[Buddha-l] Buddhists taking a stand against Islamaphobia

[Dan Lusthaus]

>> Dignaga, et al. pointed out long
>> ago, there is a difference between sensation (pratyaksa, which serves up
>> reality) and conceptualization about reality (anumana, etc.).
>
> I think Dan is thinking of Dharmakˆprti, not Dignˆgga. Dharmakˆprti 
> associates sensation with ultimate truth and inference with conventional 
> truth, but Dignˆgga claims that the very ideas of truth and falsity arise 
> only in kalpanˆg, which by his definition does not take place in 
> sensation. Sensation is reality-neutral for Dignˆgga.
> Richard Hayes

Dharmakirti certainly extended the distinction between the two pramanas 
beyond what Dignaga expressed, but it is not clear to me that "sensation is 
reality-neutral" (whatever that specifically means) for Dignaga. Richard, do 
you have any specific passages in mind for this understanding of Dignaga? 
"Truth" and "falsity" play in a different register than "real" and "unreal". 
The former is a conceptual pair, while pratyaksa is kalpana-apodha, devoid 
of conceptualization, so separate from true-false, but not from real-unreal.

Dan