Prostrations to Guru. Prostrations to All
Na chaivam manasah anindriyatvath sukhaadhipratyakshasya
Saakshaatvam na syaath indriya ajanyathvaadhithi vaachyam
Nahi indriyajanyatvena jnaanasya saakshaatvam
Anumithyaadherapi manojanyathayaa saakshaatva aptheh
Isvara jnaanasya anindriya janyasya saakshaatvaana apatheshcha
It cannot be urged that if the mind thus be not an organ,. The perception of happiness etc, will not be immediate; because the immediacy of knowledge does not lie in its being due to an organ; for in that case inference etc. also, being due to the mind, would be immediate, and God’s knowledge, which is not due to any organ, would not be immediate.
There was an objection raised as to whether mind is also an organ or not. Dharmaraja told that there is no proof to show that mind is a sense organ, and quoted a Srutti to show that mind is different from the sense organ. When we perceive a pot through our eyes, we get the direct knowledge that there is pot. Suppose we are seeing a smoke in a mountain. We can infer that there is fire in the mountain. The knowledge that there is fire in the mountain is not produced by direct perception and hence this knowledge is not a direct knowledge but an indirect knowledge only. This inference comes up only in the mind and if we consider mind as a sense organ, then the knowledge that there is fire in the mountain will become a direct knowledge, which is not correct. The author points out this fault if we consider mind as the sense organ.
Also for knowledge to be immediate, it doesn’t depend on being generated from sense organ. Isvara is omnipotent and omniscient as he is the creator the world. Therefore he is all-knowing as well and the knowledge is immediate. He doesn’t require any instrument to know anything in the world. Then since the knowledge of Isvara is not due to any organ, it would mean that Isvara’s knowledge is not immediate and cannot have perceptual knowledge which is a fault when we consider knowledge got from sense organs alone are immediate. Therefore, direct knowledge need not depend on being generated by sense organ. The knowledge like “I am Happy” etc. are not generated by sense organs, but still it is direct knowledge only.
Sidhaanthe pratyakshatva prayojakam kimithi cheth kim jnaanagathasya
Pratyakshatvasya prayojakam pruchchasi kimvaa vishayagathasya
Aadhye pramaana chaithanyasya vishaya avachinna chaitanyaabhedha ithi broomah
thaThaahi thrividham chaitanyam –
vishayachaitanyam pramaanachaitanyam pramaathruchaitanyam
chethi thathra Ghataadhi avachinnam chaitanyam vishaya chaithanyam
anthah karana vritti avachinnam chaitanyam pramaanachaithanyam
anthah karana avachinna chaitanyam pramaatruchaitanyam
What, then, is the criterion of perceptuality according to the tenets of Vedanta?
Reply: Do you inquire about the criterion of the perceptuality of knowledge or of object? If it be the former, we say it is the unity of the Consciousness reflected in the means of knowledge with the consciousness limited by the object. To be explicit: Consciousness is threefold – as associated with the object (vishaya), with the means of knowledge (pramaana) and with the subject or knower (pramaatr). Of these, Consciousness limited by the jar etc., is the consciousness associated with the object; that limited by the mental state is the Consciousness associated with the mean of knowledge; and that limited by the mind is the Consciousness associated with the subject.
The author then anticipates a question. What is the criterion for the perceptuality? He then answers this question from two stand-point, from the stand point of the knowledge got out of perception and from the stand point of the object. When we say “This pot” the knowledge got is knowledge of perception and when we see from the object stand point, the pot is the object of perception. The criteria for knowledge to be perceptual and criteria for object to be perceptual are different. First he starts his analysis on criteria for knowledge to be perceptual. In this case of knowledge to be perceptual, the criterion is that the Consciousness limited by the means of knowledge and the Consciousness limited by the object is one and the same.
After giving the criterion for knowledge to be perceptual, he defines 3 terms.
Vishaya Chaitanyam: It is consciousness limited by the object.
Pramana Chaitanyam: It is the consciousness limited by the modification of the mind when an object is perceived.
Pramaatr Chaitamyam: It is the Consciousness limited by the anthah karanam which correspond to the experiencer, the subject.
The author then defines what is vritti or modification of the mind and from then continues his explanation by means of questions and answers on the first standpoint of knowledge to be perceptual. We will see that in the next day.
Prostrations to All