way from its simple beginnings. Finally, the origin and development of the images of the Buddha and Bodhisattvas is very important development in the history of Buddhist art.

References

1.      https://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/budd/hd_budd.htm

2.      http://factsanddetails.com/world/cat55/sub355/item1328.html

   3. https://www.widewalls.ch/magazine/history-of-buddhist-art

Different Kinds of Pramāṇa in Traditional Indian Philosophy

In India epistemology is an essential part of different part of different systems of philosophy. All schools of Indian philosophy, without exception accept a fact that epistemology is very important because they regard, ignorance as the root cause of human suffering. Therefore, they try to discuss carefully all aspects relating to the definition, means,validity and the way to achieve proper knowledge. this task is carried out to overcome suffering and to get liberation. 

Pramāṇa literally means "proof" and "means of knowledge”. It refers to epistemology in Indian philosophies, and is one of the key, much debated fields of study in Buddhism, Hinduism and Jainism, since ancient times. It is a theory of knowledge, and encompasses one or more reliable and valid means by which human beings gain accurate, true knowledge

·         Hinduism (Advaita Vedanta and Bhatta Mimamsa schools) identifies six Pramanas as correct means of accurate knowledge and to truths:

1.      Pratyakṣa (perception),

2.      Anumāṇa (inference),

3.      Upamāṇa (comparison and analogy),

4.      Arthāpatti (presumption, postulation, derivation from circumstances),

5.      Anupalabdhi (non-perception, negative/cognitive proof) and

6.      Śabda (word, testimony of past or present reliable experts).

·         Carvaka School

Carvaka School accepted only one valid source of knowledge i.e. Perception. It held all remaining methods as outright invalid or prone to error and therefore invalid

·         Vaisheshika school

Epistemologically, the Vaiśeṣika School considered the following as the only proper means of knowledge:

1.     Perception (Pratyakṣa)

2.     Inference (Anumāna)

·         Jainism, Sankhya, Yoga, Vishishtadvaita Vedanta, and Dvaita Vedanta schools

According to the Sankhya, Yoga, and two sub-schools of Vedanta, the proper means of knowledge must rely on these three pramanas

1.     Pratyakṣa — perception

2.     Anumāna — inference

3.     Śabda — testimony/word of reliable experts

·         Nyaya school

The Nyāya School accepts four means of obtaining knowledge (pramāṇa), viz., Perception, Inference, Comparison and Word.

1.     Perception, called Pratyakṣa

2.     Inference, called Anumāna,

3.     Comparison, called Upamāna.

4.     Word, or Śabda are also accepted as a pramāṇa.

·         Buddhism accepts only two Pramana as valid means to knowledge:

1.      Pratyaksha (perception) and

2.      Anumāṇa (inference).

Rinbochay adds that Buddhism also considers scriptures as third valid pramana, such as from Buddha and other "valid minds" and "valid persons". This third source of valid knowledge is a form of perception and inference in Buddhist thought. Valid scriptures, valid minds and valid persons are considered in Buddhism as Avisamvadin (incontrovertible, indisputable). Means of cognition and knowledge, other than perception and inference, are considered invalid in Buddhism. In Buddhism, the two most important scholars of pramāṇa are Dignāga and Dharmakīrti.