Pramana is constructed from pratyaksha, anumana, and agama

pratyaksha: evidence; sense data; empirical data that is perceived and analyzed within a dualistic and fragmented context; facts or knowledge of events coming from sense objects. Pratyaksha is empirical data interpreted through the dualistic mind as ordinary, sensual object-relations of name and form, a limited I/it knowledge framework, where the position of the observer is not corrected, a limited, biased, and fragmented mode of perception. Instead of the observer's position compensated for in universal time and space, the objects are viewed shortsightedly. Pratyaksha is *not* pure vast awareness, unbiased, primordial wisdom, naked or open awareness, pure awareness, vidya (rigpa Tibetan), gnosis, jnana, or heightened awareness where "sense data" is interpreted in terms of vast primordial time, vast all pervasive space, viveka-khyater, samyama, or knowledge (as is known in samadhi).

Ordinary dualistic perception or observation of an object by the senses, or the act of apprehending or cognizing a specific object by the imputation of an objective observer. When applied to sense objects, it can be said to be the direct bare apprehension of a sense object or a bare/naked sense awareness prior to mental processing/interpretation by the intellect (buddhi) or individual mind (manas). It is the first step (of apprehension) of comprehension, which produces reified conclusion or belief. Normally pratyaksa refers to the way the senses collect data from the sense world (physical world) regarding specific information; thus it provides the raw data for samprajnata (cognition based on specific content verses unspecific or general). An easy analogy is the perception of a mountain from four separate valleys. From the South the mountain looks red. From the east, it looks blue. From the north, it looks white, and from the West golden colored. Each view is biased and limited dependent upon the vantage point of the observer. All the observer can say from their limited positions is that *from* the mountain looks red, etc. Similarly what does the mountain look like from above, from underneath, or from within it? In short, one can not know a mountain this way (through pratyaksha) and one cannot observe one's mental processes/phenomena either accurately other than through the aegis of the universal timeless, non-dual mind.

It is not to be confused with the samadhi of non-dual naked awareness free from conceptualization processes (which occurs in asamprajnata samadhi). When applied to a mental object it is the act of apprehending an apparent object of the mind where the object(s) form an apparent specific and limited content occupying the mind, but the overall non-dual context or perspective is occluded; as in the idiom “Not knowing the forest for the trees”. Pratyaksa refers to normal dualistic object relations, where there is a specific object which is apprehended forming the contents of the mind of a seemingly separate observer who is observing the specific object. Pratyaksa is common dualistic observation or "normal" perception "about" events, things, or normal observations based on a separate it (phenomena) and an observer (ego). It is limited or partial data, not direct or special insight.

anumana: inference; reasoning; logic (deductive and inductive). In philosophical and intellectual systems, dialectics and logic are an instrumental attempt to uphold the primacy of anumana. Deductive reasoning is useful as far as it goes. Many concoctions of the mind can be constructed rationally and many theories can also be considered as rational, but neither validates the theory, nor can it be said that two or more perfectly rational analyses must form the same conclusion.

Ideation processes, thought constructions, and intellectual investigation although valuable in the deconstruction of myths and fallacies, are inadequate in an integrative/wholistic sense. Such are thus demeaned in yoga. Empirical methods are most often seriously skewed and influenced by prior beliefs and experiences. Consequently, it cannot be expected that two observers when observing, experiencing, or experimenting the same event will make the same* theory-neutral* observations. The role of observation as a theory-neutral arbiter may not be possible. "Theory-dependence" of observation means that, even if there were agreed methods of inference and interpretation, observers may still disagree on the nature of empirical data.

agama: external evidence as provided not by the sense organs per se, but from external respected sources such as authorities in the field, respected peers, teachers, priests, tradition, or authoritative books such as accepted scripture. In a democracy, agama may also be majority consensus, conventional wisdom, peer pressure, or even mass hallucination, paranoia, or hysteria if one were take that as authority.

pramana: a belief system where one believes that one possesses valid knowledge; valid cognition; an assumption based on facts, inference and external authority; a view of the world and hence a view of self backed up by pratyaksha, anumana, and agama, a proven theory; so called right knowledge based upon pratyaksha, anumana, and agama. In short human beings take in limited data from the sense world, infer or impute meaning upon it, and then find some external validation instrument, thus forming the adherence to a belief system.

[This vrtti] called pramana is constituted of pratyaksha (sense data), anumana (logic or inference), and external validation processes emanating from dependence upon scripture, authoritative teachers, gurus, accepted external authority, trusted friends, peer groups, or even consensus reality (agama) which externalizes one's attention and extracts our essential power and energy astray from direct experience of innate wisdom.

Warning: The following commentary is by far the longest of all and may become tedious to those who already know that pramana (confidence in belief systems) is a powerful citta-vrtti to be gratefully surrendered/let go. True confidence and certainty comes from realization of one's true nature, which is beyond concepts and belief systems, conditioning, and dualistic/fragmented bias. True confidence is not the result of memorizing or adhering to an authoritative text, an external teacher, an external object what-so-ever, or isolated phenomena. It requires humility to question conventional beliefs  and assumptions -- beliefs of both external authority and one's own accumulations, and ABSOLUTE humility to recognize the true nature of mind and nature. That humility creates wisdom; while aligning with that wisdom/awareness creates a true sense of security and confidence. If one confidently already KNOWS that, then one can save time by proceeding on to the next sutra.

"Philosophy only exists insofar as there are paradoxical relations, relations which fail to connect, or should not connect.  When every connection is naturally legitimate, philosophy is impossible or in vain.