[Advaita-l] How is an object perceived.

[Kuntimaddi Sadananda]

Jayanarayanan - PraNAms 
Thanks for your input. What you wrote is true - but is from the paramaarthika point.
>From vyaavahaarika point, the object knowledge is distinct from the subject knower. Prof. Bina Gupta later clarifies in her introduction. Just copying her statement where empirical knowledge of an object is differentiated from the knowledge of the substantive consciousness. 
My question was why to invoke the mind going out and grasp the object for the sense of sight when the experience of everyone is different. Perception is a wonder as - as soon as I open my eyes the object in front is seen and known instantaneously. 
My hats off to that creator who made this possible. 
Hari Om!
Sadananda----------------------Bina Gupta -Perception in Advaita Vedanta.
"The position taken by Vedanta Paribhasha and elucidated atgreat length by Paribhasha Prakashika exhibits great insight. The object thatis expressed in awareness is expressed as the material object rather than thesubstratum on which it is superimposed. The consciousness defining the objectas such does not stand as the object of awareness. Nescience in its cosmicaspect veils the substratum-consciousness through the false projection (vikshepa)of the material object. Empirical knowledge cannot effect its removal. What itcan remove is only the individual derivative form of nescience which, likedarkness, has been hiding the consciousness of the particular object. Theobject becomes manifest through the removal of the temporary ignorance of theobject accomplished by the mental mode. The mental mode, as illustrated byconsciousness, thus acts technically as the means of valid knowledge."


 

    On Saturday, April 18, 2020, 10:53:44 AM GMT+5:30, S Jayanarayanan via Advaita-l <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:  
 
  Kuntimaddi Sadananda kuntimaddisada at yahoo.com wrote:
 
> PraNAms to all.
> 
 
Namaste.
 
> 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 Advaita Vedanta',
> where she presents the analysis of VP. In the introduction she writes,
> "Although there are difference of opinions among the Advaitins as to how
> an object becomes manifest to the subject, most of them recognize the
> two-fold function of a mental-mode entitled in an external perception:
> the removal of the veil of ignorance that hides the object from the subject
> and the association between the subject consciousness and the object.
> (She gives reference to Madhusudana Saraswati's work). Then she says
> ' A slightly modified account of the process involved in perception, however,
> is set forth in VP and explained by Paribhasha Prakashika. She says,
> 'The view that is propounded in modification of the above account espouses
> a mere literal coincidence of the object-consciousness and
> the cognizer-consciousness. The cognizing subject is here understood to
> be co-extensive with the mind, which is the limiting adjunct of the
> cognizing subject. In a perceptual process, the subject co-extensive with
> the mind and its modes extends itself to the object and coincides with it.
> This is possible because the consciousness limited by the mental-mode and
> the consciousness limited by the object become one or united.
> 
> Personally I do not see any difference.
> 
> Question is always -how does the perception of an objectoccur? 
> 
 
I don't quite understand the description of the process of perception provided by Bina Gupta.
However, I can say this from my personal understanding:
 
1) It is impossible to give a consistent and full explanation of the process of perception (e.g. Seeing)
assuming the existence of an external material or physical object (e.g. pot) without appeal to a
non-material of non-physical entity (i.e. Self or Consciousness). Vide Sankara's BSB 3.3.54-55.
In fact, this is the evidence of the existence of the Self as separate from the body, using the
phenomenon of perception.
 
2) Sankara says in his BSB 3.3.54 that the Self is of the very nature of Perception itself ("upalabdhisvaruupa") :
 upalabdhisvaruupa eva cha na aatmetyaatmano dehavyatiriktatvam .
 
The above indicates that the Self is literally identical with SEEING, HEARING, etc. In other words:
 Self = Seeing = Hearing = ...
 
If that is taken to be the advaitic standpoint, then the question of seeing an object (i.e. the "seen") may not be
meaningful, since ultimately the seen object is not really real, but SEEING is really real and remains a constant.
 
> 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 sensed and forms
> corresponding vritti a modification in or of the mind. The all-pervading
> consciousness now can get reflected by the Vritti. That makes one be
> 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' when pot is perceived. This is a general description.
> 
> It is assumed that the mind perceives the illuminated consciousness of the Vritti
> and the knowledge of the contents of the Vritti becomes known to the mind -
> as phala vyaapti. 
> 
> The details and the sequence is rather clouded here. Trying to unwrap 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
> 
 
Regards,
Kartik

  
_______________________________________________
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