Part XI - Unity of limiting consciousness
for perception
In the example of the jar and space, there is nothing
but limitless Brahman, whose nature is existence-consciousness,
appearing as limiting consciousness (actually as limiting
existence) in the form of a jar (‘form’ here
stands for the attributes of the jar, which are different
from those of mug or vessel) with the associated name
of 'jar'. The ‘name’ provides the generic
attribute of ‘jar-ness’ or ‘jar-hood’ .
The senses measure those attributes, since the substantive
Brahman has no attributes. ‘Existence’ is
not an attribute. (If existence were an attribute, then
we would need another substantive for the attributive
existence, i.e. we would need another Brahman whose
nature is existence. Then we would run into infinite
regress. In addition, if existence were an attribute,
then the attribute should be different from the substantive.
The only thing that is different from existence is non-existence.
Now we run into self-contradiction. The non-existence
which is different from existence becomes a substantive
for the attributive existence, i.e. existence would
be an attribute for non-existence. A non-existent substantive
is no substantive. Hence, existence cannot be an attribute
as some philosophers argue. Hence, advaita says that ‘existence-consciousness’ is
a svarUpa or inherent nature of Brahman. Here, language
is too limited to express the svarUpa lakShaNa of Brahman
As the scriptures say, ‘words cannot reach there’!).
When the sense-input forms a vRRitti in the mind whose
attributes are the same as those of the jar, the one
to one correspondence between the existent-attributive
vRRitti and existent-attributive jar is established.
This is stated in VP as ‘the limiting consciousness
of the object jar is united with the limiting consciousness
of the vRRitti, the mental mood for the completion of
the perception’.
The truth of this becomes clear, since Brahman is all
pervading and limitless. The only differences between
one object and another are the attributes that define
the objects. In the perception of 'this is jar', the
attributes of the jar are measured and carried to the
mind, where a vRRitti is formed consisting of the same
attributes that were measured. Brahman in the form of
jar is now Brahman in the form of the vRRitti in the
mind, since everything is nothing but Brahman. The same
statement is expressed as: “the limiting consciousness
of Brahman in the form of jar is now united with the
limiting consciousness of Brahman in the form of vRRitti”,
since the attributes of both the object outside and
vRRitti inside are the same. The substantives for both
jar outside and vRRitti inside are also the same since
Brahman is limitless and indivisible.
To be more exact, the expression of Brahman
is different in different limiting adjuncts. Brahman’s
expression depends on the nature of the adjuncts. In
the case of very gross products or the gross world,
the inertness is obvious. In all these, the all-pervading
Brahman is expressed as just the existence - sat svarUpa.
Hence we say that the jar IS, where the ‘is-ness’ is
the expression of its existence. Hence, the object ‘jar’ is
Brahman expressed as existence with the name ‘jar’ and
the form of ‘all the attributes superimposed on
that existence’.
In the case of jar or any other tangible object, the
existence ‘exists’ in a grosser form. All
gross forms consist of pa~ncha bhUta-s [five elements]
transformed by a recombination process, keeping Brahman
as their substantive. If the object is subtle, as in
the case of the mind, Brahman can then express as an
existent and conscious entity, since the mind can reflect
the light of consciousness much better than a gross
object. It is like a mirror that can reflect light better
than a stone. The degree of reflection depends on the
reflecting medium. Perception of jar therefore involves
perception of Brahman in the limiting existence in the
form of a jar with its attributes.
During the process of perception, the attributes are
gathered by the senses and are projected in the mind
as a vRRitti. Although the attributes are the same in
both the jar and vRRitti, the mind is a subtler expression
of Brahman as opposed to the jar which is a grosser
expression. Hence, in the vRRitti, Brahman is expressed
not only as ‘existence’ similar to that
in the jar, but also as ‘reflected consciousness’,
since the vRRitti which is nothing but a mental mood
can reflect the light of consciousness better than the
gross material of the jar. Hence considering all this,
we can state that perception is said to be complete
if the existence of the jar with its attributes unites
with the existence of the vRRitti with the same attributes
as sensed by the senses. Since existence is all pervading,
all that requires to be carried by the senses are the
attributes of the object to the vRRitti. It is also
a fact that the senses can carry only attributes and
not the substantive itself. Hence, perception is complete
as soon as the attributes are projected on to the vRRitti
or image or mental mood that is formed in the mind.
The vRRitti is illumined as it forms, since mind has
the capacity to reflect the illuminating consciousness.
The limiting reflected consciousness by the vRRitti
is the knowledge of the vRRitti, which is the same as
the knowledge of the object. A vRRitti is nothing but
existence with the attributes that are gathered by the
senses and those attributes are the same as the attributes
of the jar, which is also nothing but existence with
the attributes. Thus there is an identity of the two – object jar
and the vRRitti – as both are existence with the
attributes of the jar. The only difference is that existence
is expressed in the jar in a grosser form while it is
expressed in a subtle form in the vRRitti. The other
difference would depend on how far the senses could
gather the attributes from the jar and carry them to
the vRRitti. In some cases the senses can be trained
to pick up finer differences in tastes, different shades
in colors or finer differences in forms which may not
be possible for untrained senses. There are professional
wine tasters and tea tasters who can distinguish finer
differences in tastes to know which is better or more
easily sellable!
Proceed to the next
essay. |
