PREFACE xxi
that the Purvamimansa and the Vedanta Sutras represent a long period of working over, it is by no means clear that we can deduce 1 from a remark of so late a writer as Surecvara that Jaimini, the author of the Purvamimansa, also wrote a more philosophical £ariraka Sutra,th& first two Sutras of which corre- spond with those of the extant Vedanta Sutra. The fact that in these two Sutras, Purvamimansa and Vedanta, references are made both to Jaimini and Badarayana is best explained, not by assuming a number of Jaiminis and Badarayanas, but simply by recognizing that each text represents a long scholastic develop- ment and that the use of the names may not represent the views of the authors in question any more accurately than do, for instance, those of the Christian Fathers or the Scholastics the doctrines of Aristotle, or those of the neo-Platonists those of Plato. Nothing, of course, conclusive can be adduced against the belief in many Jaiminis or Badarayanas, and recourse has recently been had 2 to the same device to explain the fact that Prabhakara sometimes appears in tradition as later than Kumarila, while his work as known to us shows no certain trace of such a relation. In this case the suggestion is probably needless. The much discussed question of Dignaga's place in the history of Indian logic, in special his relation to Pracastapada, has been furthered by Dr. Randle's edition of Dignaga's fragments 3 ; it appears to me that Dignaga's priority is still the more probable view, but this issue, as well as the important contributions to our knowledge of Indian philosophy by Professor M. Walleser, Th. Stcherbatsky, Louis de la Vallee Poussin, S. Radhakrishnan, Das Gupta, O. Strauss, Masson Oursel, J. W. Hauer, Ryukan Kimura, Kokileswar Sastri, Mahendranath Sircar, and others, must be reserved for discussion elsewhere. Y. Kanakura * has shown that the alleged interpolations in Cankara's Bhasya are known to Vacaspati Micra, while the date adopted by me 5 for C/afikara is supported by Jinavijaya's proof that Haribhadra, whom C/afikara
1 S. K. Belvalkar, Ftstgabe Garbe, pp. 162-70; Ind. Phil. Rev., ii. 141-54, Contra, Nilakantha Sastri, IA. 1. 172.
s Stcherbatsky, Festgabe Jacobi, p. 372. What is said in FOCM. 1924, pp. 475 ff , 523 ff. is inconclusive.
8 The Nyayapravefa is now published in GOS. 32 (vol. ii).
- Festgabe Jacobi, pp. 381-5 ; on Anandajiiana, cf. p. 382, n. 1.
6 IOC. ii. 612.
