The Bhikṣuṇī Maṇimēkhalai

129 - Other Views on the Philosophical Systems
It seems likely there is manuscript warrant for the confusion in the
printed texts of the commentary of Sābara on the Pūrva Mīmāṁsa.
The Pāṇini translator in his comment on Sūtra I, I, 5 of the Pūrva
Mīmāṁsa translates only six pramāṇas as those of the commentator.
In his analysis of the first pāda of the work that he prefixes to the
translation, he recounts eight pramāṇas without indicating where
exactly he obtained the information from? 76 Is it not possible then
and therefore the eight of [91]
Maṇimēkhalai?
ṭi as we find it stated in the
That there is some little confusion would become clear from the
following extracts from Professor Keith’s Karma Mīmāṁsa. On page
8, he has:–
addition has been made to the teaching of the Mīmāṁsa in the shape
of the introduction of the discussion of the validity of knowledge and
its diverse forms.’ Further down he has ‘it is not illegitimate to assume
t pramāṇas as valid and is quoted as such in
commentaries, and if the Maṇ
ṭi
formulated eight pramāṇas as such, is there not justification for
regarding the two as the same person?
The point that the Sūtras actually discuss only four pramāṇas does not
materially affect the question as these pramāṇas are pramāṇas of
validity for the purpose of Mīmāṁsa Śāstra particularly, while the
eight may be held as generally acceptable. The four considered in the
76 A letter of mine asking for the source of this information regarding the
eight pramāṇas, fetched the reply, to my great regret, that the learned
translator died on 10th June, 1927.