How do we in the role of the
subject perceive an object? What is the state of our consciousness with
respect to the object? This is referred to as the epistemology
of perception. In this post, I will first survey perception (Pratyaksha)
as outlined by Vedanta and then discuss how Sri Aurobindo augmented this
theory in the light of his own supramental experiences. By giving new meaning
to the four terms Vijnana, Prajnana, Samjnana and Ajnana
listed in the Aitereya Upanishad, Sri Aurobindo presented a fresh
perspective on the epistemology of perception.
Perception in
Vedanta
According to Indian philosophy, it
is One Consciousness (Brahma-Chaitanya)
which has “become” (ie which underlies) the world in its various forms such as
man, animals, plants and even the supposedly inanimate objects. Everything
has the same consciousness within it although the outward expression differs in
degree and intensity. In the phenomenal world, consciousness has veiled
its full power and plunged into what may be called (spiritual) Ignorance
or Nescience. In case of the supposedly inanimate mineral kingdom, this
consciousness is said to be veiled by a state of inertia (tamas). This
veiling is denoted as Maya
(Illusion) and it is this Nescience which is the cause of all empirical
distinctions between the Knower, the Known and Knowledge. here 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. The act of perception must be understood in the
light of this ontological background. Every act of perception (pratyaksha)
may be regarded as a realization of the
One Self by an unveiling of the nescience which currently exists between
the subject-consciousness and the object-consciousness, the Knower and the
Known.
The phenomenon of perception can
be illustrated in the words of Vacaspati
Mishra who said: “Every 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.” [JS] In accordance with this example, it is
possible to identify three stages of perception:
1. Indeterminate apprehension: The subject consciousness
registers a change in the sense-input. This stage occurs at the level of
the sense-mind (manas). The mind must be attentive or attached to the
organ. If the mind is inattentive, no perception occurs even if the
external sense-organ is active. This is observed in the phenomenon of
absent-mindedness where one says, “I
didn’t hear that song even though it was playing.”
2. Determinate apprehension: The mind (Chitta) takes the form of the object (chitta-vritti). The
mind is said to be active in perceiving an object, and not a passive recorder
of impressions. It is said to capture an impression of the external
object. 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.
3. Cognition / Apperception: In this stage, the mind,
in its cognitive aspect (buddhi) alongwith the ego-sense (ahankāra),
utilizes past memories (samskāras) to resolve and act on the
object. According to Vedanta, one part of the mind becomes the
object (ie by imaging the object within our consciousness) and another part of
the mind observes this internal image and manipulates it using the
intellect. The first part is the determinate apprehension discussed in
the preceding paragraph while the second part is cognition.
This figure indicates the various
stages in perception (see Mental Sheath)
Buddhi-Manas-Chitta-Ahankara
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.
Epistemology of Perception
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Cartesian_Theater.jpg
The various ancient Indian
schools of philosophy such Nyaya, Mimansaka, Sankhya, Jaina, Buddhism,
Vedanta offered their own variants on the epistemology of perception.
The full discussion of these variants can be read in Jadunath
Sinha‘s excellent two-volume set Indian Psychology. (link)
Arthur
Avalon in his book Serpent Power presents the perspective of Tantra
on perception. Tantra denotes the object as Artha and subject as
Sabda. The part of the mind which becomes the object, which images the
object within the subject-consciousness, is called subtle Artha. The other part of the mind, which cognizes this
subtle image, is denoted as subtle
Sabda.
The object perceived is called Artha, a term which comes from the
root “ri” which means to get, to know, to enjoy. Artha is that which is known, and which therefore is an
object of enjoyment. The mind as Artha,
that is, in the form of the mental impression-is a reflection of the
outer object or gross Artha.
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 or Nama (name), and that aspect
in which it is its own object or cognized is called Artha or Rupa
(form). The outer physical object of which the latter is, in the individual, an
impression is also Artha or Rupa, and spoken speech is the outer Sabda. Subject and object are thus
from the Mantra aspect Sabda- and
Artha-terms corresponding to
the Vedantic Nama and Rupa, or concepts and concepts
objectified. As the Vedanta says, the whole creation is Nama and Rupa.
Mind is the power (śakti), the function of which is to distinguish and
identify (Bheda samsarga-vrtti Sakti). Perception
is dependent on distinguishing and identification. In the perception of
an object that part of the mind which identifies and distinguishes, or the
cognizing part, is subtle Sabda,
and that part of it which takes the shape of the object (a shape which
corresponds with the outer thing) is subtle Artha. The perception of an object is thus consequent on
the stimultaneous functioning of the mind in its twofold aspect as Sabda and Artha, which are in indissoluble relation with one another as
cognizer (grāhaka) and cognized (grāhya). Both belong to the
subtle body. [AA]
Sri Aurobindo
on perception
Sri Aurobindo’s augmented the
Vedantic theory of perception based on his spiritual experience of the
Supramental World (Maharloka or
Vijnanaloka). In this
world, ideas are not abstractions but always concrete realities inseparable
from the objects they define. A good example of this would be
simultaneously experiencing the power of the burning light and the substance of
the fire within it [SALD]. He coined the term Real-Idea to define this experience.
On the plane of mind you have
abstractions. It is the mind’s 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
concreteness. That is why I called it the Real-Idea and not an “abstract idea”. 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. [PET]
The supramental consciousness can
be said to have two powers—apprehension and comprehension.
1. Apprehension (Pratyaya)
is the
basis of objective cognition. This is equivalent to the mode of
apprehension defined in the Vedantic theory of perception. It is the
gaining of relational knowledge of the object from the standpoint of the
subject. 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.
2. Comprehension is gaining knowledge about
the object from within—as if the object were part of one’s own self. In
this mode, knowledge is obtained because the consciousness perceives the other
as part of one’s own self. Such knowledge is more complete than the
traditional form of relational knowledge gained through the subject-object
differentiation.
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. In
the unenlightened man, the powers of apprehension are dominant while the powers
of comprehension are imperfect and undeveloped. 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. Sri Aurobindo
augmented the Vedantic theory of perception by redefining the four terms Vijnana, Prajnana, Samjnana and
Ajnana mentioned in the
Aitereya Upanishad: [3.2]
This 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 application¹ of
thought and vitality and desire and passion, all these, yea all, are but names
of the Eternal Wisdom.
Vijnana Prajnana Samjnana Ajnana
With reference to the verse above,
Prajnana and Samjnana are powers of apprehension, while
Vijnana and Ajnana are powers of comprehension.
·
Vijnana: The object is held as part of one’s own consciousness in
order to gain complete knowledge of the truth and idea within it.
·
Ajnana: (note: Ajnana here
does not mean ignorance but knowledge-will as in the word Agnya and Ajna Chakra) The object is possessed in the energy of
consciousness.
·
Prajnana: The object is analyzed as separate from the subject in
the outgoing movement of the apprehensive consciousness.
·
Samjnana: The object is analyzed in the in-bringing movement of the
apprehensive consciousness. This is awareness of the object by
sense-contact.
We will now analyze the varied
actions of these powers of consciousness in the three stages of spiritual
growth of
1. Unilluminated Mind: Samjnana and Prajnana dominate
while Vijnana is poor and Ajnana is absent.
2. Intuitive Mind: Partial Vijnana along with Prajnana and Samjnana.
3. Supramental Mind: Vijnana and Ajnana dominate.
Perception in
the Unilluminated Mind
The unilluminated mind proceeds
from ignorance to knowledge. Its primary power is apprehension (in the
form of Samjnana and Prajnana) and then it tries to
imperfectly gain comprehension (as Vijnana
and Ajnana). Sri
Aurobindo defined the act of perception as follows.
As our human psychology is
constituted, we begin with Samjnana,
the sense of an object in its image; the apprehension of it in knowledge (Prajnana) follows. Afterwards
we try to arrive at the comprehension of it in knowledge (Vijnana) and the possession of it in
power (Ajnana). There are
secret operations in us, in our subconscient and superconscient selves, which
precede this action, but of these we are not aware in our surface being and
therefore for us they do not exist. If we knew of them, our whole conscious
functioning would be changed. [SAKU1]
Comparing these terms to the
Vedantic theory, the correspondence can be identified as
1. Samjnana = Indeterminate
apprehension. This is the action of Sense-mind (manas)
2. Prajnana = Determinate
apprehension. This is the imaging of the object within the mind (Chitta-Vritti).
3. Vijnana functions in a
much-diminished form as the cognitive mode of the intellect.
4. Ajnana is next to absent in the
operation of the unenlightened man.
Perception in
the Intuitive Mind
When the consciousness rises to
the Intuitive Mind, one develops the four powers of Intuition. The functioning of Vijnana is now half-awakened. As
Sri Aurobindo states in one of his unfinished commentaries on the Upanishads, Smriti (Intuition) is the link
between Vijnana (Knowledge by
Identity) and Prajnana(apprehension) because Smriti is innate perception; it is the latent memory of the
truth which rises when within our consciousness, we have momentarily unified
with the object-consciousness.
A still more indirect action of
the vijnāna is smŗti;
when the truth is presented to the soul and its truth immediately and directly
recognised by a movement resembling memory—a perception that this was always
true and already known to the higher consciousness. It is smŗti that is nearest to
intellect action and forms the link between vijnānam and prajnānam,
ideal thought & intellectual thought, by leading to the higher forms of
intellectual activity, such as intuitive reason, inspiration, insight &
prophetic revelation, the equipment of the man of genius. [SAKU2]
Perception in
the Supramental Mind
In the fully supramentalized
being, the primary power is comprehension while the powers of apprehension
become a secondary capability. As Sri Aurobindo defines it:
The basis of its action of
the world will be the perfect, original and all-possessing Vijnana and Ajnana. It will comprehend all things in its energy of conscious
knowledge, control all things in its energy of conscious power. These energies
will be the spontaneous inherent action of its conscious being creative and
possessive of the forms of the universe. What part then will be left for
the apprehensive consciousness and the sense? They will be not independent
functions, but subordinate operations (Prajnana
and Samjnana) involved
in the action of the comprehensive consciousness itself. In fact, all four
there will be one rapid movement. If we had all these four, acting in us with
the unified rapidity with which the Prajnana
and Sanjnana act, we
should then have in our notation of Time some inadequate image of the unity of
the supreme action of the supreme energy.
If we consider, we shall see that
this must be so. The supreme consciousness must not only comprehend and possess
in its conscious being the images of things which it creates as its
self-expression, but it must place them before it—always in its own being, not
externally—and have a certain relation with them by the two terms of
apprehensive consciousness. Otherwise the universe would not take the form that
it has for us; for we only reflect in the terms of our organisation the
movements of the supreme Energy. But by the very fact that the images of things
are there held in front of an apprehending consciousness within the
comprehending conscious being and not externalised as our individual mind
externalises them, the supreme Mind and supreme Sense will be something quite
different from our mentality and our forms of sensation. They will be terms of
an entire knowledge and self-possession and not terms of an ignorance and
limitation which strives to know and possess. [SAKU1]
References
·
[JS] Sinha, Jadunath. Indian psychology : perception (link)
·
[PET] Purani. Evening Talks, p291
·
[SAS] Sri Aurobindo. Synthesis of Yoga pp 862-884.
·
[SALD] Sri Aurobindo. Life Divine. pp 130-140.
·
[SAKU1] Sri Aurobindo. Kena and other Upanishads, pp 51-57
·
[SAKU2] ibid. p 430
·
[AA] Arthur Avalon. Serpent Power (link)
http://auromere.wordpress.com/2009/09/11/epistemology-of-perception/