The  Second  Chapter    
of  the  
 Pramanavarttika  
 
 
Handout  for  the  Fall  2014  Term  
for  the  Advanced  Buddhist  Philosophy  Course  in  
English  
 
INSTITUTE  OF  BUDDHIST  DIALECTICS  
McLeod  Ganj,  Dharamsala,  India  
Prepared  by  Venerable  Kelsang  Wangmo  
 
 
 
 
  
 

Table  of  Contents1  

Introduction  ..........................................................................................................................................................  1  
Dignaga  ......................................................................................................................................................................................  1  
Dharmakirti  .............................................................................................................................................................................  2  
Gyaltsab  Je  ................................................................................................................................................................................  4  
The  Seven  Treatises  on  Pramana  ...................................................................................................................................  4  
The  eight  pivotal  points  of  logic  ......................................................................................................................................  5  
The  Pramanavarttika  ...........................................................................................................................................................  8  
The  chapter  on  inference  for  one’s  own  benefit  .....................................................................................................  8  
The  chapter  on  the  establishment  of  a  valid  cognizer  ........................................................................................  8  
The  chapter  on  direct  perception  and  the  chapter  on  inference  for  others’  benefit  ................................  9  
Elucidation  of  the  Path  to  Liberation  ............................................................................................................................  9  
Questions  for  studying  the  Introduction  ..............................................................................................................  10  
 
 
Table  of  Contents  for  the  Body  of  the  text:  
 
The  Second  Chapter  of  the  Elucidation  of  the  Path  to  Liberation    
An  explanation  of  [this  chapter's]  objects  of  realization  –  liberation,  omniscience,  and  the  paths  leading  
to  [the  two,  liberation  and  omniscience]    
The  general  meaning    
Citing  the  explanation  by  Acharya  Dignaga    
The  way  the  meaning  [of  Dignaga's  explanation]  is  elucidated  by  the  author  of  the  Pramanavarttika    
[Dignaga  and  Dharmakirti's]  view    
The  meaning  of  the  branches    
Identifying  'non-­‐deceptive'    

                                                                                                               

1     DRAFT  -­‐    
The  Second  Chapter  of  the  Pramanavarttika  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

  2  
 Introduction  
 
The  following  handout  for  the  IBD  Buddhist  philosophy  course  on  the  second  chapter  of  Dharmakirti’s  
Pramanavarttika  contains  translations  of  two  texts:  
1. The  second  chapter  of  Dharmakirti's  Pramanavarttika  (Tib.:  tshad  ma  rnam  ‘grel,  Engl.:  
Commentary  on  [Dignaga’s  Compendium  of]  Pramana)    
2. The  second  chapter  of  Gyaltsab  Je's  commentary  on  the  Pramanavarttika,  called  Elucidation  of  the  
Path  to  Liberation,  a  Detailed  Explanation  of  the  Verse  Lines  of  the  Pramanavarttika  (Tib.:  tshad  
ma  rnam  'grel  gyi  tshig  le'ur  byes  pa  rnam  bshad  thar  lam  gsal  byed)  –  usually  referred  to  as  
Elucidation  of  the  Path  to  Liberation  (Tib.:  thar  lam  gsal  byed)  
 
Gyaltsab  Je’s  Elucidation  of  the  Path  to  Liberation  is  interspersed  with  the  Pramanavarttika,  for  the  
commentary  provides  detailed  expositions  on  the  meaning  of  the  verses  of  the  root  text.    
Furthermore,  since  both  texts  are  difficult  to  comprehend  on  their  own,  they  are  also  interspersed  with  
additional  explanations  by  contemporary  masters  such  as  Geshe  Yeshe  Thabgyal,  Geshe  Palden  Drakpa,  
Geshe  Wangchen,  Geshe  Gyatso,  Geshe  Tsering  Norbu,  and  others.  
As  the  name  of  the  text  implies,  Dharmakirti's  Pramanavarttika  is  a  commentary  on  Dignaga's  
Compendium  of  Pramana  (Skt:  Pramana-­‐samuccaya,  Tib.:  tshad  ma  kun  btus).  The  six  chapters  of  
Dignaga’s  Compendium  are  written  in  verse  and  constitute  one  of  the  most  important  works  on  Pramana.  
Here  the  Sanskrit  term  Pramana  translates  as  “logic”  or  “epistemology”,  although  it  literally  means  “valid  
cognizer”.  This  is  explained  in  more  detail  below.  
 

Dignaga  
Dignaga  (ca.  450-­‐540  CE)  was  a  proponent  of  the  Chittamatra  school  Following  Reasoning  and  one  of  
Vasubandhu’s  four  great  disciples,  each  of  whom  surpassed  their  teacher  in  a  particular  field  of  Buddhist  
study.  Dignaga  was  more  learned  than  Vasubandhu  in  Pramana2.    
Dignaga  was  born  into  a  Brahmin  family  in  Simhavaktra,  near  Kanchi  in  South  India.  At  a  young  age,  he  
became  very  proficient  in  the  sacred  Brahmin  scriptures  and  the  worldly  sciences.  However,  he  eventually  
lost  interest  in  the  spiritual  system  of  the  Brahmins,  developed  renunciation  for  the  suffering  nature  of  cyclic  
existence,  and  took  ordination  from  a  Buddhist  teacher  called  Nagadatta  (Tib.:  glang  po  byin)  of  the  
Vatsiputriya  system,  a  sub-­‐school  of  the  Buddhist  Vaibhashika  School.  Nagadatta  named  him  Dignaga  (Tib.:  
phyogs  kyi  glang  po)  and  gave  him  extensive  teachings  on  the  three  baskets  according  to  the  Vatsiputriya  
system.  
Followers  of  the  Vatsiputriya  system  assert  a  type  of  self  that  is  inexpressible  as  something  substantially  or  
imputedly  existent,  or  as  being  the  same  or  different  from  the  five  aggregates.  Dignaga  was  instructed  by  his  
teacher  to  meditate  on  the  inexpressible  self.  In  an  attempt  to  find  and  comprehend  the  inexpressible  self,  
Dignaga  is  said  to  have  kindled  fires  in  the  four  directions,  stripped  off  his  clothes,  and  meditated  day  and  
night.  When  he  reported  back  to  his  teacher  that  he  was  unable  to  find  such  a  self,  his  teacher  took  this  as  an  
indirect  criticism  and  sent  him  to  study  elsewhere.  
Dignaga  went  to  stay  at  Nalanda  Monastery  where  he  became  a  disciple  of  Vasubandhu.  He  studied  and  
mastered  the  entire  body  of  sutras  and  treatises  of  the  Hinayana  and  Mahayana,  and  became  a  great  tantric  
practitioner,  receiving  instructions  from  Manjushri  himself.  He  also  developed  great  skills  in  debate  and  on  
numerous  occasions  defended  the  monastery  against  learned  non-­‐Buddhist  scholars  who  challenged  the  

                                                                                                               
2  The  other  three  disciples  were  (1)  Shtiramati  who  was  more  learned  than  Vasubandhu  in  Abhidharma,  (2)  Gunaprabha  who  was  
more  learned  in  the  Vinaya,  and  (3)  Arya  Vimuktisena  who  was  more  learned  in  the  Prajnaparamita.  

 
The  Second  Chapter  of  the  Pramanavarttika  
 
monks  in  debate.  Dignaga  became  particularly  renowned  for  having  defeated  the  great  Brahmin  scholar,  
Sudurjaya,  who  –  as  a  result  of  losing  the  debate  –  converted  to  Buddhism  together  with  his  disciples.    
At  the  time,  it  was  customary  for  a  scholar  who  lost  a  debate  to  adopt,  along  with  his  disciples,  the  spiritual  
system  of  the  victor.  
Dignaga  eventually  left  Nalanda  in  order  to  lead  a  contemplative  life  in  the  forests  of  Orissa.  There  he  
resolved  to  compose  what  became  his  most  famous  work,  the  Compendium  of  Pramana,  as  a  compilation  of  
his  many  previous  writings  on  Pramana,  which,  according  to  his  own  description,  were  fragmentary  works.  
It  is  said  that  he  wrote  the  first  verse  of  the  Compendium,  comprising  the  homage  and  promise  to  compose  
the  text,  on  a  rock  at  his  cave  hermitage:  
To the one who has become a valid cognizer, to that which wishes to benefit migrators,
To the "teacher", the "sugata", the "protector", I prostrate.
In order to establish valid cognizers, I will herewith create a single compendium of my various
fragmentary writings
When  he  wrote  those  words  many  auspicious  signs  occurred,  such  as  light  blazing  forth,  the  earth  trembling,  
loud  thunder  rolling  in  the  sky,  and  so  forth.  A  Brahmin  ascetic  called  Krishnamuni  observed  these  signs  and  
through  his  clairvoyance  understood  that  they  were  the  results  of  Dignaga’s  writing.  Driven  by  envy,  he  went  
to  Dignaga’s  cave  while  the  latter  was  away  on  alms-­‐rounds  and  erased  the  words.  When  Dignaga  returned,  
he  wrote  the  verse  again,  and  again  Krishnamuni  came  to  erase  it.  The  third  time  Dignaga  left  an  additional  
note  that  read,  “Please  do  not  erase  this  verse  just  for  fun  because  with  this  verse  I  am  pursuing  a  great  aim.  
Also,  there  is  no  point  in  erasing  it  out  of  envy  since  it  is  in  my  mind  from  where  it  cannot  be  removed.  But  if  
you  disagree  with  these  words,  you  should  show  yourself,  and  we  will  debate.”  When  the  auspicious  signs  
occurred  a  third  time,  Krishnamuni  went  again  to  Dignaga’s  cave.  But  upon  reading  the  note  he  refrained  
from  erasing  the  verse  and  waited  for  Dignaga’s  return.  The  two  debated  and  Krishnamuni  was  defeated  
three  times.  When  Dignaga  asked  him  to  adopt  the  Buddha  Dharma  as  a  result  of  his  defeat,  the  Brahmin  
ascetic  grew  furious  and  emanated  magical  flames  that  burned  Dignaga’s  clothes  and  possessions.    
Distraught  and  discouraged  by  the  Brahmin’s  reaction,  Dignaga  felt  that  if  he  could  not  help  the  highly  
intelligent  Brahmin,  how  could  be  of  benefit  to  all  sentient  beings  by  composing  the  Compendium  of  
Pramana?  He  threw  the  chalk  with  which  he  had  written  the  verse  up  in  the  air,  thinking,  “As  soon  as  the  
chalk  touches  the  ground,  I  will  give  up  my  aspiration  to  attain  enlightenment  for  the  benefit  of  all  sentient  
beings  and  instead  strive  to  become  self-­‐liberated”.  But  the  chalk  did  not  fall  back  to  the  ground  and  when  he  
looked  up,  he  saw  Manjushri  in  the  sky,  holding  the  chalk.  Manjushri  asked  Dignaga  not  to  give  up  his  mind  
of  enlightenment,  and  promised  to  protect  him  until  he  attained  the  state  of  a  Buddha.  He  also  asked  him  to  
compose  the  Compendium  and  prophesied  that  in  the  future  this  commentary  would  become  an  eye  for  
migrating  beings.  
Encouraged  by  these  words,  Dignaga  composed  the  Compendium  of  Pramana,  which,  along  with  
Dharmakirti’s  Pramanavarttika,  has  remained  ever  since  the  subject  of  study,  contemplation,  and  
meditation  –  at  first  widely  in  India,  and  then  for  centuries  in  Tibet,  Mongolia,  and  the  Himalayan  regions.  
After  completing  the  text,  Dignaga  travelled  around  South  India  and  greatly  furthered  the  spread  of  
Buddhism.  One  of  his  main  disciples  was  Ishvarasena  (Tib.:  dbang  phyung  sde)  who  composed  a  commentary  
on  the  Compendium  of  Pramana  and  later  became  one  of  Dharmakirti’s  teachers.  
 

Dharmakirti  
Dharmakirti  (ca.  600-­‐660  CE)  was  also  a  follower  of  the  Chittamatra  School  Following  Reasoning.  He  was  
born  to  a  Brahmin  family  in  Tirumalai  in  the  kingdom  of  Chudamani  of  Tamil  Nadu.  Until  the  age  of  eighteen  
he  trained  in  the  Brahminical  tradition  and  became  very  well-­‐versed  in  non-­‐Buddhist  philosophy.  Then,  
upon  reading  a  Buddhist  text,  he  developed  faith  in  the  Buddha  Dharma  and  started  to  dress  in  the  style  of  a  
Buddhist  layperson.  This  angered  the  Brahmins  and  he  was  expelled  from  his  community.    
Dharmakirti  went  to  Nalanda  monastery  where  he  received  ordination  and  extensive  teachings  from  
Dharmapala  (Tib.:  chos    skyong).  Then  he  requested  Ishvarasena  –  who  was  a  direct  disciple  of  Dignaga  –  to  
teach  him  the  Compendium  of  Pramana.  Ishvarasena  taught  him  the  text  three  times.  After  the  first  time,  
  2  
The  Second  Chapter  of  the  Pramanavarttika  
 
Dharmakirti's  understanding  of  the  Compendium  had  become  equal  to  that  of  Ishvarasena;  after  
the  second  time,  it  had  become  equal  to  Dignaga’s;  and  after  the  third  time  Dharmakirti  was  able  to  
recognize  that  some  of  Ishvarasena's  assertions  were  not  in  accordance  with  Dignaga's  views.  After  
Dharmakirti  revealed  those  mistaken  assertions  to  Ishvarasena,  the  latter  was  delighted  by  his  student's  
intelligence  and  granted  him  permission  to  compose  a  commentary  on  the  Compendium  of  Pramana  in  
order  to  refute  those  assertions.  
Dharmakirti  was  also  initiated  into  the  Buddhist  tantras,  became  a  highly  accomplished  practitioner,  and  had  
a  direct  vision  of  Heruka.  
In  order  to  deepen  his  understanding  of  non-­‐Buddhist  philosophy,  Dharmakirti  then  went  to  work  as  the  
servant  of  a  renowned  non-­‐Buddhist  scholar,  pretending  not  to  be  a  Buddhist.  He  served  him  and  his  family  
for  several  years,  learning  all  the  secret  points  of  that  philosophical  system.  Later  he  challenged  and  defeated  
the  renowned  scholar  in  debate,  converting  him  and  his  disciples  to  Buddhism.  
Thereafter,  Dharmakirti  travelled  across  India  converting  many  people  to  Buddhism.  Eventually  he  arrived  
at  the  gates  of  the  residence  of  king  Utphullapuspa,  who  had  heard  of  Dharmakirti's  great  fame  and  invited  
him  to  stay  in  his  kingdom.  Dharmakirti  accepted  and  while  staying  there  composed  the  Seven  Treatises  on  
Pramana  (Tib.:  tshad  ma  sde  bdun)  –  one  of  which  is  the  Pramanavarttika  –  as  well  as  an  auto-­‐commentary  
on  the  first  chapter  of  the  Pramanavarttika.  However,  most  contemporary  scholars  were  unable  to  grasp  
the  meaning  of  the  treatises.  The  few  who  understood  the  meaning,  moved  by  envy,  claimed  that  they  were  
incorrect  and  tied  them  with  a  string  to  the  tail  of  a  dog.  Dharmakirti's  response  was  that  the  dog  would  run  
through  the  different  villages  and  cities,  and  in  that  manner  spread  the  treatises.  He  also  added  a  verse  to  the  
beginning  of  the  Pramanavarttika  (after  the  verse  of  homage  and  the  promise  to  compose  the  text)  that  
reads:  
Most living beings are attached to the mundane and not endowed with the dexterity
of wisdom.
Not only are they not interested in excellent teachings, they are hateful owing to the
defilement of envy.
This is why the thought that this [treatise] will be beneficial to others does not
occur.3
However, since I have generated great effort familiarizing [my] mind with excellent
teachings, I am happy [to compose the treatise].

Sometime  later  Dharmakirti  taught  the  Pramanavarttika  to  two  of  his  main  disciples,  Devendrabodhi  (Tib.:  
lha  dbang  blo)  and  Shakyabodhi  (Tib.:  sha’kya  blo).  Afterwards,  he  asked  Devendrabodhi  to  compose  a  
commentary  on  the  text.  However,  displeased  with  the  first  draft  Dharmakirti  washed  it  away  with  water;  
displeased  with  the  second  draft  he  burned  it.  He  finally  accepted  the  third  draft  but  criticized  it,  remarking  
that  although  the  explicit  meaning  of  the  text  was  conveyed,  the  deeper  implicit  meaning  was  not.  
Thinking  that  no  one  would  be  able  to  properly  comprehend  his  text,  Dharmakirti  added  the  following  line  to  
the  end  of  the  Pramanavarttika:  
Just as a river into the ocean, [the meaning of this treatise] will dissolve into my
body and disappear.

Towards  the  end  of  his  life  Dharmakirti  founded  a  school  and  a  temple  at  Kalinga,  where  he  passed  away.  
Both  Dignaga  and  Dharmakirti  strongly  affected  the  course  not  only  of  Buddhist  philosophy,  but  of  Indian  
philosophy  in  general.  Their  expositions  on  language,  negation,  direct  perception,  etc.  were  highly  influential  
among  both  Buddhist  and  non-­‐Buddhist  philosophers,  but  their  greatest  impact  derived  from  their  analysis  
of  inferential  reasoning.  
Dignaga  and  Dharmakirti  are  often  described  as  Buddhist  logicians,  for  they  formulated  a  system  of  logic  and  
epistemology  that  was  based  on  a  new  form  of  deductive  reasoning.  Yet  this  does  not  mean  that  they  were  
chiefly  interested  in  the  formal  properties  of  reasoning.  Instead,  they  regarded  logic  as  a  useful  tool  that  

                                                                                                               
3
     In  the  first  class  (October  1,  2014),  Geshe  Kelsang  Wangmo  explains  the  difficulties  this  line  presents  for  translation  
and  suggests  other  renderings.    See,  p.  21  of  Class  Notes  -­‐  download  from  ibd-­‐buddhist.blogspot.com.  
  3  
The  Second  Chapter  of  the  Pramanavarttika  
 
enables  Buddhist  practitioners  to  eliminate  their  misperceptions,  replace  them  with  correct  apprehensions  
of  reality  and  eventually  attain  liberation  and  Buddhahood.    
The  debate  format  that  is  still  very  popular  among  Tibetan  Buddhist  students  of  debate  is  based  largely  on  
Dignaga  and  Dharmakirti’s  works.  Dharmakirti’s  Pramanavarttika,  in  particular,  provides  Tibetan  Buddhist  
philosophers  with  a  standard  vocabulary  that  is  used  as  a  framework  for  analysis  of  the  various  Buddhist  
scriptures.  It  also  represents  the  epistemological  foundation  of  the  curriculum  in  many  Tibetan  monastic  
institutions.  
 

Gyaltsab  Je  
Gyaltsab  Darma  Rinchen  (1364–1432)  was  born  in  Tsang  province  of  central  Tibet.  He  was  ordained  as  a  
monk  at  the  age  of  ten  and  given  the  name  Darma  Rinchen  (dar  ma  rin  chen).  Gyaltsab  Je  studied  at  the  Sakya  
Monastery,  the  Kadam  monastery  of  Sangpu  (gsang  phu),  and  the  Kagyu  monastery  Tsetang  (rtse  thang  –  
which  later  converted  to  the  Geluk  tradition).  Like  Lama  Tsongkhapa,  he  was  also  a  student  of  the  renowned  
Sakya  Master  Rendawa  Zhoenu  Lodroe  (red  mda'  ba  gzhon  nu  blo  gros).    
After  extensive  study  of  the  Prajnaparamita,  Pramana,  Vinaya,  and  so  forth  Gyaltsab  Je  became  an  
accomplished  and  eloquent  scholar  of  the  Sakya  tradition,  famed  for  his  intellect  and  knowledge.  While  
visiting  different  monasteries  in  Central  Tibet,  he  met  Lama  Tsongkhapa.  He  had  heard  of  Lama  
Tsongkhapa’s  fame  and  went  to  attend  one  of  Lama  Tsongkhapa’s  teachings  at  Ratrong  Monastery.  As  
Gyaltsab  Je  listened  to  Lama  Tsongkhapa,  he  was  astounded  by  the  clarity  and  profundity  of  his  teaching,  and  
generated  great  faith.  From  that  time  on,  Gyaltsab  Je  was  completely  devoted  to  Lama  Tsongkhapa  and  
became  one  of  his  main  disciples.  He  received  extensive  teachings  from  Lama  Tsongkhapa  and  took  copious  
notes.    Being  a  prolific  writer  he  composed  numerous  commentaries  (such  as  the  Elucidation  of  the  Path  to  
Liberation).  He  also  supervised  the  construction  of  Ganden  Monastery.  
Before  Lama  Tsongkhapa  passed  away,  he  appointed  Gyaltsab  Je  as  the  first  ‘throne  holder’  of  the  Ganden  (or  
Gelug)  tradition.  
 

The  Seven  Treatises  on  Pramana  

As  mentioned  above,  Dharmakirti  composed  seven  commentaries  on  the  Compendium  of  Pramana,  
referred  to  as  the  Seven  Treatises  on  Pramana  (Tib.:  tshad  ma  sde  bdun).  These  seven  texts  can  be  categorized  
into:  
i. Three  treatises  that  are  like  a  body  and    
ii. Four  treatises  that  are  like  branches.  
The  three  treatises  that  are  like  a  body  are:  
a) Pramanavarttika  (Tib.:  tshad  ma  rnam  'grel,  Engl.:  Commentary  on  [Dignaga's  Compendium  
of]  Pramana)  
b) Pramanaviniscaya  (Tib.:  tshad  ma  rnam  nges,  Engl.:  Ascertainment  of  Pramana)  
c) Nyayabindu  (Tib.:  rigs  thigs,  Engl.:  Drops  of  Reasoning)  
 
The  four  treatises  that  are  like  branches  are:  
a) Hetubindu  (Tib.:  gtan  tshigs  thig  pa,  Engl.:  Drops  of  Logic)  
b) Sambandhapariksha  (Tib.:  'brel  ba  brtag  pa,  Engl.:  Investigating  Relations)  
c) Samtanantarasiddhi  (Tib.:  rgyud  gzhan  grub  pa,  Engl.:  Proof  of  Other  [Mental]  Continua)  
d) Vadanyaya  (Tib.:  rtsod  pa'i  rigs  pa,  Engl.:  Reasoning  of  Debate)  
The  three  treatises  that  are  like  a  body  are  general  elaborations  on  the  Compendium  of  Pramana  on  logic  
and  epistemology.  The  first  is  the  most  extensive,  the  second  is  slightly  shorter,  and  the  third  is  the  shortest.    
These  three  are  treatises  that  are  like  a  body  because  they  each  teach  the  eight  ‘pivotal  points  of  logic'  (Tib:  
rtog  ge'i  tshig  don  rgyad).    

  4  
The  Second  Chapter  of  the  Pramanavarttika  
 
The  eight  ‘pivotal  points  of  logic'  are:  
1. Correct  inferential  cognizers  (Tib.:  rjes  dpag  yang  dag)  
2. False  inferential  cognizers  (Tib.:  rjes  dpag  ltar  snang)  
3. Correct  direct  perceivers  (Tib.:  mngon  sum  yang  dag)  
4. False  direct  perceivers  (Tib.:  mngon  sum  ltar  snang)  
5. Correct  proof  statements  (Tib:  sgrub  ngag  yang  dag)  
6. False  proof  statements  (Tib.:  sgrub  ngag  ltar  snang)  
7. Correct  refutations  (Tib.:  sun  ‘byin  yang  dag)    
8. False  refutations  (Tib.:  sun  ‘byin  ltar  snang)  
 
Each  of  the  three  texts  teaches  the  eight  ‘pivotal  points  of  logic’  by  primarily  teaching  the  four  correct  pivotal  
points,  while  teaching  the  four  false  pivotal  points  in  an  ancillary  fashion.  
 
The  last  four  texts  are  treatises  that  are  like  branches  because  they  do  not  teach  all  eight  ‘pivotal  points  of  
logic’  but  only  some  of  them,  and  because  they  are  just  supplements  to  the  first,  third,  or  fourth  chapter  of  
the  Pramanavarttika.  The  Hetubindu  (on  correct  reasons)  and  Sambandhapariksha  (on  the  relationship  
between  correct  reasons  and  predicates)  are  supplements  to  the  first  chapter  of  the  Pramanavarttika,  
while  the  Vadanyaya  (on  the  issue  of  other  minds)  is  a  supplement  to  the  third  and  the  
Samtanantarasiddhi  (on  debate  techniques  etc.)  is  a  supplement  to  the  fourth  chapter.  
 

The  eight  pivotal  points  of  logic  

Among  the  four  ‘correct  pivotal  points  of  logic’,  (1)  correct  inferential  cognizers  and  (3)  correct  direct  
perceivers  are  considered  to  be  the  tools  that  facilitate  our  own  understanding;  they  function  mainly  for  our  
own  benefit,  for  they  enable  us  to  accomplish  our  personal  short-­‐  and  long-­‐term  goals  by  replacing    harmful  
misperceptions  with  well-­‐founded  recognition  of  reality.    
 
(1)  Correct  inferential  cognizers  and  inferential  cognizers  are  equivalent.  Inferential  cognizers  are  
conceptual  consciousnesses  that  realize  their  main  objects  in  dependence  on  correct  reasons.  These  types  of  
consciousness  are  essential  for  Buddhist  practice  because  they  facilitate  the  realization  of  essential  concepts,  
such  as  the  suffering  nature  of  cyclic  existence,  impermanence,  selflessness,  etc.  which  need  to  be  
apprehended  in  order  to  gradually  eliminate  the  numerous  misperceptions  that  are  responsible  for  our  
problems  and  difficulties.  However,  most  of  these  essential  concepts  are  slightly  hidden  phenomena  and  
cannot  be  perceived  initially  without  relying  on  logical  reasoning.  Logical  reasoning,  in  turn,  relies  on  
logically  correct  syllogisms.  An  example  of  such  a  syllogism  is:  
Regarding  the  subject,  the  physical  body,  it  is  impermanent,  because  it  is  a  product  of  its  own  causes  
and  conditions.  Like  the  last  moment  of  a  candle  flame,  for  instance.  
A  correct  syllogism  has  four  parts:  a  (i)  subject,  (ii)  predicate,  (iii)  correct  reason,  and  (iv)  example.  In  the  
case  of  the  syllogism  cited  above,  “physical  body”  is  the  subject,  “impermanent”  the  predicate,  “being  a  
product  of  its  own  causes  and  conditions”  the  correct  reason,  and  “the  last  moment  of  the  candle  flame”  the  
example.  Furthermore,  the  composite  of  the  two,  the  subject  (physical  body)  and  the  predicate  
(impermanent),  constitutes  the  object  that  is  to  be  established  (Tib.:  bsgrub  bya).  Hence,  “the  physical  body  is  
impermanent”  is  the  above  syllogism’s  object  that  is  to  be  established.    
After  having  realized  the  different  aspects  of  the  syllogism  –  e.g.  that  the  physical  body  is  a  product  of  its  own  
causes  and  conditions,  that  whatever  is  a  product  of  its  own  causes  and  conditions  is  necessarily  impermanent,  
and  so  forth,  a  practitioner  eventually  generates  an  inferential  cognizer  realizing  the  object  that  is  to  be  
established,  i.e.  realizing  that  the  physical  body  is  impermanent.  Since  such  realization  arises  in  dependence  
on  a  correct  reason  (being  a  product  of  its  own  causes  and  conditions)  inferential  cognizers  are  described  as  
conceptual  consciousnesses  that  realize  their  main  objects  (e.g.  that  the  physical  body  is  impermanent)  in  
dependence  on  correct  reasons.    
 
(3)  Correct  direct  perceivers  and  direct  perceivers  are  also  equivalent.  Direct  perceivers  refer  to  correct  
sense  or  mental  consciousnesses  that  perceive  their  main  object  directly  without  relying  on  a  generic  image.  

  5  
The  Second  Chapter  of  the  Pramanavarttika  
 
Examples  of  direct  perceivers  are  sense  direct  perceivers,  such  as  an  eye  consciousness  apprehending  a  
table,  an  ear  consciousness  apprehending  a  song,  a  nose  consciousness  apprehending  the  smell  of  perfume,  
and  so  forth.  These  sense  consciousnesses  realize  phenomena  that  are  obvious  or  manifest  (i.e.  not  hidden),  
such  as  shapes,  colors,  sounds,  etc.  Other  examples  of  direct  perceiver  are  self-­‐knowers  (which  are  explained  
below),  clairvoyant  awarenesses,  and  yogic  direct  perceivers.  Yogic  direct  perceivers  are  mental  direct  
perceivers  that  directly  realize  their  main  objects  (e.g.  impermanence,  selflessness  etc.)  in  dependence  on  
prolonged  and  extensive  meditation.  
Direct  perceivers  are  essential  to  Buddhist  practice.  Although  hidden  phenomena  are  realized  for  the  first  
time  by  inferential  cognizers,  such  a  realization  is  not  sufficient  for  practitioners  aspiring  to  transform  their  
mind  and  attain  liberation  or  Buddhahood.  Such  a  realization  is  not  sufficient  because  inferential  cognizers  
are  conceptual  consciousnesses  that  do  not  realize  their  objects  directly  but  through  a  generic  image.    
For  instance,  an  inferential  cognizer  realizing  selflessness  does  not  realize  selflessness  directly  but  through  
the  generic  image  of  selflessness.  Hence,  a  practitioner  who  has  cultivated  an  inferential  cognizer  realizing  
selflessness  continues  to  familiarize  with  the  conceptual  consciousness  realizing  selflessness  until,  after  
prolonged  and  intense  meditation,  that  consciousness  transforms  into  a  yogic  direct  perceiver  realizing  
selflessness,  which  is  strong  enough  to  serve  as  an  effective  antidote  to  the  misperception  of  the  self  and  to  
other  afflictions.  
Ordinary  direct  perceivers,  such  as  sense  direct  perceivers,  are  also  significant  in  Buddhist  practice,  for  they  
enable  practitioners  to  listen  to  teachings,  read  the  scriptures,  etc.  They  also  facilitate  inferential  cognition  of  
a  hidden  phenomenon.  For  instance,  a  practitioner  who  generated  the  inferential  cognizer  realizing  that  the  
physical  body  is  impermanent  in  dependence  on  the  above  syllogism  (Regarding  the  subject,  the  physical  
body,  it  is  impermanent,  because  it  is  the  product  of  its  own  causes  and  conditions)  must  have  realized,  prior  to  
generating  such  an  inferential  cognizer,  that  the  physical  body  is  the  product  of  its  own  causes  and  conditions.  
But  unlike  the  physical  body  being  impermanent,  the  physical  body  being  a  product  of  its  own  causes  and  
conditions  is  not  a  hidden  phenomenon,  for  it  can  be  realized  for  the  first  time  by  an  eye  consciousness.    
 
(5)  Correct  proof  statements  and  (7)  correct  refutations  are  considered  to  be  the  tools  that  facilitate  others’  
understanding,  which  is  why  they  are  mainly  for  th  e  benefit  of  others.  After  having  attained  realizations  
ourselves  by  means  of  inferential  cognizers  and  direct  perceivers,  we  need  to  assist  others  in  attaining  the  
same  realizations  by  refuting  their  wrong  views  with  correct  refutations,  and  by  generating  realizations  in  
their  mental  continuums  through  proof  statements.  
(5)  Correct  proof  statements  are  verbal  statements  that  express  a  correct  syllogism.  An  example  of  a  proof  
statement  is,  “Whatever  is  a  product  of  its  own  causes  and  conditions  is  necessarily  impermanent.  Like  the  
last  moment  of  a  candle  flame,  for  instance.  Likewise,  the  physical  body  is  also  a  product  of  its  own  causes  
and  conditions.”  Here  these  words  state  that  just  as  the  last  moment  of  a  candle  flame  is  impermanent  
because  it  is  a  product  of  its  own  causes  and  conditions,  likewise  the  physical  body  is  impermanent  because  
it  is  a  product  of  its  own  causes  and  conditions.    
Therefore,  the  words  of  the  proof  statement  express  the  following  syllogism:  
Regarding  the  subject,  the  physical  body,  it  is  impermanent,  because  it  is  a  product  of  its  own  causes  and  
conditions.  Like  the  last  moment  of  a  candle  flame,  for  instance.  
In  dependence  on  hearing  that  proof  statement,  a  person  who  has  not  yet  realized  that  the  physical  body  is  
impermanent  is  able  to  cultivate  an  inferential  cognizer  realizing  that  the  physical  body  is  impermanent.  
 
(7)  Correct  refutations  refer  to  correct  consequences.  Like  a  syllogism,  a  consequence  is  a  form  of  logical  
statement  which  one  cites  to  help  another  person  first  to  recognize  and  then  to  let  go  of  a  wrong  view.  A  
consequence  is  stated  in  such  a  way  as  to  reveal  the  absurdity  of  that  person’s  wrong  view;  it  turns  his  own  
assertions  against  him,  so  that  he  is  unable  to  give  a  correct  response  without  contradicting  what  he  
asserted.  
For  instance,  to  a  person  who  holds  that  (a)  the  physical  body  is  permanent,  that  (b)  the  physical  body  is  a  
product  of  its  own  causes  and  conditions,  and  that  (c)  whatever  is  a  product  of  its  own  causes  and  conditions  
is  necessarily  impermanent,  the  following  consequence  is  cited:  

  6  
The  Second  Chapter  of  the  Pramanavarttika  
 
Regarding  the  subject,  the  physical  body,  it  follows  that  it  is  not  a  product  of  its  own  causes  and  
condition  because  it  is  permanent.  
In  this  case,  the  person  accepts  that  the  physical  body  is  permanent,  which  is  why  he  cannot  claim  that  the  
reason  is  not  established  (i.e.  he  cannot  claim  that  it  is  not  correct  that  the  physical  body  is  permanent)    
Since  he  accepts  the  forward  and  counter-­‐pervasions  (i.e.  that  whatever  is  permanent  is  necessarily  not  a  
product  of  its  own  causes  and  conditions,  and  whatever  is  a  product  of  its  own  causes  and  conditions  is  
necessarily  not  permanent)  he  cannot  claim  that  there  is  no  pervasion.  Lastly  he  cannot  even  accept  that  the  
physical  body  is  not  a  product  of  its  own  causes  and  conditions,  for  that  would  contradict  his  original  
assertion  that  the  physical  body  is  a  product  of  its  own  causes  and  conditions.  He  is  thus  left  speechless.  
The  person  comes  to  realize  that  his  views  are  contradictory,  which  enables  him  to  reassess  his  beliefs  until  
he  is  convinced  of  the  fact  that  the  physical  body  is  impermanent.  After  he  has  reached  this  conviction,  one  
cites  a  proof  statement  expressing  a  syllogism  that  establishes  that  the  physical  body  is  impermanent.    
As  mentioned  above,  in  dependence  on  that  syllogism  the  person  is  able  to  eventually  generate  an  inferential  
cognizer  realizing  that  the  physical  body  is  impermanent.  
 
Regarding  the  four  ‘false  pivotal  points  of  logic’,  (2)  false  inferential  cognizers  refer  to  conceptual  
consciousnesses  that  are  not  actual  inferential  cognizers  because  they  do  not  realize  their  objects.  An  
example  of  a  false  inferential  cognizer  is  a  correctly  assuming  consciousness  perceiving  that  the  physical  
body  is  impermanent,  which  did  not  arise  in  dependence  on  a  syllogism.  Another  example  is  a  correctly  
assuming  consciousness  perceiving  that  the  physical  body  is  impermanent,  which  arose  in  dependence  on  a  
wrong  syllogism.  A  wrong  syllogism  is  a  logically  incorrect  syllogism  and  therefore  does  not  lead  to  an  
inferential  cognizer  realizing  the  syllogism’s  object  that  is  to  be  established.  For  instance,  the  following  
syllogism:  Regarding  the  subject,  the  physical  body,  it  is  impermanent,  because  it  exists,  is  a  wrong  syllogism  
since  there  is  ‘no  pervasion’.  There  is  ‘no  pervasion’  because  whatever  exists  is  not  necessarily  impermanent.  
Whatever  exists  is  not  necessarily  impermanent  because  there  are  phenomena  that  are  permanent.  
Another  example  of  a  wrong  syllogism  is:  Regarding  the  subject,  the  physical  body,  it  is  permanent  because  it  is  
unchangeable.  This  is  a  wrong  syllogism  because  the  reason  is  not  an  attribute  of  the  subject,  i.e.  the  physical  
body  is  not  unchangeable.  Such  a  wrong  syllogism  may  give  rise  to  a  wrong  conceptual  consciousness  
perceiving  the  physical  body  to  be  permanent,  which  is  also  a  false  inferential  cognizer.  
 
(4)  False  direct  perceivers  refer  to  conceptual  consciousnesses  or  wrong  non-­‐conceptual  awarenesses.  Since  
false  direct  perceivers  are  either  conceptual  or  wrong  consciousnesses  they  are  not  actual  direct  perceivers.  
Examples  include  a  conceptual  consciousness  realizing  selflessness,  an  eye  consciousness  perceiving  a  blue  
snow  mountain,  and  a  memory  consciousness  remembering  a  table.  
 
(6)  False  proof  statements  are  statements  that  express  a  wrong  syllogism.  This  means  that  wrong  proof  
statements  express  a  logically  incorrect  syllogism  in  dependence  on  which  one  cannot  generate  an  
inferential  cognizer  realizing  the  syllogism’s  object  that  is  to  be  established.  An  example  of  a  false  proof  
statement  is:  “Whatever  is  unchangeable  is  necessarily  permanent.  Like  the  absence  of  an  elephant  on  the  
table,  for  instance.  The  physical  body  is  also  unchangeable.”  This  statement  is  a  false  proof  statement  
because  it  expresses  the  following  wrong  syllogism:  Regarding  the  subject,  the  physical  body,  it  is  permanent  
because  it  is  unchangeable.  Like  the  absence  of  an  elephant  on  the  table,  for  instance.  
 
(8)  Wrong  consequences  are  consequences  that  do  not  reveal  the  absurdities  of  a  person’s  wrong  view,  so  
that  the  person  is  unable  to  become  aware  of  his  contradictory  assertions.  An  example  of  a  wrong  
consequence  is:    
Regarding  the  subject,  the  physical  body,  it  follows  that  it  is  not  a  product  of  its  own  causes  and  conditions  
because  it  is  permanent.  
addressed  to  a  person  who  holds  that  (a)  the  physical  body  is  permanent,  that  (b)  the  physical  body  is  a  
product  of  its  own  causes  and  conditions,  but  who  does  not  hold  that  (c)  whatever  is  a  product  of  its  own  
causes  and  conditions  is  necessarily  impermanent.  
   

  7  
The  Second  Chapter  of  the  Pramanavarttika  
 
It  is  important  to  identify  and  understand  these  false  ‘pivotal  points  of  logic’,  for  practitioners  may  confuse  
them  with  their  correct  counterparts.    
 

The  Pramanavarttika  
Among  the  Seven  Treatises  of  Pramana,  the  most  popular  one  is  the  Pramanavarttika,  which  in  Tibet,  
Mongolia,  and  the  Himalaya  region  in  particular,  has  been  more  widely  studied  than  Dignaga's  Compendium  
of  Pramana.    
The  Pramanavarttika  is  written  in  verse  and  has  four  chapters:  
1. The  chapter  on  inference  for  one’s  own  benefit  (Skt.:  Svarthanumana  ,  Tib.:  rang  don  rjes  dpag  gi  le’u)  
2. The  chapter  on  the  establishment  of  a  valid  cognizer  (Skt.:  Pramanasiddhi,  Tib.:  tshad  ma  grub  pa’i  
le’u)  
3. The  chapter  on  direct  perception  (Skt.:  Pratyaksha,  Tib.:  mngon  sum  le’u)  
4. The  chapter  on  inference  for  others’  benefit  (Skt.:  Prarthanumana,  Tib.:  gzhan  don  rjes  dpag  gi  le’u)  
 
The  chapter  on  inference  for  one’s  own  benefit  
Unlike  the  last  three  chapters  of  the  Pramanavarttika,  the  first  does  not  actually  elaborate  on  any  of  the  
verses  or  chapters  of  Dignaga’s  Compendium  of  Pramana,  but  serves  as  an  introductory  chapter  to  the  text.  
It  sets  forth  inferential  cognizers  (both  the  correct  and  false  inferential  cognizers,  among  the  eight  ‘pivotal  
points  of  logic’)  because,  as  Dharmakirti  explains  in  his  auto-­‐commentary  on  the  first  chapter  of  the  
Pramanavarttika:  
Thorough discernment of that which is factual and that which is not depends on inferential
cognizers.    
Therefore,  study  and  contemplation  of  the  first  chapter  aids  practitioners  in  cultivating  inferential  cognizers  
in  their  mental  continuum,  which  in  turn  facilitates  their  comprehension  of  the  last  three  chapters.  
However,  instead  of  explaining  the  inferential  cognizers  themselves,  the  first  chapter  expounds  on  that  
which  mainly  gives  rise  to  inferential  cognizers,  i.e.  correct  syllogisms,  and  presents  their  general  structure,  
categories,  definitions,  and  so  forth.  
 
The  chapter  on  the  establishment  of  a  valid  cognizer  
The  second  chapter  of  the  Pramanavarttika  is  the  most  important  one.  It  comments  only  on  the  first  two  
lines  of  Dignaga’s  Compendium  of  Pramana,  which  constitute  the  homage  to  Buddha  Shakyamuni.  
Elaborating  on  the  two  lines  of  homage,  the  second  chapter  presents  liberation,  Buddhahood,  and  the  paths  
that  lead  to  these  two  states.  Dharmakirti  presents  liberation,  Buddhahood,  and  the  paths  that  lead  there  by  
way  of  establishing  that  the  Buddha  is  a  ‘valid  cognizer’.  However,  this  does  not  mean  that  the  Buddha  is  
literally  a  valid  cognizer,  because  valid  cognizers  are  consciousnesses  while  the  Buddha  is  not  a  
consciousness  but  a  person.  Instead,  it  means  that  the  Buddha  is  a  ‘valid  cognizer  being’.  The  Buddha  is  a  
‘valid  cognizer  being’  because,  through  his  own  power  (without  depending  on  another  teacher),  he  
unerringly  and  effortlessly  teaches  those  seeking  release  whatever  they  need  to  know  to  reach  their  goal.  
As  part  of  establishing  that  the  Buddha  is  a  ‘valid  cognizer  being’,  the  second  chapter  also  sets  forth  past  and  
future  lives,  the  four  noble  truths,  and  so  forth.  
Some  scholars  explain  that  the  reason  why  Dharmakirti  composed  the  second  chapter  is  that  at  the  time,  
numerous  critics  expressed  their  disapproval  of  Dignaga’s  works  on  Pramana.  As  mentioned  above,  Pramana  
literally  means  ‘valid  cognizer’.  Valid  cognizers  are  awarenesses  that  are  newly  non-­‐deceptive,  i.e.  that  newly  
realize  their  main  objects.  There  are  two  types  of  valid  cognizers:  (a)  direct  valid  cognizers  (i.e.  valid  
cognizers  that  are  direct  perceivers)  and  (b)  inferential  valid  cognizers  (i.e.  valid  cognizers  that  are  
inferential  cognizers).  
One  of  the  main  objectives  of  the  Pramana  literature  is  to  teach  practitioners  the  means  of  cultivating  correct  
apprehension  of  the  essential  concepts  of  the  Buddha  Dharma.  Such  apprehension  depends  primarily  on  
realizing  phenomena  that  are  currently  hidden  to  us  and  which  we  can  realize  initially  only  with  inferential  

  8  
The  Second  Chapter  of  the  Pramanavarttika  
 
cognizers.  Inferential  cognizers  in  turn  depend  on  correct  syllogisms  and  thus  on  logical  reasoning.  Since  the  
Pramana  literature  elucidates  such  logical  reasoning  and  the  way  to  utilize  it  as  a  tool  to  comprehend  
impermanence,  selflessness,  and  so  forth,  commentaries  on  Pramana  are  usually  referred  to  as  
commentaries  on  “logic”  or  “epistemology”,  and  the  study  of  Pramana  is  referred  to  as  the  study  of  “logic”  or  
“epistemology”.  
 
However,  many  Indian  scholars  were  unable  to  recognize  the  value  of  Dignaga’s  work.  Some  claimed  that  
teachings  on  Pramana  (i.e.  logic  or  epistemology)  were  not  based  on  the  teachings  of  the  Buddha.  Others  
alleged  that  the  main  purpose  of  the  Pramana  literature  was  to  defeat  an  opponent  in  debate  and  that  it  was  
of  no  use  to  those  aspiring  to  attain  liberation  or  Buddhahood.  
Therefore,  Dharmakirti  taught  the  second  chapter  of  the  Pramanavarttika  to  counteract  these  assertions  by  
demonstrating  the  significance  of  the  Pramana  literature  with  respect  to  studying,  contemplating,  and  
meditating  on  past  and  future  lives,  the  four  noble  truths,  liberation,  Buddhahood,  and  so  forth.  
Please  note  that  even  though  in  general,  the  Pramanavarttika  is  based  on  the  point  of  view  of  the  
Chittamatra  School  Following  Reasoning,  the  second  chapter  is  from  the  perspective  of  the  Sautrantika  
School.  
 
The  chapter  on  direct  perception  and  the  chapter  on  inference  for  others’  benefit  
The  last  two  chapters  of  the  Pramanavarttika  comment  on  the  actual  body  of  Dignaga’s  Compendium  of  
Pramana,  i.e.  the  six  chapters  of  the  text.  Among  the  eight  ‘pivotal  points  of  logic’,  the  third  chapter  presents  
correct  and  false  direct  perceivers,  and  the  fourth  chapter,  correct  and  false  proof  statements  as  well  as  
correct  and  false  refutations.  
 

Elucidation  of  the  Path  to  Liberation  

Dharmakirti’s  verses  are  very  terse  and  their  meaning  often  difficult  to  access.  Therefore,  students  of  the  
Pramanavarttika  mostly  rely  on  one  or  more  of  its  commentaries.    
One  of  these  commentaries  is  Gyaltsab  Je’s  Elucidation  of  the  Path  to  Liberation  (which  is  written  in  
prose).  It  is  one  of  the  foremost  Tibetan  commentaries  on  the  Pramanavarttika  still  studied,  debated,  and  
meditated  on  in  most  Gelugpa  monastic  institutions;  it  is  thus  part  of  a  living  and  vibrant  philosophical  
tradition.  Contemporary  masters  regularly  refer  to  it  (and  Dharmakirti’s  root  text)  when  explaining  past  and  
future  lives,  the  four  noble  truths,  liberation,  Buddhahood,  and  so  forth.    
Gyaltsab  Je  composed  the  Elucidation  of  the  Path  to  Liberation  based  on  the  Indian  commentaries  on  the  
Pramavarttika.  However,  unlike  most  Indian  commentators,  Gyaltsab  Je  provides  extremely  detailed  
outlines,  as  is  customary  in  many  Tibetan  treatises.  The  Elucidation  structures  Dharmakirti’s  root  text  by  
way  of  dividing  it  into  numerous  textual  sections,  with  each  section  having  a  different  heading.  The  
advantage  of  such  a  systematic  format  is  that  the  text  becomes  more  accessible  and  easier  to  comprehend.  
Furthermore,  not  only  does  Gyaltsab  Je  offer  comprehensive  explanations  of  the  meaning  of  Dharmakirti’s  
verses,  he  also  provides  lengthy  discussions,  thought-­‐provoking  analysis,  and  invaluable  summaries.    
In  the  Elucidation  of  the  Path  to  Liberation,  he  begins  the  presentation  of  the  second  chapter  by  
prostrating  to  the  revered  Gurus.  Thereafter,  he  cites  the  “second  heading”,  which  is  the  main  heading  of  the  
second  chapter.  This  heading  is  referred  to  as  the  “second  heading”,  for  it  is  the  second  of  three  headings  
cited  at  the  beginning  of  the  Elucidation.  These  three  are  really  the  subheadings  of  an  earlier  heading,  which  
together  with  yet  another  heading  constitute  the  basic  headings  of  the  four  chapters  of  the  
Pramanavarttika.  The  two  basic  headings  are:  
(1) The  means  for  oneself  to  ascertain  liberation  and  the  paths  that  lead  there  
(2) Having  ascertained  these,  the  means  of  assisting  others  [to  ascertain    liberation  and  the  paths  that    
lead  there]  
Of  these  two,  the  second  is  the  main  heading  of  the  fourth  chapter,  while  the  first  (as  mentioned  above)  is  the  
one  that  has  three  sub-­‐headings:  

  9  
The  Second  Chapter  of  the  Pramanavarttika  
 
(1.1) The  means  of  ascertaining  hidden  phenomena  
(1.2) An  explanation  of  the  objects  of  ascertainment  –  liberation,  omniscience,  and  the  paths  that  lead  
there  
(1.3) The  means  of  ascertaining  obvious/manifest  phenomena  
 
Among  the  three  subheadings,  the  first  is  the  main  heading  of  the  first  chapter,  the  second  is  the  main  
heading  of  the  second  chapter,  and  the  third  is  the  main  heading  of  the  third  chapter.  
After  citing  the  main  heading  of  the  second  chapter,  Gyaltsab  Je  gives  a  short  introduction  to  the  second  
chapter  of  the  Pramanavarttika,  in  which  he  briefly  explains  the  meaning  of  the  two  lines  of  homage  of  
Dignaga’s  Compendium  of  Pramana  and  the  reason  for  establishing    that  the  Buddha  is  a  ‘valid  cognizer  
being’.  Thereafter  he  starts  his  elucidation  of  the  verses  in  Dharmakirti’s  second  chapter.  
 

Questions  for  studying  the  Introduction  

 
• Who  composed  the  Compendium  of  Pramana  and  how  many  chapters  does  it  have?  
• Who  composed  the  Pramanavarttika  and  how  many  chapters  does  it  have?  
• Who  composed  the  Elucidation  of  the  Path  of  Liberation?  
• Which  of  these  three  commentaries  are  written  in  verse  and  which  are  written  in  
prose?  
• On  which  text  does  the  Pramanavarttika  primarily  comment?    
• On  which  text  does  the  Elucidation  of  the  Path  of  Liberation  primarily  comment?  
• Which  philosophical  tenet  school  does  Dignaga  follow?  
• Which  philosophical  tenet  school  does  Dharmakirti  follow?    
• Which  philosophical  tenet  school  does  Gyaltsab  Je  follow?  
• Among  the  Seven  Treatises  of  the  Pramana,  which  are  the  three  treatises  that  are  like  
a  body,  and  which  four  treatises  are  like  branches?  
• Which  of  the  three  treatises  that  are  like  a  body  is  the  longest  and  which  one  is  the  
shortest?  
• How  are  Dignaga  and  Dharmakirti  significant  from  the  point  of  view  of  logic  or  
epistemology?  
• Why  are  the  first  three  treatises  like  a  body,  and  the  last  four  like  branches?  
• What  are  the  eight  ‘pivotal  points  of  logic’?  Think  of  an  example  for  each  of  the  eight.  
• Which  of  the  eight  ‘pivotal  points  of  logic’  are  mainly  for  one’s  own  benefit,  and  which  
are  mainly  for  the  benefit  of  others?  
• Why  are  the  four  correct  ‘pivotal  points  of  logic’  important  for  Buddhist  practice?  
• Why  are  the  four  false  ‘pivotal  points  of  logic’  explained?  
• What  does  an  inferential  cognizer  depend  upon  in  order  to  realize  its  main  object?  
• What  is  main  subject  matter  of  the  first  chapter  of  the  Pramanavarttika?  
• What  is  main  subject  matter  of  the  second  chapter  of  the  Pramanavarttika?  
• What  is  main  subject  matter  of  the  third  chapter  of  the  Pramanavarttika?  
• What  is  main  subject  matter  of  the  fourth  chapter  of  the  Pramanavarttika?  
• Why  did  Dharmakirti  compose  the  second  chapter?  
• Why  is  the  topic  of  logic  or  epistemology  called  “Pramana”,  i.e.  “valid  cognizer”?  
• How  is  the  Elucidation  of  the  Path  of  Liberation  different  from  most  Indian  
commentaries?  
 
 
  10  
The  Second  Chapter  of  the  Pramanavarttika  
 
 
 
 
 
 

  11