[Advaita-l] Perception in lightning

[Venkatraghavan S]

Yes, but that rUpa is a property of the physical object, which requires the
manovRtti to move towards the object. rUpa is not light emanating from the
object, it is a property inhering in it. Where in the paribhASha has this
idea of rUpa been stated?

If it is a property of the object, it leads to the question, how can you
see the galaxy's rUpa if the galaxy does not exist any longer?

One solution which you had suggested was that rUpa is actually light that
travels and meets the manovRtti.

Instead of changing the nature of rUpa, I had suggested that it is not rUpa
that is seen by chakshu, but reflected light. That idea has certainly not
been suggested by the existing vedAnta framework.

Regards,
Venkatraghavan

On Tue, 11 May 2021, 10:50 H S Chandramouli, <hschandramouli at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Namaste.
>
> The current position is that vishaya for the sense organs are rUpa and
> shabda only. For ease of understanding perhaps,  they are referred to in
> texts like VP as objects. Hence no change is required. That is what I
> meant. Only proper understanding is needed.
>
> Regards
>
> Chandramouli
>
>
> <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_183010351409733267_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>
> On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 3:05 PM Venkatraghavan S <agnimile at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Namaste
>> It is not to account for exceptions per se. The idea is to preserve as
>> much of the advaita epistemological framework as possible, while accounting
>> for observable scientific phenomena.
>>
>> That being the case, what was suggested is that if we change the concept
>> of what constitutes a viShaya to the subject (the object is not the
>> viShaya, light / sound is), one can preserve the existing framework while
>> addressing the challenge of viewing objects that have ceased to exist.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Venkatraghavan
>>
>> On Tue, 11 May 2021, 09:47 H S Chandramouli, <hschandramouli at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Namaste.
>>>
>>> Reg  << Thus all the terms related to viShayAvacChinna chaitanya can be
>>> recast to mean prabhAvacChinna chaitanya / shabdAvacChinna chaitanya etc
>>> >>,
>>>
>>> There is perhaps no need to recast anything. The present rendering
>>> covers practically all the commonly  met with experiences. We are perhaps
>>> considering exceptions. Hence a general reference to what has been
>>> clarified would  be enough to cover such exceptions
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Chandramouli.
>>>
>>>
>>> <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_183010351409733267_m_-2873140088161445427_m_-7682390552209184207_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>>>
>>> On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 1:22 PM Venkatraghavan S <agnimile at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Namaste
>>>> I was going to suggest this well. The object that is perceived is not
>>>> the physical object itself but light / sound emanating from it.
>>>>
>>>> Thus without needing the postulation of the mind to move towards a
>>>> physical object elsewhere, one could postulate that the light / sound
>>>> itself is the viShaya. Thus all the terms related to viShayAvacChinna
>>>> chaitanya can be recast to mean prabhAvacChinna chaitanya / shabdAvacChinna
>>>> chaitanya etc.
>>>>
>>>> Thus, the viShaya adhiShThAna chaitanya can still be the prakAshaka,
>>>> there is difference between paroksha and pratyaksha on account of the
>>>> prabhA / shabda making contact with the eyes, there is possible for bhrama
>>>> because of ajnAna in the viShaya (light/sound) avacChinna chaitanya.
>>>>
>>>> And as Sri Chandramouli says, this aligns with the anubhava of not
>>>> experiencing the exact quantum of distance in the perception of sound and
>>>> light even when one knows in general that it is far / near.
>>>>
>>>> That is simpler I feel and requires less items to postulate such as the
>>>> mind being able to travel back in time to see distant galaxies etc. While
>>>> it may be true for yogis, to say that everyone does that naturally does not
>>>> sit well.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Venkatraghavan
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, 11 May 2021, 08:17 H S Chandramouli via Advaita-l, <
>>>> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Namaste.
>>>>>
>>>>> The following could perhaps form the basis for a resolution of the
>>>>> issue.
>>>>>
>>>>> What is cognized through vision is the rUpa (color) of the Vishaya. It
>>>>> could be considered as the light enveloping the object or emanating
>>>>> from it
>>>>> (in the case of lightning for example) as the case may be. While ‘being
>>>>>  distant’ is also perceived in the cognition, the actual location is
>>>>> not
>>>>> when the distance is large. Same with shabda or sound. While the sound
>>>>> is
>>>>> cognized as well as it being ‘distant’, exact distance is not involved
>>>>> in
>>>>> the cognition.
>>>>>
>>>>> We can now consider ‘where’  the cognition takes place when all the
>>>>> three
>>>>> involved in the cognition; namely antahkarana vritti,rUpa or light
>>>>> enveloping/emnating from the object, and shabda or sound emanating
>>>>> from the
>>>>> object;  all three are in motion, and the distances between the
>>>>> objects and
>>>>> the experience are large.The location where visual cognition takes
>>>>> place
>>>>> can be considered as the location where the rUpa or light enveloping
>>>>> the
>>>>> object or emanating from it is coincident with the antahkarana vritti
>>>>> issuing forth through the eyes. Similarly for the cognition of sound.
>>>>> These
>>>>> locations need not be the same as their origin. When distances
>>>>> involved are
>>>>> negligible compared to their speeds, location of cognition will be
>>>>> practically the same as the object. When distances are large, they
>>>>> could be
>>>>> quite different.
>>>>>
>>>>> This explains the reason for cognition taking place at different times
>>>>> in
>>>>> case of lightning and thunder for example. This would also cover
>>>>> anomalies
>>>>> in respect of cognition of very distant stars/planets etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards
>>>>> Chandramouli
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>> <
>>>>> 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_-4332257227125025052_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Archives: https://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
>>>>>
>>>>