The Bhikṣuṇī Maṇimēkhalai

147
Appendix. The Authorship of the Nyāyapravēśa by
Monsieur Tubianski
In an excellent note in the Bulletin of the Academy of Sciences, 1926,
Russia, Monsieur Tubianski attacks the problem of the authorship of
the treatise, Nyāyapravēśa, and gives his vote in favour of the
Nyāyapravēśa known to the Chinese and regarded by them as the
principal treatise on Buddhist logic being the work of
Śaṁkarasvāmin, and not of Dignāga. I am obliged to Professor Jacobi
of Bonn for a copy of the note, and am merely giving a summary of
the arguments in favour of this position as presenting the other side of
the question, the more readily as Professor Jacobi writes to intimate
that he is in full agreement with Monsieur Tubianski. 79 There are four
works bearing names though slightly different but near enough for
any one of them to be confounded with another. Two of these are in
Chinese, two in Tibetan. The first of the Chinese works is
Nyāyapravēśa ascribed to Śaṁkarasvāmin.
2. The Nyāyadvāra in two translations by Ywan-Chwang [Xuan
Zang] and I’Tsing [Yi Jing] respectively, and attributed to
Dignāga.
3. Similarly there are two works in Tibetan (a)
Nyāyapravēśadvāra and (b) Nyāyapravēśa, both of them ascribed
to Dignāga.
79 For a full statement of the opposite position reference may be made to the
newly published volume in the Gaekwad’s Oriental Series, Baroda, volume
No. XIX (Introd.).