|
Part XIX - Perceptuality of Objects: Definition vindicated (part 2)
Then the next question is who is that 'I am', the knower,
the pramAta? This aspect will be addressed in detail
again so that it is sufficient here to realize that
the ever present witnessing consciousness, sAkShi, cannot
be a pramAta. Knowing involves a modification or vikAra.
According to Advaita, the ever present witnessing consciousness,
sAkShi, is the all pervading infinite Brahman who does
not and cannot undergo any modification. However, in
his presence, one can say that pramAta, prameya and
pramANa (the tripuTI or three fold division of knower,
known and means of knowledge) can exist.
If the sAkShi is not a pramAta, can the mind be the
pramAta? The mind is also an inert entity and, by itself,
cannot be a knower. A knower has to be a conscious entity.
Then who is the knower? According to Advaita Vedanta,
the pramAta, subject or knower, is the ever present
consciousness, sAkshI chaitanya, but reflected in the
mind. This is called the reflected consciousness or
chidAbhAsa and is more commonly known as the ego or
ahaMkAra, which has the notion of 'I am the doer', 'I
am the knower' or 'I am the enjoyer' etc - the hero
of everyone's autobiography.
As discussed before, the mind, being subtle matter,
has the capacity to reflect the light of consciousness
of sAkshI and the degree of its reflection depends on
its purity. It is analogous to a mirror, whose degree
of reflection of light depends on its cleanliness. To
eliminate any misunderstanding that might arise to the
effect that the mind is separate from sAkshI, the pure
consciousness, we need to recognize that like all other
objects, the mind is also a superimposition on the all-pervading
consciousness, like ring on gold. The substantive of
the mind is sAkshI chaitanya or the witnessing consciousness
only. In contrast to inert objects which are grosser
forms, the mind being subtle can express Brahman not
only as existence but also as 'reflected consciousness'.
Hence pramAta, the knower, is the reflected consciousness
in the mind.
Now we can bring all three factors - pramAta, prameya
and pramANa - together to complete the perception. When
the pramANa operates through the senses, forming a vRRitti
or mental state in the mind, it is also reflected in
the light of consciousness. Now we have two reflected
consciousnesses - one directly in the mind as the pramAta
or knower, and the other a reflection of the vRRitti.
Since consciousness is all pervading, it pervades the
mind too. In contrast to the grosser (bhautika) elements
superimposed on consciousness, the mind corresponds
to the subtler element (bhUta). Being subtle, the mind
can 'reflect' the all illuminating consciousness and
that reflected limiting consciousness is called chidAbhAsa,
ahaMkAra or Ego. In the case of the mental states or
vRRitti-s that corresponds to external or internal perceptions,
its illumination occurs when it forms in the mind. Thus,
when an object is perceived, its mental state is formed
and illumined. When the next object is seen, the next
mental state is formed and illumined. vRRitti-s are
formed sequentially and the associated thoughts are
also sequential in the mind. However, in forming ego
or chidAbhAsa, the mind itself is an object of illumination
with its attributes. Hence the illumination and reflection
occur as long as mind and its attributes are there;
i.e. all the time that the mind is operating. This includes
both the waking state and dream state. Hence chidAbhAsa,
ahaMkAra or Ego is formed all the time that the mind
is present.
We are using the words ‘superimposed’ or ‘reflection
like a mirror’ etc only for the purpose of illustration.
The mind is a superimposition on Brahman just as a ring
is on gold, while consciousness is the adhiShThAna or
substratum for the mind. Hence, the mind is consciousness
alone but appears as an inert but subtle object. Since
it is subtle, it can reflect the light of consciousness
much better than gross elements. The illumination and
reflection occurs all the time that the mind is there.
Thus, the ego will also be there all the time that the
mind is there. This is true even for a j~nAnI, except
that the j~nAnI is the one who realizes that I am not
the ego and knows that ego is just a superimposed entity
(adhyAsa) like ring on gold and that I am the substantive,
adhiShThAna – the absolute eternal consciousness.
Hence, the mind of a j~nAnI is free from the egotistical
notions that I am this or that etc. He will use the
ego as he uses the mind and the body for transactional
purposes. Life itself pulsates through the mind as a
subtle body. The reflected light of consciousness (chidAbhAsa)
in turn illumines the gross body, the five prANa-s or
physiological functions, the five sense organs and five
organs of action. It is like the sun illuminating the
moon and moon in turn illuminating other objects. The
reflected consciousness, chidAbhAsa, for all practical
purposes (transactional purposes or vyAvahArika) acts
as the conscious entity, although it is borrowed consciousness
from the original sAkshI chaitanya. The mind is there
during waking and dream states and in potential
form in the deep sleep state, while the sAkshI is there
as the adhiShThAna or substratum all the time. Hence,
chidAbhAsa or ego is there in the waking and dream states
and in potential form in the deep sleep state.
We understand from this analysis that, as long as the
mind is operating, it is getting illumined by sAkshI
chaitanya and therefore ego is there as the background,
reflecting, limiting consciousness for all transactions
with the mind. It is this Ego that acts as the knower
or pramAta during perception. The reflection is the
reflection of the light of illumination of consciousness
that is all pervading; it is existence-consciousness.
There cannot be any divisions in consciousness, just
as there are no divisions in space. Any supposed divisions
in space or in consciousness are therefore only for
transactional purposes. Since perception is a transaction,
it is said to be complete when the consciousness reflected
as knower, pramAta, unites with the consciousness reflected
in the vRRitti formed as a result of the operation of
pramANa, i.e. the sense input.
Thus existence-consciousness, the all-pervading Brahman,
remains as the substantive for all: the knower, knowledge
and the means of knowledge. Consciousness expresses
itself by its reflection as both the knower or the subject
and the known or vRRitti that is formed in the mind
via the sense input. Both reflected consciousnesses
as the knower and the known are in the mind only. The
former can be considered as a general reflection
in the mind as the knower (ego or ahaMkAra) while the
other can be considered as a particular reflection
in the vRRitti as the known. I.e. both the subject and
the object are in the mind. The substantive for both
is expressed as consciousness or existence.
Perception is said to be complete when the reflected
limiting consciousness of the subject is united with
the reflected limiting consciousness of the object.
This is stated in two ways by VP in terms of consciousness
and existence. The perceptuality of the object is when
the consciousness of the subject is not different from
the substantiality of the object.
'pramAtRRi chaitanyaH eva ghaTa adhiShThAnam ..' – 'the
consciousness of the subject alone forms the substantive
of the pot etc.'
Here, VP uses the word 'substantive' or adhiShThAna,
instead of 'consciousness' of the pot, since the pot
is inert. For perception, we are uniting the reflected
consciousness of subject and object. VP also states
this in terms of existence as: 'a perceptual object
has no independent existence apart from the existence
of the subject', 'pramAtRRi satta eva ghaTAdhi satta,
na anyaH' (VP makes an emphatic statement here that
existence of the knower alone is expressed as the existence
of the pots, etc). Hence the above two criteria forms
the basis of the immediate and direct perception of
an object by a subject.
The above conditions are expressed in terms of the
subject, since the subject is independent while the
object has only dependent existence, as discussed above.
Hence, the perceptuality of objects such as pots etc
is established by direct and immediate means of knowledge-
'siddham ghaTAdeH aparokshatvam'. VP says the definition
of perceptuality of an object is vindicated. Hence,
the perceptuality of an object is defined as being the
same as consciousness or existence of the subject, the
knower. Alternatively, this can be stated as: the subject's
consciousness forms the substantive of the object perceived
or the subject's existence forms the basis for the existence
of the object perceived. Since I am there, the whole
universe is perceived and, since I am there, the existence
of the whole universe is established. Without my presence,
who can establish the existence of the universe or its
awareness? Ultimately, I alone form the truth of the
Universe - where ‘I am’ stands for pure
existence-consciousness, the Brahman that I am. That
is Advaita Vedanta.
In the case of inference - as in 'the distanct hill
is on fire because I see the smoke'- VP says that, since
the mind does not go to the location affected by the
fire etc., the limiting consciousness of the fire is
not united with the limiting consciousness of the knower
and therefore the existence of the fire is not directly
established. It is distinct from the existence of the
subject. Hence, the definition of perceptuality in terms
of immediate and direct knowledge of the object is not
violated. In terms of our understanding, it is the same
as saying that the vRRitti of the fire that is formed
has no attributive knowledge from the sense input to
establish the existence of the object ‘fire’.
Hence, fire is only a mental deduction. Whether there
is really fire in the distant hill or not depends on
the efficacy of the deductive logic; hence it is mediate
and indirect.
Before we discuss the structure of the mind, VP presents
some discussion in terms of questions and answers, which
we will take up next.
Proceed to the next
essay. |
