This paper focuses on how Dharmakirti [法稱] is inherited and developed and how Wonhyo [元曉] criticizes the quadratic argument of Xuanzang [玄奘] that inherited the quadrant of Dharmapala [護法] on the structure of our knowledge as the "concrete fact of the relatedness". We will try to identify the point of contact between Dharmakirti and Wonhyo.
According to Dignaga [陳那], our knowledge consists of three parts: the objective shape [相分], the subjective shape [見分], and the function to grasp the subject of recognition [自證分]. On the other hand, according to the Dharmapala, our knowledge consists of the objective shape [相分], the subjective shape [見分], and the function to grasp the subject of recognition [自證分], the function of function to grasp the subject of recognition [證自證分]. While Dharmakirti positively advocates the Three Components of Awareness [三分說] of Dignaga, Wonhyo advocates the Three Components of Awareness [三 分說] of Dignaga in passively criticizing the argument of Xuanzang [玄奘] succeeding the Four Components of Awareness [四分說] of Dharmapala.
Finally, for the three components of Dignaga's knowledge, Dharmakirti can not divide our knowing in the ultimate level by the objective shape [相分], the subjective shape [見分], and the function to grasp the subject of recognition [自證分]. but at the level of the world, by our preconceived notion, his theory is said to consist of the objective shape [相分], the subjective shape [見分], and the function to grasp the subject of recognition [自證分]. Wonhyo does not recognize the three components of knowing at the level of non-existence [非有], but recognizes the three components of knowing at the level of non-nonexistence [非無]. Therefore, in the ultimate level [Dharmakirti] and the level of non-existence [Wonhyo], they do not recognize the three components of knowledge, but in the level of the world [Dharmakirti] and the level of non-nonexistence [Wonhyo] they recognize the three components of knowledge.
