You are here: SriPedia - Oppiliappan - Archives - Jul 2006

Oppiliappan List Archive: Message 00062 Jul 2006

 
Jul 2006 Indexes ( Date | Thread | Author )
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]


Anubhuthi as self proved

Advaitin say that anubhuthi is svayamprakasa, self-proved. The reason 
given for this is that if anubhuthi is not self proved it has to 
depend on another to prove its existence, like a pot. This means, as 
perceptions reveal an object like pot it does not need any other 
means to reveal itself. If it is not self-proved it ceases to be 
perception.

Ramanuja disagrees with this argument saying that in that case past 
perceptions known through memory and the perceptions of others known 
through inference will not be termed as perceptions. Unless the 
perception of others are admitted to be known the meaning of words 
and their connections will not be perceived and one will not be able 
to infer the knowledge of the acharya and approach him for learning.

'Anubhuthithvam nAma,' says Ramanuja ,'varthamAnadhasAyAm svasatthayA 
Eva svAsrayam prathi prakAsamAnathvam,' perception is that which 
illumines its object by its very existence when it is present. The 
objects like pot lack this attribute hence they are not 
perceptions.So to say that, if perception depends on another to prove 
its existence, it will not be different from objects of perception 
like pot, is not correct. Even if the perception needs no proof for 
its existence its ceasing to be perception could result as in the 
case of skyflower of which there is no perception, ananubhuthithva, 
the nonexistence of it does not need any other proof. If it is said 
that in the case of skyflower the ananubhuthithva, nonperception, is 
due to its being 'asat', nonexistent, whereas in the case of pot the 
nonperception is due to ajnAnaavirodhithvam,not inimical to 
ignorance, which means that the lack of knowledge about the pot, is 
the cause. But Ramanuja says that it is not agreeable to cite two 
different causes for the two nonperceptions and the same reason 
ajnAnaavirodhithva is the cause in both cases.

The view that anubhuti is eternal is criticised.

The argument of the advaitin that there is no prior nonexistence, 
prAgabhAva of anubhuthi and hence it is anaAdhi, has no beginning, is 
refuted by Ramanuja saying, 'yatthu svthassisddhAyAh samvidhah 
prAgabhAvAdhyabhAvAth uthpatthih nirasyathE - thaddhandhasya 
jAthyandhEnayashtih pradheeyathE,' it is like one blind man giving a 
staff to one who is born-blind, that is blind leading the blind.Just 
because there is no one to perceive the prior nonexistence it cannot 
be negated. The prior nonexistence of anubhuthi is perceived by 
anubhuthi itself because perception is not restricted to the present 
but extends to the past and future, except when the perception is 
caused by the contact of sense organs with the sense objects, that 
is, when we see a pot, the perception of it is with reference to that 
particular object at that particular time and place. In the case of 
memory, inference, vedic and yogic perception, what belongs to the 
times other than the present is perceived.

Advaitin says that prAgabhAva, prior nonexistence of anubhuthi cannot 
be proved by any pramANa since it cannot be cognised by sense 
perception being nonexistent, nor by inference because the hetu,  
like the smoke  which is the reason for the inference of fire,   is 
not there.  And there is no vedic text  can be quoted in this matter. 
So on the basis of the absence of any pramANa the prior nonexistence 
of perception cannot be proved.

Ramanuja says, 'YadhyEvam svathssiddhathva vibhavam parithyajya 
pramANAbhAve avaroodascheth yOgyAnupalabdhyA Eva abhAvah samarTHithah 
ithi upasAmyathu bhavAn.' If the advaitin strives to prove that 
perception is eternal having recourse to the absence of pramAna 
rather than on the ground that perception is self-proved, the reply 
would be in reference to yOgyAnupalabDHi. That is, if a thing exists 
it must be capable, yOgya, of cognition. So anubhuthi if ever existed 
prior to its cognition it would have been cognised. Hence It did not 
exist.

The perception of a pot for instance shows its existence only at the 
time of perception and not always. So perception is limited by time.  
If it is eternal the object of cognition will also become eternal. 
which is not the case. Similar is the case of cognition through any 
other means of knowledge like  anumAna, inference. 

Advaitin may argue that what is meant by  perception being eternal  
has no reference to that of objects but anubhuthi in 
general,nirvishaya samvid.( samvid and anubhuthi are synonymous 
here.) 

Advaitin says that an objectless perception is found in deep sleep, 
intoxication and swoon but this is refuted by Ramanuja on the basis 
of yOgyAnupalabDHi. If there is such pereption it would have been 
remembered when awakened from such states. Since it is not the case 
there is no such thing as objectless perception, nirvishayasamvid.

It cannot be argued that just because it is not remembered you cannot 
say that there was no perception because we do not remember 
everything previously experienced even in the waking state. Ramanuja 
replies that only when there is a strong reason like leaving this 
body, all experience is forgotten. So when there was no remembrance 
of any experience whatsoever  denotes only the absence of it.

 Advaitin might argue that the reason for the lapse of memory of the 
experience of perception is sleep is due to the absence of objects 
and the 'I' factor in sleep. Presence of objects and the notion 
of 'I' is necessary for the  remembrance and they are also necessary 
for having an experience in the absence of which there can be no 
perception. It will be explained later that even in the state of 
sleep the 'I'continues to exist. But that experience is of the Self 
which will be shown to be savisesha. Here the absolute perception 
devoid of all objects  is only refuted. If it is said that the 
experience of the Self is  the absolute perception it is not 
acceptable because even that  is an attribute of the Self as will be 
shown later. 

So the argument that since anubhuthi cannot prove  its own prAgabhAva 
it should be eternal is wrong.Moreover what is eternal must have no 
end. Advaitin says that since anubhuthi is not originated it suffers 
no change and hence it has no end. This is not tenable says Ramanuja, 
because there is vyabhichAra in prior nonexistence, prAgabhAva, of 
things produced, like pot, their prior non existence has no beginning 
but it ends when the thing is produced.

To evade this difficulty advaitin may define the term change as being 
that of a bhAvapadhArTha, a positive entity. That is , the changes 
that occur in positive object like pot is denied to be present in 
anubhuthi. The changes which result in the destruction or end of the 
positive entity like pot is not present in prior nonexistence, which, 
though having  no beginning , has an end.  Ramanuja overrules this by 
saying that avidhya according to advita is a bhAva padharTHa which 
has no origination being anAdhi but it ends when the knowledge of 
Brahman arises.But to the argument that the changes in avidhya are 
said to be mitThyAbhootha, unreal, Ramanuja says that even the 
changes in objects like pot are unreal according to advaita.Hence 
anubhuthi cannot be proved to be eternal.











------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Great things are happening at Yahoo! Groups.  See the new email design.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/TISQkA/hOaOAA/yQLSAA/XUWolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Oppiliappan/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    Oppiliappan-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index ] [Thread Index ] [Author Index ]
Home Page
http://www.ibiblio.org/sripedia
oppiliappan-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
To subscribe to the list