Pramana Wiki

The Buddha as Valid Cognition (pramāṇabhūta)

6 min read

The Buddha as Valid Cognition (ཚད་མར་གྲུབ་པ་, pramāṇasiddhi)

The argument that the Bhagavan Buddha is a valid person (ཚད་མའི་སྐྱེས་བུ་, pramāṇabhūta) — i.e. a nondeceptive source of instruction about what is to be adopted and what is to be discarded on the path to liberation. The demonstration occupies all of Chapter 2 of the pramanavartika and is formally constructed as a commentary on the five epithets of dignaga’s opening homage in the pramanasamuccaya:

I prostrate to him who became valid, resolved to work for the benefit of others, the Teacher, the Sugata, and the Protector.

dharmakirti’s strategy: rather than assert the Buddha’s authority dogmatically, derive it by reasoning from an observable cause (great compassion) through the methods that cause produces (training in no-self over many lives) to the three resultant epithets (Teacher, Sugata, Protector) — and run the argument in both directions.

What Counts as a Valid Person

Dharmakīrti’s first — and crucial — move is to narrow the target of the demonstration. The valid person is not one who knows “all hidden phenomena” (since no such being can be established by reasoning), but one who:

knows the realities of what is to be developed and discarded, together with methods and causes. — PV 2.32

That is, the valid person is the one who knows the four truths: suffering (to be known), origin (to be abandoned), cessation (to be achieved), and path (to be relied on). Dharmakīrti’s rhetorical flourish: “If seeing far makes for a valid being, come and devote yourselves to vultures!” (PV 2.33d).

This redefinition deflects the Jaiminīya Mīmāṃsā objection that no human being can know all hidden phenomena. The point is irrelevant: omniscience in that sense is neither necessary nor the basis of the Buddha’s authority.

Forward Sequence: From Compassion to Protector

Gorampa’s scholastic outline (PV 2.29–146; gorampa-pramanavartika, §§35–39):

  1. Great compassion is the accomplisher (PV 2.34) — equanimous, non-selfish, wishing to liberate all beings
  2. Compassion is cultivated through training over many lives — this presupposes past and future lives, which must first be established (see proof-of-rebirth)
  3. Training admits unlimited increase (PV 2.120–131) — qualities of mind, produced from homogeneous mental causes, operate “naturally on their own, like fire with wood and quicksilver with gold”; unlike jumping or heating water, they do not run into physical ceilings
  4. From compassion arises “Teacher” (PV 2.132–139) — the one who, by analysing the cause and antidote of suffering, comes to see all faults and qualities clearly; trained in the methods
  5. From “Teacher” arises “Sugata” (PV 2.139c–145b) — abandonment with three qualities:
    • Well abandoned (no basis for afflicted suffering, arising from seeing no-self; superior to non-Buddhist “freedom from desire”)
    • Abandoned never to return (seeds of the view of self uprooted; superior to the Lesser Vehicle)
    • Completely abandoned (imprints of mental afflictions eradicated; superior to śrāvaka and pratyekabuddha arhats, who still have bad tendencies of body, speech, and mind)
  6. From “Sugata” arises “Protector” (PV 2.145c–146) — one who speaks the path he has seen, without the faults that would cause him to deceive

Reverse Sequence: From the Four Truths Back to Compassion

The reverse demonstration (PV 2.147–283) takes as its premise that the Buddha taught the four truths and establishes each truth by entity-based reasoning, so that the teaching itself is seen to be without error — which then grounds “Protector”, from which the earlier epithets can be reconstructed:

  • Truth of suffering (PV 2.147–178): the appropriated aggregates possessed of saṃsāra; saṃsāra is established by (a) desire being manifest at birth, which must have had a previous homogeneous cause, and (b) the material-cause principle; the four aspects (impermanence, suffering, empty, no-self) are established
  • Truth of origin (PV 2.179–190): suffering is established as having a cause (refuting uncausedness and refuting Īśvara / permanent causes); craving is the main cause
  • Truth of cessation (PV 2.191–205): liberation is possible; conventional self engages in bondage and liberation while the aggregates are what ultimately carry them (for tenet-holders from Vaibhāṣika upward); refutation of both the permanent self and the Pudgalavādins’ “inexpressible” self
  • Truth of the path (PV 2.206–279): the understanding of no-self is the sole antidote to saṃsāra. Key argument: defilements and the antidote have contradictory modes of apprehension on the same object (self), and “the nature of mind is luminous, and the defilements are incidental” (PV 2.208–209), so defilements had no power to harm mind by way of its nature even previously. Merely distinct apprehension is not enough to be an antidote (desire and anger are distinct but share ignorance as root); partial suppression is not enough (love does not contradict ignorance); only the view of emptiness uproots. Ritual paths (Īśvara-initiation, mantra, five-fire reliance, ascetic practices) cannot uproot craving because they do not oppose apprehension of self

With the four truths established by reasoning, “Protector” follows (PV 2.280). “Sugata” is then given a second gloss — not only abandonment but three aspects of knowing (reality-as-it-is, stability, knowing the features of all phenomena) — reconciling the forward and reverse uses of the epithet. “Teacher” follows from engagement in knowing the needs of others, and “compassion” from not neglecting others’ welfare once one’s own purposes are fulfilled (PV 2.281–282). Endeavour is thereby established (PV 2.283).

Purpose of the Praise

Dharmakīrti closes (PV 2.283–285) by stating the purpose of praising the Buddha by way of pramāṇa: it is to know that pramāṇa as a system is established from the Buddha’s own teaching — “it is not that Dignāga invented it.” The Buddha himself taught inference, syllogisms (whatever is produced is subject to cessation; smoke → fire), and the indispensability characteristic (ma khyab med pa, avinābhāva) of a correct reason.

Relationship to Scriptural Authority

This argument is the formal grounding of the view that scripture is subsumed under inference (see scriptural-authority). By proving that the Buddha is nondeceptive with respect to the four truths, Dharmakīrti gives a reason (compassion-driven training over many lives) that warrants inferring the rest. The argument is therefore Buddhist epistemic pessimism in operation: untrained awareness is shot through with ignorance, so the authority of any source of knowledge must itself be demonstrated.

Sources

Graph View

Backlinks