{"id":37320,"date":"2017-02-16T22:26:56","date_gmt":"2017-02-16T16:56:56","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/globalpress.hinduismnow.org\/?p=37320"},"modified":"2017-02-16T22:26:56","modified_gmt":"2017-02-16T16:56:56","slug":"epistemology-of-perception","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/globalpress-new.hinduismnow.org\/?p=37320","title":{"rendered":"Epistemology of perception"},"content":{"rendered":"

By – Sandeep<\/strong>
\nHow do we in the role of the subject perceive an object?\u00a0\u00a0 What is the state of our consciousness with respect to the object ?\u00a0 This is referred to as the epistemology<\/a> of perception. In this post, I will first survey perception <\/a>(Pratyaksha) <\/em>as outlined by Vedanta<\/a> and Tantra and then discuss how\u00a0 Sri Aurobindo augmented this theory in the light of his own supramental experiences.\u00a0\u00a0 By giving new meaning to the four terms Vijnana<\/em>, Prajnana<\/em>, Samjnana <\/em>and Ajnana <\/em>listed in the Aitereya Upanishad<\/em><\/a>, Sri Aurobindo presented a fresh perspective on the epistemology of perception.<\/p>\n

Perception in Vedanta
\n<\/strong><\/h4>\n

According to Indian philosophy, it is One Consciousness (Brahma-Chaitanya<\/em>) which has \u201cbecome\u201d (i.e. which underlies) the world in its various forms such as man, animals, plants and even the supposedly inanimate objects.\u00a0 Everything has the same consciousness within it although the outward expression differs in degree and intensity.\u00a0\u00a0 In the phenomenal world, consciousness has veiled its full power and plunged into what may be called\u00a0 (spiritual) Ignorance or Nescience.\u00a0\u00a0 In case of the supposedly inanimate mineral kingdom, this consciousness is said to be veiled by a state of inertia (Tamas<\/em>).\u00a0 This veiling is denoted as Maya<\/em> (Illusion) and it is this Nescience which is the cause of all empirical distinctions between the Knower, the Known and Knowledge.\u00a0 There would be no Nescience if we were fully conscious because then the distinction between subject and object would not exist; everything we perceive would be seen as part of the One Self.\u00a0 The act of perception must be understood in the light of this ontological background.\u00a0\u00a0 Every act of perception (Pratyaksha<\/em>) may be regarded as a attempted realization of the One Self<\/strong> by an unveiling of the nescience which currently exists between the subject-consciousness and the object-consciousness, the Knower and the Known.
\nThe phenomenon of perception can be illustrated in the words of tenth century Indian philosopher, Vacaspati Mishra<\/a>, who said: \u201cEvery one who deals with an object first intuits it, then reflects upon it, then appropriates it, and then resolves or determines, this is to be done by me, and then he proceeds to act.<\/em>\u201d\u00a0\u00a0 In accordance with this example, it is possible to identify three stages of perception[1]:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Indeterminate<\/strong> apprehension<\/strong><\/a>:\u00a0 The subject consciousness registers a change in the sense-input.\u00a0\u00a0 This stage occurs at the level of the sense-mind (Manas<\/em>).\u00a0 The mind must be attentive or attached to the organ.\u00a0 If the mind is inattentive, no perception occurs even if the external sense-organ is active.\u00a0\u00a0 This is observed in the phenomenon of absent-mindedness where one says, \u201cI didn\u2019t hear that song even though it was playing.<\/em>\u201c<\/li>\n
  2. Determinate apprehension<\/a><\/strong>: The mind (Chitta<\/em><\/a>) takes the form of the object (Chitta-Vritti<\/em>).\u00a0 The mind is said to be active in perceiving an object, and not a passive recorder of impressions.\u00a0\u00a0 It is said to capture an impression of the external object.\u00a0\u00a0 Here, one may take the analogy of a camera which has a photographic film (or pixel buffer, if we use the analogy of the digital cameras) onto which all the sense-impressions are united into a single image.<\/li>\n
  3. Cognition \/ Apperception<\/a><\/strong>: In this stage, the mind, in its cognitive aspect (Buddhi<\/em>) alongwith the ego-sense(Ahankara<\/em>), utilizes past memories (Samskaras<\/em>) to resolve and act on the object.\u00a0\u00a0 According to Vedanta, one part of the\u00a0 mind becomes the object (i.e. by imaging the object within our consciousness) and another part of the mind observes this internal image and manipulates it using the intellect.\u00a0 The first part is the determinate apprehension discussed in the preceding paragraph while the second part is cognition.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    This figure indicates the various stages in perception (see Mental Sheath<\/a>)<\/p>\n

    \n\"Buddhi-Manas-Chitta-Ahankara\"<\/a><\/p>\n

    Buddhi-Manas-Chitta-Ahankara<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    The figure below is a picturesque view of the division that occurs in the mind during the second (determinate apprehension) and third (cognition) stages described above.<\/p>\n

    \n\"Epistemology<\/a><\/p>\n

    Epistemology of Perception<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    Source: http:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/File:Cartesian_Theater.jpg<\/a>
    \nThe various ancient     Indian schools of philosophy<\/a> such Nyaya, Mimansaka, Sankhya, Jaina, Buddhism, Vedanta offered their own variants on the epistemology of perception.\u00a0 The\u00a0 full discussion of these variants can be read in Jadunath Sinha<\/a>\u2018s excellent two-volume set Indian Psychology. (link<\/a>)<\/em><\/p>\n

    Perception in Tantra<\/strong><\/h4>\n

    Arthur Avalon<\/a> in his book Serpent Power<\/em> presents the perspective of Tantra on perception.\u00a0\u00a0 Tantra denotes the object as Artha and subject as Sabda.\u00a0\u00a0 The part of the mind which becomes the object, which images the object within the subject-consciousness, is called subtle Artha<\/strong>.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 The other part of the mind, which cognizes this subtle image, is denoted as subtle Sabda<\/strong>.
    \nThe object perceived is called Artha<\/em>, a term which comes from the root \u201cRi\u201d which means to get, to know, to enjoy.\u00a0 Artha <\/em>is that which is known, and which therefore is an object of enjoyment.\u00a0 The mind as Artha<\/em>-that is, in the form of the mental impression-is a reflection of the outer object or gross Artha<\/em>.\u00a0 As the outer object is Artha, so is the interior subtle mental form which corresponds to it. That aspect of the mind which cognizes is called Sabda <\/em>or Nama <\/em>(name), and that aspect in which it is its own object or cognized is called Artha <\/em>or Rupa<\/em> (form). The outer physical object of which the latter is, in the individual, an impression is also Artha <\/em>or Rupa<\/em>, and spoken speech is the outer Sabda<\/em>. Subject and object are thus from the Mantra aspect Sabda <\/em>and Artha<\/em>-terms corresponding to the Vedantic Nama <\/em>and Rupa<\/em>, or concepts and concepts objectified. As the Vedanta says, the whole creation is Nama <\/em>and Rupa<\/em>. Mind is the power (Sakti<\/em>), the function of which is to distinguish and identify (Bheda samsarga-vrtti Sakti<\/em>).\u00a0\u00a0 Perception is dependent on distinguishing and identification.\u00a0 In the perception of an object that part of the mind which identifies and distinguishes, or the cognizing part, is subtle Sabda<\/em>, and that part of it which takes the shape of the object (a shape which corresponds with the outer thing) is subtle Artha<\/em>.\u00a0 The perception of an object is thus consequent on the stimultaneous functioning of the mind in its twofold aspect as Sabda <\/em>and Artha<\/em>, which are in indissoluble relation with one another as cognizer (Grahaka<\/em>) and cognized (Grahya<\/em>). Both belong to the subtle body. [2]<\/p>\n

    Sri Aurobindo on perception<\/strong><\/h3>\n

    Sri Aurobindo augmented the Vedantic theory of perception based on his spiritual experience of the Supramental World (Maharloka <\/em>or Vijnanaloka<\/em>).\u00a0 In this world, ideas are not abstractions but always concrete realities inseparable from the objects they define.\u00a0 A good example of this would be simultaneously experiencing the power of the burning light and the substance of the fire within it Sri Aurobindo<\/em>, The\u00a0Life\u00a0Divine\u00a0\u2013\u00a0I: The\u00a0Supermind\u00a0as\u00a0Creator<\/em><\/a>.\u00a0 He coined the term Real-Idea <\/strong>to define this experience.
    \nOn the plane of mind you have abstractions. It is the mind\u2019s way of representing realities of planes higher than the mind. Behind these abstractions there is a Reality. On the plane above the mind there are no abstractions, there are realities and powers. For instance, you form an abstract idea in the mind about the Supermind. When you get to the Supermind you find it is not an abstraction at all. It is more intensely concrete than Matter, something quite overwhelming in its concrete-ness. That is why I called it the Real-Idea<\/strong> and not an \u201cabstract idea\u201d. In that sense there is nothing more concrete than God. Even if we were on the pure mental plane we would find mind much more concrete and real. But as we are on the physical plane we always think the mind more abstract. Before the Supermind, Matter dwindles into a shadow. [3]
    \nThe supramental consciousness can be said to have two powers \u2013 apprehension and comprehension.<\/p>\n

      \n
    1. Apprehension (Pratyaya<\/em>) <\/strong>is the basis of objective cognition.\u00a0 This is equivalent to the mode of apprehension defined in the Vedantic theory of perception.\u00a0 It is the gaining of relational knowledge of the object from the standpoint of the subject.\u00a0 It is when the subject places an image of the object in front of it (within, not without) in order to build a relation with it.<\/li>\n
    2. Comprehension <\/strong>is gaining knowledge about the object from within \u2013 as if the object were part of one\u2019s own self.\u00a0\u00a0 In this mode, knowledge is obtained because the consciousness perceives the other as part of one\u2019s own self.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Such knowledge is more complete than the traditional form of relational knowledge gained through the subject-object differentiation.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

      Sri Aurobindo discovered that the all the perceptive powers of the human mind are actually derived from, but inferior to, the Supramental powers of Comprehension and Apprehension.\u00a0\u00a0 In the unenlightened man, the powers of apprehension are dominant while the powers of comprehension are imperfect and undeveloped.\u00a0 This is in contrast to the Supramental plane, where the powers of comprehension operate perfectly while the powers of apprehension are rendered subordinate or redundant.\u00a0 Sri Aurobindo augmented the Vedantic theory of perception by redefining the four terms Vijnana<\/em>, Prajnana<\/em>, Samjnana <\/em>and Ajnana<\/em> mentioned in the Aitereya Upanishad.
      \n\u092f\u0926\u0947\u0924\u0926\u094d\u0927\u0943\u0926\u092f\u0902 \u092e\u0928\u0936\u094d\u091a\u0948\u0924\u0924\u094d \u0964 \u0938\u0902\u091c\u094d\u091e\u093e\u0928\u092e\u093e\u091c\u094d\u091e\u093e\u0928\u0902 \u0935\u093f\u091c\u094d\u091e\u093e\u0928\u0902 \u092a\u094d\u0930\u091c\u094d\u091e\u093e\u0928\u0902 \u092e\u0947\u0927\u093e \u0926\u0943\u0937\u094d\u091f\u093f\u0930\u094d\u0927\u0943\u0924\u093f\u0930\u094d\u092e\u0924\u093f\u0930\u094d\u092e\u0928\u0940\u0937\u093e \u091c\u0942\u0924\u093f\u0903 \u0938\u094d\u092e\u0943\u0924\u093f\u0903 \u0938\u0902\u0915\u0932\u094d\u092a\u0903 \u0915\u0924\u0941\u0930\u0938\u0941\u0903 \u0915\u093e\u092e\u094b \u0935\u0936 \u0907\u0924\u093f \u0938\u0930\u094d\u0935\u093e\u0923\u094d\u092f\u0947\u0935\u0948\u0924\u093e\u0928\u093f \u092a\u094d\u0930\u091c\u094d\u091e\u093e\u0928\u0938\u094d\u092f \u0928\u093e\u092e\u0927\u0947\u092f\u093e\u0928\u093f \u092d\u0935\u0928\u094d\u0924\u093f \u0965\u0968\u0965
      \nThis which is the heart, is mind also. Concept and will and analysis and wisdom and intellect and vision and continuity of purpose and feeling and understanding, pain and memory and volition and application3 of thought and vitality and desire and passion, all these, yea all, are but names of the Eternal Wisdom.
      \nSri Aurobindo<\/em>,       The\u00a0Upanishads: Aitereya\u00a0Upanishad<\/em><\/a>
      \nWith reference to the verse above, Prajnana <\/em>and Samjnana <\/em>are powers of apprehension, while Vijnana <\/em>and Ajnana <\/em>are powers of comprehension.<\/p>\n