Object and Consciousness of the Object

[Guest guest]

--- ombhurbhuva <ombhurbhuva wrote:

 

 

>

> " But according to Sankara, the existences of sensible objects do not

> depend on their perceptions; perceived or unperceived they exist as such.

> Jadunath Sinha aptly observes:

> " Berkeley argues that the existence of a sensible object consists in being

> perceived - esse is percipi - and therefore it is an idea of the mind.

> Sankara on the other hand, argues that an object is perceived because it

> actually exists external to the mind; an object is distinctly perceived as

> existing independent of the act of perception. No one can argue a fact of

> experience out of existence. " . (Sinha's book/Indian Realism)

 

Michael - PraNAms

 

Agreed - it does not contradict what I wrote. I never said perceptions creat

objects.

Senses can only perceive the attributes; and attributes of the objects are not

created by

the senses. Hence peceptions do not creat objects. That is absolutely correct.

 

The statement is 'Existence of an object is established by knowledge of its

existence'.

Existence is established - I do not mean that I as a jiiva is the creator of the

object

for it to exist - that is not the implication of that statement. But I can know

that

'object is' or 'object exists'-only by the knowledge of its existence. -If I

donot know

then whether the object is or is not - I would not know either - hence from my

point it

is anirvacaniiyam. Suppose you say it is - now I have to have a

1. faith in your words - That is how we learn all the science that were taught

in the

schools - unless we ourselves do all the experiments. You become apta vaakya

pramaNa.

 

2. Or I have to directly explore using your words as a basis, until I myself

see that

object- Then the existence is confirmed with my knowledge of its existence. It

becomes

vijnaana. The samething is done in brahma jnaanam too.

 

God may be knowing that things that he created (since he has saraswati by his

side to

know), but unless he or his representtive tells me, I would not know that it

exists -

neither I know it does not exists. It remains as anirvacaniiyam only - that is

what I

call as indeterminate problem. Determinism follows through pramAnas only - where

one is

not get carried away with bhramaa instead of pramaa.

 

3. In the case of black holes, it stated existing in the minds of few scientists

by

inference or logic based on some indirect observations and deductions. It got

confirmed

by pratyaksha pramANa giving more faith in the logical deductions to proceed

further.

 

Anyway I am convinced of my statement!

 

Hope I am clear now!

 

Hari Om!

Sadananda