Question asked by Pete Q.
Question: In Arizona, it is possible to buy the stuffed, mounted head of a “Jackalope,” a kind of horned rabbit (technically an antlered hare). By Buddhist consensus, direct perception and inference are the only two means of valid cognition (pramana). Yet in this case, I have direct perception of a horned rabbit (or something that seems to be a horned rabbit), while any authoritative testimony (e.g. from experts in biology) that might correct my misapprehension is rejected as an invalid means of knowledge. Must Buddhist tourists in Arizona accept the existence of rabbit horns?
That is good. Existence is geographical and symbolic. Not necessarily pervasive. So important not to get stuck on the examples set out to help your percieve something deeper.
Something that might exist in one place may not in another. In pramana, you are concerned with direct perception and inference and not get stuck on examples of it that may exist or not in your area.
So perhaps in Arizona you can substitute examples with a horned Tibetan instead?? Langdarma doesn’t count…haha
Good luck on your studies and very happy to hear you contemplating on Pramana. Wonderful.