KATSURA (1984)，discussing Dharmakirti’s theory of truth, contrasts two points of view as relevant for Dharmakirti’s criteria of pramaoa, namely，‘pragmatic’ and ‘epistemological’ ones. As for the former，‘pragmatic’ point of view，besides Dharmakirti’s first definition pramaoam avisaovadi jnanam，KATSURA (1984：224) comments on the second definition ajnatartha-praka.o va as follows: Furthermore，according to Dharmakirti，the object of pramaoa should be something new. This idea is probably derived from a sort of common sense belief that knowledge is meaningless unless it contains some new information. … The definition of pramaoa so far discussed can be called ‘the pragmatic criterion of pramaoa’ of Dharmakirti. Besides ‘epistemological’ correspondence with an object，being a source of new information is an important characteristic of pramaoa, not only for Dharmakirti，but also for Kumarila, 1 a contemporary Mimaosaka, probably a bit senior to Dharmakirti，as FRAUWALLNER (1962) suggests. In fact this has been so in the Mimaosa tradition even before Kumarila, while in the Buddhist tradition this characteristic is not found before Dharmakirti. It is therefore necessary to reconsider what the origin of this idea may have been，and to examine whether Dharmakirti may have borrowed it from the Mimaosa. This paper will attempt to shed light on these questions mainly by examining the historical and theoretical development of the idea within the Mimaosa tradition.
目次
Introduction 89 Hermeneutical background The concept of novelty in the Jaimini-sûtra 89 Œabara’s understanding of novelty 90 Presupposition of the sûtras 92 Extension of the novelty by the Våtti-kâra 92 The idea behind the Våtti-kâra’s definition of upamâna 93 Kumârila’s clarification of the structure of upamâna 94 The notion of novelty in the definition of pramâòa 95 Kumârila’s definition of pramâòa in the Båhaþ-þîkâ 96 The notion of novelty in the Mîmâôsâ tradition 96 Implication of Dharmakîrti’s introducing novelty 97 Conclusion 98
