[Advaita-l] How is an object perceived.

[H S Chandramouli]

Pranams Sri Sadananda Ji,

A partial response.

Reg  << Personally I do not seeany difference >>,

I am copyig below relevant part of the translation of Sishanta Bindu of Sri
Madhusudhana Saraswati by Sri SN Shastri based on the talks on the same by
Sri Krishnamurthy Shastrigal.

<< Thus this is the method here. (This is how cognition of an object
takes place). The internal organ (mind) which is inside the body, which
pervades the whole body, which is created out of the subtle elements
with a preponderance of sattvaguna, which is a modification of
nescience, and which is extremely clear like a mirror, stretches out
through the eyes and other sense organs, pervades objects such as a pot
which are capable of being known, and takes the form of that object, just
like molten copper (poured into a mould). Like the light of the sun, it (the
mind) can suddenly contract or expand. (The light covers small as well as
big objects). The mind, being a substance with parts, is capable of
undergoing changes. It is inside the body, pervading it, and extends,
without any break, up to the object such as pot, which it covers (by
taking the form of the object), like the eye (just as the vision of the eye
extends from the eye to the object without a break). The part of the mind
which is within the body, which is called the ego, is known as the agent.
The part that extends like a stick from the body to the object, which is
called the cognition resulting from a mental modification (vritti-jnaana),
is known as the action. The part of the mind that pervades the object is
what makes the pot, etc., the object of knowledge. It is called the capacity
to manifest.
87. Because of the capacity of the mind with these three parts to receive
a reflection (like a mirror), consciousness becomes manifested (reflected)
in it. Though the consciousness so manifested is only one, it is given
three different names, based on the three-fold division of the mind in
which it is reflected. The part that is limited by the portion called the
agent is known as the knower. The part limited by the portion referred to
above as the action is called the means of knowledge. The part covering
the object, described above as the capacity to manifest, is called
knowledge. The object to be known is the Brahman-consciousness which
is the substratum of the object and which is unknown. The same, when
known, is the phala or result >>.

Differences from VP are evident.

Regards

<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
Virus-free.
www.avast.com
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 8:38 PM Kuntimaddi Sadananda via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

>
> PraNAms to all.
>
> Many years ago I had written my own understanding of VedantaParibhasha(VP).
>
> I am just revisiting the issue of perception.
>
> I was reading the book by Prof. Bina Gupta, Perceiving in AdvaitaVedanta',
> where she presents the analysis of VP. In the introduction shewrites,
> "Although there aredifference of opinions among the Advaitins as to how an
> object becomes manifestto the subject, most of them recognize the two-fold
> function of a mental-modeentitled in an external perception: the removal of
> the veil of ignorance thathides the object from the subject and the
> association between the subjectconsciousness and the object. (She gives
> reference to Madhusudana Saraswati'swork). Then she says ' A slightly
> modified account of the process involved inperception, however, is set
> forth in VP and explained by Paribhasha Prakashika.She says, 'The view that
> is propounded in modification of the above accountespouses a mere literal
> coincidence of the object-consciousness and thecognizer-consciousness. The
> cognizing subject is here understood to beco-extensive with the mind, which
> is the limiting adjunct of the cognizingsubject. In a perceptual process,
> the subject co-extensive with the mind andits modes extends itself to the
> object and coincides with it. This is possiblebecause the consciousness
> limited by the mental -mode and the consciousnesslimited by the object
> become one or united.
>
> Personally I do not seeany difference.
>
> Question is always -how does the perception of an objectoccur?
>
> We have a) The all-pervading consciousness, b) the mind c)chidaabhaasa -
> at the subject level.
>
> And from the object point -we have object form which can be sensedand
> forms corresponding vritti a modification in or of the mind.
> Theall-pervading consciousness now can get reflected by the Vritti. That
> makes onebe conscious of the vRitti or indirectly the perceived object
> outside.Simultaneously and spontaneously a subject vRtti or aham vRitti
> (which is anego-vRitti) also raises claiming the knowledge as 'I know this
> is a pot' whenpot is perceived. This is a general description.
>
> It is assumed that the mind perceives the illuminatedconsciousness of the
> Vritti and the knowledge of the contents of the Vrittibecomes known to the
> mind - as phala vyaapti.
>
> The details and the sequence is rather clouded here. Trying tounwrap this
> process to have some clear understanding if possible.
>
> Also, how is process differ from the point of Shree MadhusudanaSaraswati?
>
> Any thoughts on this?
>
> Just exploring.
>
> Hari Om!
>
> Sadananda
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>