Dialectical terms (11): Doubt (saṃśaya)

Doubt about a thing occurs when its certainty is not ascertained. It is want of judgment about things of uncertainty.^[1] For instance, when persons endowed with the signs of long life, persons without such signs and active, and inactive persons are seen to live a long life or succumb to sudden death, there arises the doubt whether death is timely or untimely. Accordingly, doubt is an erroneous cognition which consists in attributing two recalled contradictory characteristics to a single substratum.

Akṣapāda gives third priority to doubt in his categorial scheme, because it is regarded as a prerequisite for the employment of syllogistic reasoning (nyāya) for arriving at correct judgments. He defines doubt as an indefinite knowledge, which seeks to know the identifying characteristic of an object, and ascribes its occurrence to five different causes.^[2]

Vātsyāyana says that there is no need of applying the nyāya to an object which is unknown or which has been ascertained. It is only when there exists doubt regarding an object there occurs the need of examination by the instrument of knowledge called nyāya.^[3] Further he explains the five causes of doubt. Accordingly, the doubt arising from the perception of common charactereristcs of many objects in a single object (samānadharmopapatti) is the first one . The doubt occurring from the apprehension of properties of homogeneous and heterogeneous things in a substratum (anekadhrmopapatti) is the second. The third originates from the knowledge of contradictory views (vipratipatti). Doubt taking place from the irregularity of cognition (upalabdhyavyavasthā), and doubt cropping up from irregularity of non-cognition (anupalabdyavyavastha) are the fourth and fifth respectively.^[4] Doubt, according to Kaṇāda, is an erroneous cognition that originates from the perception of the common characteristics of many objects in a thing followed by the recollection of the specific characteristics of such objects.^[5] To Praśastapāda, doubt is an indefinite cognition in the form of “either this or that”. It arises from the recollection of the peculiarities of the two objects consequent on the perception of an object having the similarities of those objects whose distinct characteristics have formerly been cognized.^[6] Sivāditya conceives doubt as indefinite cognition^[7] and includes false assumption (ūha) and error (anadhyavasāya) in it.^[8]

If we look at the whole explanations, we can see that doubt is an erroneous cognition which originates from uncertainty because of attributing contradictory characteristics to an object. Thus, in essence, all the later explanations make no difference with the explanation given in the Carakasaṃhitā. In fact, if Caraka explained the nature of doubt, Akṣapāda and others focused on its cause.

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

saṃśayo nāma sandehalakṣaṇānusandigdheṣvartheṣvaniścayaḥ, CS,Vimāna - sthāna, VIII. 43; Caraka includes doubt in the group of tantrayukties also. See supra, p. 333.

[2]:

samānanekadharmopalebdhervipratipaterupalebdhyanupalabdh yavyavasthātaśca viśeṣāpekṣo vimarśaḥ saṃśayaḥ. Nyāyasūtra., I. 1. 23.

[3]:

tatra nā'nuplabdhe no nirīte arthe nyāyaḥ pravartate. kiṃ tarhi? samśayite arthe, Vātsyāyana on Nyāyasūtra., I. i. l, Nyāya-Bhāṣya of Vātsyāyana., p. 6

[4]:

Vātsyāyana on Nyāyasūtra., I. i. 23, Nyāya-Bhāṣya of Vātsyāyana., pp.46-48.

[5]:

sāmānyapratyakṣād viśeṣānusmaraṇācca saṃśayaḥ. Vaiśeṣikadarśana., II. ii. 17.

[6]:

saṃśayastāvat prasiddhānekaviśeṣayoḥ sādṛśyamātradarśanāt ubhayaviśeṣānusmaraṇācca kiṃsvidityubhyāvalaṃbī vimarśaḥ samśayaḥ, Praśastapādabhāṣya., pp. 4 11 - 412.

[7]:

anavadhāraṇaṃ jñānaṃ saṃśayaḥ, Saptapadārthi of Śivāditya., p. 68

[8]:

ūhānādhyavasāyayostu saṃśaya eva. Ibid., p.34.