prayojana of treatises

Tue May 19 01:48:57 UTC 1998

At 12:04 AM 5/19/98 +0200, you wrote:

>There does not seem to be much question that a prayojanam is a necessary
>condition for action (prav.rttya.ngam, prav.rttihetu.h). But it seems that
>some authors disagreed about how the statement of the prayojanam serves to
>induce one to engage (prav.rtti) with the text. For many Buddhist authors,
>at any rate, the statement of the prayojana (along with the subject matter
>and the relation between them) can at best serve only to engender a doubt
>in the listener/reader. So the question becomes whether and how doubt can
>motivate action. On Funayama's reading, Arca.ta does not accept that doubt
>can motivate action, but rather thinks that action is based only on
> Thus for Arca.ta, the reason for stating the prayojanam at the
>beginning of the treatise is merely to dispell the idea that the treatise
>has no purpose at all (since it is a well known principle that speech
>without a purpose is not worthy of being either expounded or listened to).

Doubt can produce action which will tend to remove the doubt.
Taking the rajjusarpabhrAnti of advaitins

        You see in dim light something which looks like a snake.
Does this not motivate you to bring a light and ascertain whether it
is indeed a snake or something else.



More information about the INDOLOGY mailing list