Part XII - Internal Perceptions
(cont.)
In the case of internal perceptions (i.e. perception
of happiness or unhappiness, fear, anger etc.) the mental
moods are directly perceived. As the emotions arise,
they express as perturbations in the mind – as
mental moods – and they are illumined and cognized
as they form. Senses are not involved here. The attributes
of the mood are the specific feelings themselves and
therefore further means are not required for knowledge
of those feelings. VP says that, since the limiting
consciousness in the form of mental moods and the limiting
consciousness in the form of feelings of happiness,
anger, fear, etc are identical or occupy the same space
and time, the reflected consciousness or the knowledge
which is immediate and direct is invariably a perception.
Hence, there are fundamentally two criteria that need
to be met for perception to be complete:
a) For the vRRitti that is formed either via sense
input (for the objects outside) or via internal perceptions
of the emotions, there must be one to one correspondence
between the object of perception and the vRRitti that
is formed. This insures that, for every vRRitti that
is formed, there is an object to which it corresponds,
whether the object of perception is outside or inside
the mind.
b) The vRRitti as it forms is illumined directly and
immediately by the ever present consciousness – sAkShi
or the witnessing consciousness. Hence, direct and immediate
knowledge of the object perceived is the nature of perceptual
knowledge. In complex cases, as in the case of fire
on the distant hill, the immediate perceptions are only
the smoke and the hill. From this, the knowledge that
the hill is on fire is deduced by logic, using cause-effect
relationships. This deductive knowledge is not immediate
and direct. Hence we have a mixture of direct and immediate
knowledge of the smoke and the hill, and mediate and
indirect knowledge of the fire on the hill.
The limiting consciousness of the object, the limiting
consciousness of the subject, and the limiting consciousness
of the means, all combine to form pure consciousness
but this is expressed figuratively as the ‘consciousness
of the object’ or the ‘knowledge of the
object’.
We can ask the question: how is it possible that the
limiting reflected consciousness (i.e. the ‘knowledge
of’) is the same as the pure absolute knowledge
or original consciousness? Although the answer is obvious,
it becomes a very pertinent question for many advaitic
students, since it is essentially the same question
as ‘who really realizes when I say I am not this,
or I am not the ego, which is nothing but the reflected
limiting consciousness, since it is the ego that is
making statement that I am not the ego, and not the
sAkShi chaitanya. The reflected consciousness will remain
as reflected consciousness as long as there is medium
for reflection. It is like saying that, as long as there
is a mirror, there will always be an image in the mirror
providing that there is an object in its vicinity and
there is sufficient light, whether I pay attention to
the image or not. (Human psychology is always to look
at one’s images if there is one. Everybody wants
to know how he or she looks in the mirror, as if through
another’s eyes). The original consciousness remains
as pure, ever present, ever shining consciousness, whether
there is a mirror to reflect or not. ’Self Realization’ is
then recognizing that the reflected limiting consciousness
(ego) is not separate from the original consciousness.
This analogy of mirror and reflection is only for the
purpose of illustration. If we say that the original
consciousness is all-pervading and mind is reflecting
the consciousness, this statement is for the purpose
of understanding. According to Advaita Vedanta, mind,
the reflecteing medium as well as the reflection are
not and cannot be separate from the all pervading consciousness.
Hence in Advaita it is technically called adhyAsa or
just a superimposition, like ring is superimposed on
gold. Gold is called the adhiShThAna or substantive.
Hence, the all pervading consciousness itself 'as though'
appears as the mind as well as the reflection in the
mind, for the knowledge of an object that itself appears
as one.
It is similar to entering a bright sunlit room. What
I actually see in the room is the reflected sunlight
from all of the objects in the room and the walls. But
I recognize that the reflected sunlight is not different
from the original sunlight, even though I may not be
able to see that original sunlight directly. If there
are no objects, no walls, or anything else to reflect
the sunlight, will my eyes still be able to recognize
the presence of sunlight? If I am the sunlight itself
and there is nothing to reflect, how would that be?
Hence, it is said that mind is essential for self-realization;
to recognize that I am not the reflected light in the
mind but the original source that provides the light
for the mind to reflect. In fact, I am the mind too.
It is said that, in order to see myself I became many.
This is referred to in many ways, for example as lIlA
vibhUti or aishvarya or, as gauDapAda puts it, svAbhAvika – that
is my natural state.
Hence, VP's declaration in the beginning: 'pratyakSha
pramA ca atra chaitanyam eva' meaning ‘in direct
perceptual knowledge, what is really revealed as the
knowledge as reflected consciousness is the pure consciousness
itself’. That is the identity of reflected consciousness
with the original consciousness. One is adhyAsa and
the other is adhiShThAna, a superimposition on a substratum,
like ring on Gold. It is like saying that the ring is
nothing but gold, which is its adhiShThAna or substratum.
In the case of consciousness, without that superimposition
one cannot see the adhiShThAna, just as light cannot
be seen without its reflections. One can now see the
beauty in the million dollar statement as one reflects
more and more on the truth behind all reflections. This
completes the analysis by establishing what was proposed
in the beginning. The rest of the analysis deals with
some details and related things pertaining to direct
perception as pramANa.
Proceed to the next
essay. |
