The knower is not ahamkara which is the product of ignorance.
Advaitin claims that anubhuthi is without a knower, asraya and the
known, vishaya. Due to illusion it appears as the knower as the
shell silver appears as silver. Anubhuthi is the adhishtAna or
substratum of illusion like the silver and hence real. Ramanuja says
that this is untenable. The perception is always is of the form 'I
perceive, ' and not as 'I am the perception.' Anubhuthi shows the
knower to be separate from the object of perception as when Devadatta
is seen having a staff, it is not the perception of the staff alone
but also the one who is holding the staff. So the experience 'I
perceive' shows the 'I' having the anubhuthi, and is not of anubhuthi
only.
Ramnuja refutes the view that the concept of knower is an
illusion,mithyA, as in the identification of AthmA with the body
saying 'I am stout'etc.If so, even the identification if anubhuthi
with the AtmA would be delusion because it is perceived by the one
under illusion. If it is argued that the knowledge of Brahman which
removes all illusion does not affect perception, anubhuthi ,(the
perception in the abstract meaning and not that of objects) and hence
it is not an illusion, then the same argument holds good for the
Self which is having the perception.and is hence the knower and
therefore cannot be mithyA.
` Advaitin contends that since the Self is devoid of changes it
cannot be the knower. Knowing involves changes as knowing is an
action and the AthmA is actionless. To be a knower requires an object
to be known and the action of knowing, all of which are the effects
of avidhya. So the knowership abides in ahamkara and not in the Self.
Otherwise the imperfections of the body will adhere to the Self.
Ramanuja refutes this. JnAthrthva, knowership does not belong to the
ahamkara which is jada, It is distinguished from the Self on the same
grounds that the body and other objects which are all dhrsyas,
objects of perception, are , being outward, being perceived. Ahamkara
is also perceived and hence not the perceiver.. It is also the
product of avidhya and therefore jada. Being not the perceiver the
ahamkara cannot be the knower.
The reason given to show that the knower is not the Self, namely,
that it is subject to change, is not correct, says Ramanuja, 'na cha
jnAthrthvam vikriyaAthmakam jnAthrthvam hi jnAnaguNAsrayathvam jnAnam
cha asya nithyasya svAbhAvika dharmathvEna nithyam; nithyam cha
Athmanah "nAthmA sruthEh" ithi vakshyathi. The knower is not subject
to changes . JnAthrthvam, knowership, has jnAna as its attribute and
jnAna is the essential attribute of the Self which is eternal and
hence jnAna is also eternal. That the Self is eternal is shown by the
suthras ' nAthmA srutheh'(BS.2-3-18), jnO athaEva (2-3-19 which means
that the Self is not a product but is eternal and so is the
knowledge which is its attribute which is confirmed by the sruti
texts.
It could not be argued that if jnAna is eternal and the essential
characterestic of the Self, then one should be knowing all at all
times because the jnAna though unlimited by nature attains samkocha
vikAsa, contraction and expansion depending on the state of bondage
and that of release. The contraction of jnAna is not svAbhAvika,
natural but is due to the amount of karma at a particular time and
therefore it is karmakrtha, effect of karma. Thus the Self is
changeless in reality. So the jnAhrthva, knowership pertains only to
the Self and not to ahamkara, ego.
Advaitin comes up with an explanation that the ahamkara appears to
be the knower due to close proximity with the perception, anubhuthi
created by the falling of shadow upon one another. Ramanuja asks
him 'kA chitcchAyApatthih? kim ahmakAracchAyApatthih samvidhah
uthasamvicchAyApatthih ahamkaarasya? na thAvath samvidhah jnAthrthva
ANbhyupagamAth;nApyahamkArasya, ukthareethyA thasya jadasya
jnAthrthva ayOgAth.' It should be specified as to the shadow of which
falls on which. Either ahamkara casts its shadow on the samvid or
vice versa. Samvid is not accepted as the knower as shown already and
ahamkara is jada being the product of avidhya, and therefore cannot
be the knower.There is yet another valid reason for neither of them
to be the knower, says Ramanuja, 'dhvayOrapi achAkshushthvAccha,na hi
achAkshushANAm cchAyA dhrshtA,' both being not seen by the eye and a
thing not seen is not known to cast a shadow.
If it is said to be similar to the situation where a piece of iron
put into the fire attains the heat of the fire and thus the
knowership appears in ahamkAra with the contact of anubhuthi that
also fails to prove the point. Since anubhuthi itself is not a knower
it cannot impart the knowership to ahamkAra.
Advaitin tries to surmount this difficulty by saying that neither
ahamkAra nor anubhuthi is the knower. AhamkAra only reflects
anubhuthi like a mirror and gives an appearance of anubhuthi to be in
it.So ahamkAra seems to be the knower of anubhuthi. This argument is
forwarded on the basis that the concept of knower is not real
according to the theory of advaita.Even this cannot be accepted
because ahmkAra is incapable of manifesting anything being a jada
and anubhuthi is said to be self-proved and manifests everything else
including ahamkAra. Ramnuja quotes from 'Athmasiddhi' a work on
advaia to disprove this explanation. It says,'shAnthAngAra iva
Adhithyam ahamkArO jadAthmikA svayamjyothisham aAthmAnam vyanakthi
ithi na yukthimath,' AhamkAra being insentient cannot manifest the
Athma, which is self illumined as an extinguished fire cannot
manifest the Sun.
As anubhuthi is self-proved according to the advaitin it is
contradictory to ahamkAra which is jada and if anubhuthi is said to
be manifested by ahamkAra it ceases to be anubhuthi as per the
theory of advaita. To quote from Athmasiddhi
again, 'vyangthrvyangyathvamanyOnyam na cha syAt prAthikoolyathah
vyangyathvE ananubhuthithvam AthmanisyAth yathA ghatE.' The
relationship of the manifestor and manifested cannot happen between
two entities of conflicting nature.It cannot be said that like the
rays of the Sun enter through a hole are manifested on the hand
samvid is manifested in ahamkAra because the rays of the Sun are not
manifested by the palm which only obstructs them and they manifest
themselves.
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Check out the new improvements in Yahoo! Groups email.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/6pRQfA/fOaOAA/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/
|
Home Page
http://www.ibiblio.org/sripedia |
oppiliappan-subscribe@yahoogroups.com To subscribe to the list |