[Advaita-l] How is an object perceived.

[H S Chandramouli]

Namaste Raghav Ji,

Reg  << Now in this context, I understand you to be saying that SB does not
endorse
this idea that the mind spatially extending itself to envelop the object
whereas VP dies propound this idea >>,

Oh no. I am sorry if I have conveyed a wrong impression. According to both
SB and VP, not being very finicky about terminology, mind or its vritti
extends spatially right upto the object and envelops or pervades the same.
As per VP, Subject Consciousness in the form of Chidabhasa rides along with
the vritti upto the object. SB does not support the idea of Subject
Consciousness extending upto the object. It remains confined to the body.
That is the difference highlighted by Prof Bina Gupta in her book and
referred to by Sadananda Ji.

It may be pertinent to point out that the ideas presented in SB are not the
views of Sri MS per se, but a compilation by him of the various prakriyas
expounded by different advaitic teachers upto that time on different topics
concerning advaita. It is more like SLS of Sri Appayya Dikshita. Except
that the scope of SLS is much wider than that of SB. Hence it really may
not correct to attribute the views on epistemology brought out here to Sri
MS himself. They could represent the views of other commentators on the
issue as of that time.

Reg  << Chronologically both VP and SB are nearly contemporaneous.

So, are you suggesting that VP supercedes SB or is it the other way around?
>>,

Sri MS (14-16 Centuries) is much earlier to Dharmaraja Adhvarindra (17 th
Century ).

VP is generally accepted as most representative of advaitic thought in so
far as epistemology is concerned.

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 Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 9:00 AM Raghav Kumar Dwivedula via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> Namaste Chandramouli ji
> Thank you for drawing attention to the VP and Siddhanta Bindu (SB) ways of
> presenting pratyaxa epistemology.
>
> " in
> the view of VP, the Subject extends upto the location of the object
> alongside the vritti, and  Subject Consciousness and object Consciousness
> become one or united at the location of the object."
>
>
> This used to be a bit of a sticking point for me earlier. Probably because
> of pre-existing scientific conditioning ingrained in me.
>
> Now in this context, I understand you to be saying that SB does not endorse
> this idea that the mind spatially extending itself to envelop the object
> whereas VP dies propound this idea.
>
> Chronologically both VP and SB are nearly contemporaneous.
>
> So, are you suggesting that VP supercedes SB or is it the other way around?
>
> Om
> Raghav
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, 13 Apr, 2020, 5:06 PM H S Chandramouli via Advaita-l, <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
> > The main point of difference Prof Bina Gupta is trying to highlight is
> that
> > in the view of MS, the Subject stays in the body without extending to the
> > location of the object and hence there is no question of the
> Consciousness
> > associated with the respective entities becoming one or united. While in
> > the view of VP, the Subject extends upto the location of the object
> > alongside the vritti, and  Subject Consciousness and object Consciousness
> > become one or united at the location of the object.
> > 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 Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 4:21 PM H S Chandramouli <
> hschandramouli at gmail.com
> > >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > 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
> > >
> > > <#m_-7490338045377386712_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
> > >>
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> >
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>

<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>