[Advaita-l] Causal Body

[kuntimaddi sadananda]

Jay - there are several fundamental problems in the model.

Question 1. First senses can only grasp the qualities of the object and
not the object (substantive)per sec. Qualities are different from the
object, right. Object has qualities but object is different from
qualities.    How is an object perceived and by what?  You say jarness
is perceived.  Jarness you have defined  as some imaginary quality but
what is that jarness - is it substantive or an antribute of an object. 
Mind cannot grasp the object out there without senses operating, right? 
It can only bring from the memory the image of the previously perceived
object.  So let us look at the first perception of the object. 

If five senses are not operating there is no way one can have any
perception of the object, right? The jarness is percived through what
sense and how?  Now you tell me how you can gain the perception of an 
object and its qualities to establish that there is object really out
there. This my friend is the fundamental epistemological issue. If this
answered satisfactorily then only one can go to the next step of the
reality and unreality of the object. If I cannot perceive the object how
can I establish the  validity of the knowledge of the object?  You can
have any model you want but the model has to explain the observations,
is it not? 

Question 2. you have not answered how saakshee perceives the time and
space either other than making an axiomatic statement that it is
perceived by saakshee since they cannot be perceived.  Remember
experience is not a pramaaNa even according to you - pratyaksha,
anumaana and shabda are only three pramaaNa-s for you. Now on what basis
or pramaaNa or means of knowledge saakshee perceives time and space
independent of senses, that needs to be established. 

Question 3. Is existence of the object  established because I perceive
it?  If I do not perceive  it – is the object there or not and how is
that established?   I see a snake out there  and saakshee  recorded the
time and space when ‘I’ perceived the snake – now according to your
model that snake is sat or real , Right?  How is that reality validated
now? 

Hari OM!
Sadananda




--- Jay Nelamangala <jay at r-c-i.com> wrote:
> Dear sadAnanda,
> 
> > tell us how you apprehend an
> >object? and how do you apprehend space and time? 
> 
> Space and time are apprehended by sAkshee-D.  
> 
> We don't see space itself,  we only see objects that are in space.
> Space does not lend itself to be "observable"  by our eyes,  still
> we all know there is space.  How did we get that knowledge?
> It is through sAkshee-D.   Similarly,  time can not be percieved
> through sensory organs,  but all of us have knowledge of time,
> where did we get it from?  becuase of again,  sAkshee-D.
> That is our model.
> 
> So, if you say,  you don't need sAkshee-D,  let us know how
> you got the knowledge of space and time.
> 
> >What is this blessed 'jarness' and how does 'it' present 'this
> >jarness' of the jar by what sense - and what is that jarness anyway
> for
> 
> I use the blessed term 'jarness' because I don't know any other word 
> in english to use for swaroopa of an object.  Some people use
> "suchness",
> some others use "speciality".   Swaroopa of an object is that by which
> that object distinguishes itself from other objects.  A jar has its
> own
> "speciality"  and a pillar has its own speciality.   We use this
> speciality
> or "jarness" and "pillarness" for cognition in the form "This is a
> jar",
> and "This is a pillar,  not a jar".
> 
> > Go slow Jay.  Give me the details how the perception
> >of the jar and the jarness - and the time and space  occur. Where is
> 
> Knowledge-D apprehends its object as 'is'.   An object 'is'  if it
> exists
> at a particular point of time and space.  Let us  take the knowledge-D
> of  a jar as an example.   The bare jar devoid of its spatial and
> temporal
> references is never apprehended by knowledge-D.  The jar is
> apprehended
> as 'is' and in being done so it is presented as existing at a
> particular
> time and space.  At times the absence of a thing may be apprehended
> by knowledge-D, as "There is not a jar" and even then it is
> apprehended 
> with its spatial and temporal relations.  
> 
> The knowledge-D of an external object such as jar, occurs when there
> is
> the relation between the self and manas,  manas and the external sense
> 
> organ, and the external sense organ and the object.  Owing to the
> relation
> between an external sense organ and its object when the sense organ
> is in relation to manas,  there is produced the knowledge-D of the
> object
> in manas.  This knowledge reveals the object and itself is illumined
> by
> sAkshee-D.
> 
> That is how it occurs.   
> 
> Now it is your turn to answer my original question :
> If you don't need sAkshee-D,  how do you distinguish between 
> right knowledge of Advaita and wrong knowledge of Advaita?.
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> want to unsubscribe or change your options? See:
> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
> Need assistance? Contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org

--- Jay Nelamangala <jay at r-c-i.com> wrote:
> Dear sadAnanda,
> 
> > tell us how you apprehend an
> >object? and how do you apprehend space and time? 
> 
> Space and time are apprehended by sAkshee-D.  
> 
> We don't see space itself,  we only see objects that are in space.
> Space does not lend itself to be "observable"  by our eyes,  still
> we all know there is space.  How did we get that knowledge?
> It is through sAkshee-D.   Similarly,  time can not be percieved
> through sensory organs,  but all of us have knowledge of time,
> where did we get it from?  becuase of again,  sAkshee-D.
> That is our model.
> 
> So, if you say,  you don't need sAkshee-D,  let us know how
> you got the knowledge of space and time.
> 
> >What is this blessed 'jarness' and how does 'it' present 'this
> >jarness' of the jar by what sense - and what is that jarness anyway
> for
> 
> I use the blessed term 'jarness' because I don't know any other word 
> in english to use for swaroopa of an object.  Some people use
> "suchness",
> some others use "speciality".   Swaroopa of an object is that by which
> that object distinguishes itself from other objects.  A jar has its
> own
> "speciality"  and a pillar has its own speciality.   We use this
> speciality
> or "jarness" and "pillarness" for cognition in the form "This is a
> jar",
> and "This is a pillar,  not a jar".
> 
> > Go slow Jay.  Give me the details how the perception
> >of the jar and the jarness - and the time and space  occur. Where is
> 
> Knowledge-D apprehends its object as 'is'.   An object 'is'  if it
> exists
> at a particular point of time and space.  Let us  take the knowledge-D
> of  a jar as an example.   The bare jar devoid of its spatial and
> temporal
> references is never apprehended by knowledge-D.  The jar is
> apprehended
> as 'is' and in being done so it is presented as existing at a
> particular
> time and space.  At times the absence of a thing may be apprehended
> by knowledge-D, as "There is not a jar" and even then it is
> apprehended 
> with its spatial and temporal relations.  
> 
> The knowledge-D of an external object such as jar, occurs when there
> is
> the relation between the self and manas,  manas and the external sense
> 
> organ, and the external sense organ and the object.  Owing to the
> relation
> between an external sense organ and its object when the sense organ
> is in relation to manas,  there is produced the knowledge-D of the
> object
> in manas.  This knowledge reveals the object and itself is illumined
> by
> sAkshee-D.
> 
> That is how it occurs.   
> 
> Now it is your turn to answer my original question :
> If you don't need sAkshee-D,  how do you distinguish between 
> right knowledge of Advaita and wrong knowledge of Advaita?.
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> want to unsubscribe or change your options? See:
> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
> Need assistance? Contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org


=====
What you have is His gift to you and what you do with what you have is your gift to Him - Swami Chinmayananda.

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
http://calendar.yahoo.com