prayojana of treatises

[DEVARAKONDA VENKATA NARAYANA SARMA]

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
>pramaa.na. 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.

regards,

sarma.