________________
192
Studies in Umāsvāti
found in the Tattvārthasūtra. He further stated in no equivocal words that the twofold classification of pramāṇa is not like the one accepted by the Buddhists and Vaiseșikas. It is interesting to note that he uses the word 'Māyāsūnavīya') for the Buddhist philosophers. Ācārya Umāsvāti in his bhāsya on the sūtra has also referred to the fourfold classification of some Ācāryas, but without mentioning the names of those pramāṇas and their upholders. It becomes clear from the vivarana that the fourfold classification of pramāņa owing to the distinction of perception, inference, analogy and verbal testimony is found in the canon entitled 'Anuyogadvārasūtra'.
Having raised a question about the distinction between pramāṇa and naya, he has cited two views upheld by some philosophers and critically assessed them with the precision tools of a neo-logician. Quoting the duo of slokas -
अयं न संशयः कोटेरैक्यान्न च समुच्चयः। न विभ्रमो यथार्थत्वादपूर्णत्वाच्च न प्रमा।। न समुद्रोऽसमुद्रो वा समुद्रांशो यथोच्यते।
नाप्रमाणं प्रमाणं वा प्रमाणांशस्तथा नयः।। He has supported the view upholding the standpoint (naya) as a part of pramāņa. Owing to the state of naya-jñāna being excluded from erroneous cognition, valid cognition (pramā) and as doubt also from their aggregation, and there arises an objection as to how its presence and absence will correspond to those of the verbal testimony. Refuting this objection with the acumen of a neo-logician, Yaśovijaya resolves as follows:
'न, तथात्वेऽपि तत्त्वमस्यादिवाक्यजन्यज्ञाने वेदान्तिनामिव व्यञ्जनावृत्तिजन्यज्ञाने चालङ्कारिकाणामिव तात्पर्यवैचित्र्येण वैचित्र्यस्याप्रत्यूहत्वात्, शाब्दत्वजात्यनतिक्रमेऽपि च श्रुतचिन्ताभावनाज्ञानानां शब्दस्य दीर्घदीर्घतरव्यापारेणावान्तरजातिवैचित्र्यं शास्त्रसिद्धमेव, शब्दजप्रत्यक्ष इव वा शब्दजन्यज्ञाने वैचित्र्यं भावनीयम्।'
Pointing out the defect in the definition- 'अनन्तधर्मात्कत्वप्रतिपत्तिविशिष्टे वस्तुज्येकधर्मविधारणं नयः', he puts forth a precise
