[Advaita-l] Causal Body
kuntimaddisada at yahoo.com
Wed Jun 4 21:09:25 CDT 2003
--- Jay Nelamangala <jay at r-c-i.com> wrote:
> Then again, just as everyone has a single
> brain, single sAkshee, so also there is only one correct knowledge
> for everyone and there are many varieties of incorrect knowledge for
Let me understand first the model you have presented- for each brain
there is one single saakshee - so for different brains different
saakshees- right? Now for which saakshee's brain which knowledge is
correct and which knowledge is wrong and on what basis? What instruments
they use to evaluate if a particular knowledge is correct or incorrect.
How does each saakshee evaluate the knowledge of that particular brain
is correct knowledge or incorrect knowledge? If two saakshees evaluate
(assuming that they have a means for evaluation) a given knowledge each
in their own way which is the correct and which is incorrect knowledge
> Let us take perception itself, since every one is familiar with it.
> Knowledge-D by nature presents that which is real.
Question- What do you mean by 'by nature' something is presented as
real? What is that nature that occurs natually and what is 'real' and on
what basis that reality is determined here? Jay, you are assuming lot of
things here. How do you establish the reality of an object that is
perceived and how does one perceives any object anyway - 'by nature and
real' has no meaning to me unless you explain the process and establish
the reality of that process by some norm.
>It presents its
> object as it is. For example, "this is a jar" - the jar is in a
> point of time and space and it has the property, 'jarness'.
Hold it sir. Please explain more clearly the process here - 'Which'
presents the object as it is and how? How does the time and space are
perceived -are time and space perceived separately by what senses and
how? Can you explain that process for me? I perceive the jar by what
means. 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
'it' to present. Go slow Jay. Give me the details how the perception
of the jar and the jarness - and the time and space occur. Where is
this jarness of the jar- how each of it is perceived 'by nature'?
> It is so
> apprehended by knowledge-D and the knowledge-D is consequently
> called "yathArtha". It is this knowledge-D that is taken to be true.
what is that 'it' is so apprehended by 'knowledge' - I am completely
lost here - knowledge apprehends some thing here - what is that
'knowledge' that apprehends - what and how? The whole process is unclear
to me. How this knowledge did came in to picture here. Is knowledge
outcome or the means here? Am I missing something here?
> If the conditions of perception are wrong, like defects in sense
> or abnormal conditions such as a glittering object or insufficient
> then the knowledge-D that is produced becomes false.
Again who determines whether something is defective or not? Since you
said each saakshee is different with different brains. Each is
apprehending what it perceived through their sense- brain complex - who
determines it is false knowledge - on the basis of some other saakshii
and his brain? How does that saakshii know what is right knowledge and
what is worng knowledge to establish the norm - Does it mean one
saakshee's knowledge is false and other saakshee's knowledge is right? -
> So, correct knowledge-D is svatah pramANa which sAkshee-D validates.
Jay - you made a big jump here. when the senses are defective and if
one does not know that they are defective - now possessor of that brain
and saakshee - takes what it received and on what basis it is going to
validate or invalidate this info fed by the senses? Please explain the
so called validation or invalidation by a saakshee and on what norm? If
that particular saakshee is not familiar with those norms then what
happens - is it correct knowledge or incorrect knowledge? I am still
puzzled about the jarness of the jar, though?
> sAkshee-D apprehension of untruth is conditioned by the absence of
> coherence. For this reason, the apprehension of untruth is "paratah".
Now you are bringing few more terms here - truth and untruth. Now
'coherency and 'incoherency' is again on what basis - Things look
coherent to you is incoherent to me and I am sure vice versa. My
saakshee is validating my knowledge and your saakshee yours. Now who
establishes coherency here? Mine is absolutely coherent, may not be by
your norms. Now validated knowledge by my saakshee, does that comes
under true or false knowledge? You seem to be bringing some other
validation criteria to say real or unreal - independent of any
particular saakshee-s. Am I right? Which saakshii establishes those
norms and on what basis? What is the criteria of acceptance of those
norms? Faith - beliefs - then how can one say that is a valid knoweldge
non-negatable by all saakshees?
> But in knowledge-A, the truth may be determined at the present time,
> but there is no guarantee that the knowledge-A will not be sublated
> at a future time.
Does A - stand for advaitic knowledge? - let us discuss that later once
we understand knowledge-D correctly.
Jay - I am trying to understand the saakshii-D and knowledge-D process.
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).
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list