Knowledge and Means of Knowledge-2

[Guest guest]

2. What about Time and Space?

 

[We are following the Vedanta ParibhASha (VP) text and are presenting the topics

in the

order described by Dharmaraja Adhvarindra (DA), but in the way that I

understand. The

book is concerned about the epistemological issues in advaita Vedanta. ]

 

Cognition of time: Here VP follows the Meemaansaka’s view of cognition of time.

DA

states that even though time is formless (also includes color less, tasteless,

soundless, etc - essentially beyond the field of five senses), it is perceived

by the

senses, in the sense that perception of ‘this is a jar’ involves ‘I see a jar

NOW’, since

‘is’ denotes the present tense. VP does not discuss the perception of space

here. To

include space, cognition should be ‘I see a jar, NOW and HERE’. VP states that

according

to tenants of Vedanta, when there is continuous cognition of the same object,

there is

actually a sequence of successive cognitions of the object (no reference is

given for

this, also not sure if this assumption is required –looks like digitization of

an

analogue signal). Each cognition depends on the present perception and not on

the

previous one. Hence in the cognition, ‘I see the jar, NOW’ involving the

perception of

the present tense is not violated for the case of continuous cognitions of the

same

object. (The above conclusion can be arrived at without the need of digitization

of the

continuous cognition).

 

From my understanding, Meemamsaka’s view of time is not appropriate as pramaaNa

lakshaNa

for advaita. We can state few objections and discuss the time aspects later. I

must say

that we have now the benefit of modern science which DA did not have access at

his time.

Hence these objections are intended to arrive at correct definitions rather than

any

criticism of VP.

 

1. In the cognition ‘This is a jar’, the is-ness denotes the existence aspect,

which is

beyond time, since existence can never cease to exist.

2. If ‘is’ denotes the present tense ‘Now’ the ‘now’ is also beyond the time

concept,

since it ever remains ‘now’. To define time we need two sequential cognitions

involving

‘now’ and ‘then’ – ‘then’ involving memory.

3. At any time, senses can perceive only things progressing in NOW- Hence VP

account of

the tenants of Vedanta in terms of digitization of the continuous signal,

although not

necessary, can still be applicable not for defining time but for validating the

perception at any time.

4. Time cannot be perceived by the sense organs, as their fields of operation is

fixed

and they do not include the past or the future as senses operate only in ‘NOW’,

which is

beyond time. Therefore Meemaansaka’s view that sense organs perceive the time is

fundamentally not correct. Mind with memory is required to define time, based on

two

sequential perceptions. The gap between the two sequential perceptions by the

same

pramaata (knower) is the time gap. If each perception is related to vRitti or

thought in

the mind, two sequential thoughts are required to measure the gap. When there

are no

thoughts in the mind as in deep sleep state, then there is no concept of time.

In

addition if the mind does not look back but move continuously on a single

intense

experience, I do not ‘feel’ time, since I am all the time in ‘now’ state, in

that

continuous experience. (I recognize that we have problem with words here.

Continuous is a

concept of time –but the one who is riding on ‘now’ even the continuity is also

not

recognized since past is not recognized, without bringing in memory). I ride on

‘now’,

when I am fully engaged in some serious action or enjoying some happy hours, and

loose

track of time (track can be followed only with the memory). These experiences,

where one

looses the track of time, show that it is not just the sequence of thoughts

alone that

defines the time. Mind has to track back previous and the current thoughts or

experiences to arrive at time. Since only past and present are experienced,

mind can

measure the time with reference to these two. Future, of course, is never

experienced.

Sometimes one feels that time flies fast while other times, particularly when

one is

suffering, time moves slow, even though chronologically there is no change in

pace.

Implication is cognition of time is not direct and immediate like perception. It

is a

mental projection.

 

We conclude, therefore, that time is not measured by senses as assumed by

Meemansakas,

but by the mind. Inherently, it is subjective. This is the reason why I can

have a

transcendental experience when I am always in Now –since ‘I am’ is neither past

nor

future but is a continuous presence in the present. PRESENT ALONE IS ETERNAL.

Present

can be thought of a thin line where past meets the future. The gap can be made

as small

as possible – second – micro second- nano second .. till no gap is left, where

in the

true present there is really no time either – what is there is only NOW. There

is of

course my presence since I am the one who is dividing these seconds. Hence

present is

just the presence of myself. That is the transcendental state since time is not

there.

 

One can make an objective definition for time by taking a discrete objectifiable

process,

such as earth rotating around itself or around the sun, as a measure of time

that

everybody can agree by convention. We are making a subjective notion to

objectifiable

measure by convention, as chronological time. There is no objective time

otherwise. Even

the so-called objective events have to be measured or recorded by the mind.

Experiments

involving isolation of an individual for days in a tunnel where no objectifiable

reference is available to compare with showed that a person looses the

chronological

time. He slowly relays on his biological mechanisms to determine time. Due to

phase lag

between the two, he slowly shifts from day to night and night to day, and

subjectively

determines when to sleep and when to get up, since there is no objectifiable

reference

for him.

 

We can formally define time as a gap between two sequential experiences. This is

better

than Einstein’s definition where time is defined as two sequential events

measured by an

observer who does not change with the event. Observer observing an event is

actually an

experience by the observer – His mind should observe the events. When we bring

experience

we are introducing subjectivity in the definition. When we have one single

experience as

in deep sleep state, we have no measure of time. Some philosophers assume that

saakshii

measures the time in deep sleep state. From advaita point, saakshii is pure

saakshii,

self-illuminating consciousness and is not involved in any activity. It does not

do the

job of even illuminating any thing, but things get illumined in its presence. It

is like

the Sun who does not really illumine any object, but objects get illumined in

its light.

 

 

Conclusion we can draw from this analysis is that the time is measured by the

mind by

bringing past event and present event as two sequential experiences. Continuous

flow of

vRittis or thoughts itself does not guaranty the cognition of time. In the

continuous

flow of thoughts, Mind may be riding at any instance on ‘now’. ‘Now’ is beyond

the time

concept. Mind has to stop and look back to note the time. Cognition of Space is

little

tricky since we have stereographic vision and stereo sound provided by nature by

having

two eyes and two ears that are separated. Even the sense of touch can feel the

special

distribution if the sense signals come from spatially separated different parts

of the

body. Simultaneous perception of spatially distributed objects provides the

perception of

space too. It is again mental cognition and not directly by senses. Each sense

organ

input is mono or unidirectional. Of course, beyond the sense and mind

perceptions,

Vedanta provides an independent means of knowledge in terms of creation of space

as first

of the five primordial elements that are created. There is no mention of

creation of

time, as for as I know. The fact remains that time is not measured by senses,

and is

projected by the mind requiring the memory. It is subjective.

 

Hari Om!

Sadananda