[Advaita-l] Perception in lightning

[Venkatraghavan S]

Namaste Raghav ji,
The charge of representationalism would apply if the light that was
reflected from an object did so independent of the object.

That is, in this conception, as a particular wavelength of light being
reflected is a result of a property inherent in the object that absorbs all
other wavelengths and reflects only a particular wavelength, the reflects
light that hits the eye, is "of the object" - if the object were not thus,
the reflected light would not be thus. The fact that we consider the
wavelength of the light hitting the eye to be the object's colour is
evidence of the tAdAtmya of the reflected light with the object.

Hence, a cognition of the object when the vRttyavacChinna chaitanya and
ghaTaprabhAvacChinna chaitanya are unified is as valid as the one where the
vRttyavacChinna chaitanya and ghaTAvacChinna chaitanya are unified due to
the manovRtti hitting the ghaTa.

Kind regards,
Venkatraghavan


On Tue, 11 May 2021, 12:00 Raghav Kumar Dwivedula via Advaita-l, <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> Namaste Venkatraghavan ji
> While my thinking too is very similar to what you write, i heard an
> objection along the following lines the objection that we (advaitins) too
> are falling in to the trap of 'representationalism'.
>
>  In other words, since the viShayAvacchinna chaitanyam and vRttyavacchinna
> chaitanyam never actually coincide to if we take VP literally (only
> prabhAvavacchinna chaitanyam as you put it and vRttyavacchinna chaitanyam
> coincide), we can never get veridical perception (pramA) of the distant
> object, we only recreate an unreliable image/representation of it in our
> mind. The knowledge of the object-in-itself cannot arise in this
> prabhava-mediated pratyaxa prama.
> There is no way to prove that such a prabhaav based prama is ever free from
> error. In contrast the orthodox VP position is to ensure prAmANyam by
> positing atleast the possibility that there can be coincidence of
> vishayAvacvhinna and extended mind based vRttyavacchinna-chaitanyam.
>
> My response to the above would be to examine the meaning of the word
> viShaya and whether it exists apart from its sensory prabhAvas etc.
>
>
> Om
> Raghav
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, 11 May, 2021, 2:00 pm Venkatraghavan S via Advaita-l, <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
> > Some minor typos in paragraph 3 below.
> >
> > 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 */ ears*, there is *the possibility*
> > for bhrama because of ajnAna in the viShaya (light/sound) avacChinna
> > chaitanya.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, 11 May 2021, 08:50 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
> > >>
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> >
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>