322 Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal. [N.S., XIV, 
connection of things thus recollected (sathsarga- 
bodhah), that is, the knowledge that ‘pot’ as 
qualified by oneness is an abode of existence. The 
knowledge in this third step is specially called a 
verbal knowledge. 
Lastly there is sel/-consciousness (anuvyavasaya) 
of the knowledge in the following form: “I am 
(iv. 
— 
TS GTATWIE: | 
Speech as a Means of Valid Knowledge. 
Can it be denied that speech is a means of valid knowledge? 
eans otherwise called an instrument (karana) is that 
cause which when brought into operation necessarily produc 
its effect. A speech is not, according to the Buddhists, such a 
means inasmuch as it does not, even when uttered by @ 
person who knows its meaning, produce knowledge unless it 18 
attended with expectancy, consistency, etc. Therefore “@ 
— is not,” say the Buddhists, ‘‘a means of valid know- 
e ge.” , 
A speech is indeed a means of valid knowledge. g 
opposes the above view by saying that if the Buddhists do not 
their contention that “a speech is not a means of valid know: 
ledge.” The contention of the Buddhists is therefore baseless, 
and a speech is indeed a means of valid knowledge. But the 
speech, if it is to be a means of valid knowledge, must not be 
a bare one: it should be attended with expectancy, consisten- 
The sp s 
because it is the main cause in the production of valid know- 
Is verbal testimony included in perception ? 
_ the Buddhists, while not claiming their speech 
valid, say that it serves at anv rate to produce in us @ eee 
perception of the form “a ‘speech is not a means of ee 
knowledge” by causing the recollection of things signified °Y 
it. When we hear the speech, viz. a speech is not a means 
to be 
