Does Indian epistemology concern justified true belief?

Abstract

Of the various topics which are taken up in classical Indian philosophy, prdmanyavdda, equated with epistemology in the critical literature, strikes the Western philosopher of today as being most akin to something of deep concern to him. On the basis of the translations of the Sanskrit literature provided in the best contemporary expositions of Indian thought, questions about the nature of knowledge and truth appear to be clearly broached in Indian texts, and the intricacies of some of the analyses to be found in those texts rival the intricacies of analysis as practiced by the best of recent and living Anglo-American professional philosophers. In my opinion the most outstanding exposition of Indian thinking on the topic of prâmânyavâda is to be found in the work of Jitendranath Mohanty, and most notably in his ground-breaking book, Gangesa's Theory of Truth.1 In his Introduction to a translation of the (Jnapti) Prâmânya section of Gangesa's Tattvacintdmani Mohanty first disambiguates a number of key terms and lays out in exemplary fashion the issues which appear to separate the two sides in the classical polemic concerning whether the awareness of prâmânya is "intrinsic" (svatah) or "extrinsic" (paratah). This review distinguishes the positions not only of the many important Indian systems involved — Mimamsâ, Advaita and Nyaya — but also succinctly identifies the positions of subschools within these as well as the opinions of individual philosophers found in their writings. This Introduction is followed by a faithful translation of Gangesa's chapter with copious explanatory remarks without which the Tattvaeintâmani, extremely laconic in its style, could not be understood by anyone not initiated into Sanskrit and Navyanyaya. The entire volume is a tour de force, a subtle, critical illumination of the most intricate kind of materials calling for that rare combination, brilliance as Indologist and philosopher rolled into one. Though the paper that now follows takes issue with some of Mohanty's conclusions, this in no way should be thought to mitigate against what I have just said about the book. It is only because of rare efforts such as his that it becomes possible to push further into important matters and argue issues in a fashion that promises to provide general insights.