[Buddha-l] A vocabulary question for Stephen and Lance (oranyoneelse)

[L.S. Cousins]

Stephen,

>L.S. Cousins wrote:
>>But what is meant is something more like contemplating dhamma(s) as 
>>impermanent, etc. It's not any kind of objective analysis.


>Are you alluding here to pa~n~na or to pravicaya ?

Both.

>  In Tibetan sources, undoubtedly based on Indic material, one reads 
>that praj~naa discriminates and investigates the qualities and 
>defects of an object under consideration by means of the four yuktis 
>(reasoning).  I think Dan has already mentioned this.

I understand this to refer specifically to wisdom based on reflection 
(cintamayii). In the Ko"sa evidence is normally based on either 
scripture (aagama) or reasoning (yukti); so naturally the first two 
kinds of wisdom are based on scripture and reasoning respectively. 
But eventually both are superseded or crowned by wisdom based on 
meditation practice i.e. arising in or after samaadhi.

But the reasoning here is not the reasoning we are meant to use in 
western academic scholarship i.e. an objective evaluation. Rather, 
arguments are used to convince oneself of known truths as part of a 
process aiming at personal transformation.

What by the way are the four yuktis ? I see that the fact that there 
are four is mentioned in YBhS and I seem to recall that this is 
discussed in detail by Scherrer-Schaub, but I have only her 
preliminary article here. Is it a term for the four mahaapadesa as in 
the Pali yuttihaara ?

Lance Cousins