Notes
1 Manusam.hita ̄2.11.
2 J. W. McCrindle, Ancient India as Described by Megasthenes and Arrian: Being a Trans-
lation of the Fragments of the Indika of Megasthenes and the Fist Part of the Indika of
Arrian(Calcutta, 1926); Allan Dahlquist, Megasthenes and Indian Religion: A Study
in Motives and Types(Uppsala: Almquist & Wiksell, 1962).
3 Hermann J. Jacobi, “A Contribution Towards the Early History of Indian Philoso-
phy,” translated by V. A. Sukthankar, The Indian AntiquaryXLVII (1918): 101–9.
4 Paul Hacker, “A ̄nvı ̄ks.ikı ̄,” Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde Süd- und Ost-Asiens 2
(1958): 54–83. For a detailed discussion: Wilhelm Halbfass, “Dars ́ana, A ̄nvı ̄ks.ikı ̄,
Philosophy,” in his India and Europe: An Essay in Understanding (Albany: State
University of New York Press, 1988), ch. 15.
5 Franklin Edgerton, “The Meaning of sa ̄m.khya andyoga,”American Journal of
Philology45 (1924): 1–47; Gerald James Larson, “Introduction to the Philosophy
of Sa ̄m.khya,” in Gerald James Larson and Ram Shankar Bhattacharya, eds.,
Sa ̄m.khya: A Dualist Tradition in Indian Philosophy, Encyclopedia of Indian Philoso-
phies, vol. 4 (Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1987), pp. 3–9, 114–16.
6 Bertrand Russell, Human Society in Ethics and Politics(London: Allen and Unwin,
1954), p. viii.
7 Nya ̄yabha ̄s.ya3, 11–14. All references are to page and line numbers in Thakur’s
critical edition: Gautamı ̄yanya ̄yadars ́ana with Bhas.ya of Va ̄tsya ̄yana, critically edited
by Anantalal Thakur (Delhi: Indian Council of Philosophical Research, 1997)
8 Nya ̄yabha ̄s.ya3, 15–20.
9 Nya ̄yabha ̄s.ya1, 6–10.
10 Nya ̄yabha ̄s.yaon 4.2.29.
11 Herbert Simon and Allen Newell, Human Problem Solving (Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1972), pp. 71–105. Robert Nozick, The Nature of Rationality
(Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993), pp. 163–74.
12 Nya ̄yabha ̄s.ya4, 14–18.
13 Uddyotakara. Nya ̄yava ̄rttika, 24, 3.
14 Kalidas Bhattacharya, “An Idea of Comparative Indian Philosophy,” All India
Oriental Conference(Santiniketan, 1980), p. 80.
15 Nya ̄yava ̄rttika28, 19–29, 1.
16 Roderick Chisholm, Theory of Knowledge(Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1966),
pp. 56–69.
17 Bimal Krishna Matilal, Perception: An Essay on Classical Indian Theories of Knowledge
(Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986), p. 314.
18 Din.na ̄ ga, Prama ̄n.asamuccaya1, 17; Uddyotakara, Nya ̄yava ̄rttika208, 12–237, 5
(under 2.1.33–6).
19 Va ̄ tsya ̄ yana’s comment under NS 1.1.4, and Vais ́es.ikasu ̄tra3.1.13.
20 Nya ̄yava ̄rttika36, 1–14 (under 1.1.4).
21 Compare Sartre’s criticism of Freud’s concept of a “censor” governing unconscious
repression: “the censor in order to apply its activity with discernment must know
what it is repressing... the censor must choose and in order to choose must be
aware of choosing.. .”. J.-P. Sartre, Being and Nothingness: An Essay on Phenomeno-
logical Ontology, trans. H. E. Barnes (London: Methuen & Co., 1966), p. 52.
22 Nya ̄yabha ̄s.ya19, 2–3 (above 1.1.16).
444 jonardon ganeri