2006 年 55 巻 1 号 p. 327-324,1214
The purpose of this paper is to make clear what lies behind Kumarila's introduction of the theory of the intrinsic validity of knowledge (svatahpramanya).
One of the problems Kumarila is faced with is that, in order to determine an object cognized, one has to understand the correspondence between a cognition and its object. Obviously, under this assumption one must determine the validity of the cognition by which such correspondence is understood. What this implies is that the determination of an object cognized opens regression ad infinitum.
Kumarila solved this problem by introducing the theory in question. He paid attention to the causal relation between a cognition and the determination of its object by the cognition. According to Kumarila, who holds the causal theory that a thing brings about its effect by itself, a cognition is supposed to bring about the determination of its object by itself, so that the correspondence between the cognition and its object need not be taken into consideration.
However, one cannot deny the fact that a cognition can sometimes lead to determining its object wrongly. In order to account for the sublation of erroneous cognitions, Kumarila brought together the theory in question and the theory of sublation (badha). Within the framework of the theory of the intrinsic validity of knowledge, the theory of sublation claims that when two cognitions, previous and subsequent, provide inconsistent information about the same object, the previous cognition is determined to be false by the subsequent.
Anything in this world appears to a cognizer as something determined and what appears to a cognizer is simply what really exists in the external world―this is the belief of the realist Kumarila.