The Blackwell Companion to Hinduism

rationality provides norms for the temporal and cross-modal integration of per-
ceptual experiences; and the extrapolative model, according to which rationality
provides norms for the extrapolation from the perceived to the unperceived. The
Naiya ̄yika thinks that belief in the testimony of others is indeed rational, but
that neither the perceptual nor the extrapolative model of rationality can
account for why this is so. Testimony is a sui generis source of rational belief (i.e.
a prama ̄n.a).
The Nya ̄ya theory of testimony is simple. Nya ̄yasu ̄ tra 1.1.7 states that
testimony is the utterance of a “credible person” (a ̄pta). On this su ̄tra,Va ̄tsya ̄yana
adds the following important comment:

A credible person is a speaker who has knowledge of the object and is motivated

by the desire to tell of the object as known. This definition of a credible person is

equally applicable to the seer (rs.i). the noble (a ̄rya), and the outsider (mleccha).^42

The comment is important because it implies that the scriptures do not have any
special claim to our assent, but are to be believed for precisely the same reasons
as any other piece of testimony, namely because the transmitter is credible. A
credible person is one who is knowledgeable about the subject matter, and who
has a sincere desire to communicate that knowledge, and can come from any
walk of life or branch of society.^43 Va ̄tsya ̄yana elaborates the point while
discussing the Nya ̄yasu ̄tra argument (NS 2.1.68) that the authority of the Veda
is just like that of a medical treatise, in that it rests on the credibility of the
communicator. He comments:

To what is this authoritativeness due? It is due to the direct knowledge of what is

prescribed, compassion for fellow beings, and the desire to communicate rightly.

Credible communicators, having direct knowledge of what they prescribe, show

compassion for fellow beings, (advising) “this is to be avoided,” “this is a cause

of pain,” or “this is to be attained” and “this is the means to its attainment.” For

creatures who cannot themselves understand, there is no other way of knowing

all this... Thus a credible communicator is a source of knowledge.^44

When a person speaks who is knowledgeable, well motivated, and caring, it is
rational to believe what they say. The scriptures, as it happens, are transmitted
to us by such persons, and so we are entitled to believe them and regard what
they say as a valuable source of knowledge, especially about moral and soterio-
logical matters we would not otherwise be informed of. It is rational to believe
the scriptures in just the same way and to just the same extent as it is rational
to believe a medical text about medical matters, or any other experts about their
respective field of competence.
A dilemma threatens this account of testimonial rationality. Must we know
that the speaker has the qualities of competence, sincerity, and compassion in
order to be entitled to believe her, or not? It can hardly be right to say that we
are entitled to believe any utterance we hear, and just hope that its author is
competent and sincere. That would be an epistemic charter for the gullible.^45 But

438 jonardon ganeri