Knowledge and the Means of Knowledge - 17

[Guest guest]

KhyAti vAdas

 

Before I proceed further, Shree Sastriji has just pointed out to us that he has

discussed the various theories about the errors in perception from the point of

different doctrines. These are called khyAti vaadas. In view of the exhaustive

details that he has already provided in his web site

(http://www.geocities.com/snsastri/ khyati.pdf ) I will only provide a brief

description for continuity. Excellent discussion of this topic is also provided

in ‘Methods of Knowledge’ by Swami Satprakashananda. These discussions are

from the advaitic stand point. Analysis of error is fundamental to Vedanta and

therefore has been addressed by all aachaaryas, each criticizing the other

philosophical positions and establishing their own view point. The examples

they take for analysis is perception of silver for nacre, and address how the

error in perception occurs. Listed below are prominent theories of error

analysis.

1. aatma khyAti

2. asat khyAti

3. akhyAti

4. anyathA khyAti

5. sadasat khyAti

6. sat khyAti

7. anirvacanIya khyAti

 

1. aatma khyAti or subjective cognition is an idealistic theory that negates the

external objects since perception involves mental vRitti as internal subjective

thought. Falsity involves in externalization of internal thoughts. Thus inner

cognition is apprehended as external object. This yogachaara-theory is rejected

on the basis that falsity cannot be separated from the truth, since in both

cases the internal thoughts are projected as external objects, whether it is

silver or nacre.

2. asat khyAti involves perception of non-existent entities. In the case of

perception of silver for nacre, according to this theory, not only the silver

has no existence in the place where it is seen, even the nacre has no existence

either. Thus both are dismissed as false (one may be more false than the

other). Non-existence or suunyam forms the basis for all apparent perceptions

as per their suunya vaada. All Vedantic masters reject this maadhyamika

philosophy as baseless (suunyam).

3. akhyAti – according to this theory of PrabhAkara school of mImAmsa, error

is not in perception but in the lack of appropriate discrimination at the memory

level. Thus in the case of perception of silver for nacre, there is a lack of

proper discrimination to differentiate input from memory of nacre from silver.

Thus neither of them is unreal, but falsity arises in relating remote silver

with current nacre. Advaitin dismisses this theory on the ground that silver is

perceived here and now, not remote silver is perceived. Object should be there

in front to see and not due to recollection of silver seen somewhere to mistake

nacre as silver due to lack of discrimination. That ‘this is silver’ is the

nature of perception.

4. anyathA khyAti – according to this NyAya theory, silver and nacre both are

real and the perception of brightness of nacre is seen as silver that perceived

at some other place at some other time due to some supernormal connection in

knowledge (aloukika sannikarSha). Falsity consists in relating silver with nacre

where it does not exist, but neither of the two is unreal. Advaitin dismisses

these arguments that perception of silver now and here should be based on

current sense input through organ of vision. Without acknowledging the

perception of silver in some form in the object in front, the knowledge that

‘this is silver’ cannot be occurring.

5. sadasat khyAti – this theory due to sAnkhya is based on perception of real

(sat) and unreal (asat) object. Silver that is real (in silversmith’s shop) is

perceived here as unreal superimposition on nacre. Hence it is the cognition of

real silver as unreal in the nacre. Thus it is a conjoint perception of real

and unreal object as ‘this is silver’ where nacre is. It is dismissed on the

ground that something non-existent cannot be perceived in front, just because it

is existent somewhere in silversmith's shop. The object perceived must be

present in front for its perception, since perception is immediate and direct.

6. sat khyAti – the theory due to Ramanuja – who argues that there must be

real silver present in the nacre for one to see. Since all objects are

fundamentally made of the same five elements, everything is there in everything

else. Hence perception of silver in the nacre is due to the presence of real

silver there. This theory is dismissed, since it allows perception of anything

in every object perceived, since everything is there in everything else. The

discrimination of one object from the other becomes impossible.

7. AnirvacanIya khyAti – This is advaitic theory of error. That ‘this is

silver’ is immediate and direct perception. Non-existent silver cannot give

direct and immediate perception as ‘this is silver’. The silver is perceived

as ‘here and now’. This knowledge comes from direct sense input by the

observation of silveryness of the object perceived. This knowledge is not

sublated until the perceiver goes out to pick up that silver that he sees. Thus

substantiality of the silver is negated when one tries to pick up and observe

closely. Hence, perception of silver is recognized as false, only when he

picks-up the object and discovers that it is nacre and not silver. Silver is

now recognized as false. Does the silver existed before – yes from the point

of perceiver hence silver is not unreal as its existence was experienced during

perception. No one would go after false silver. Hence in the perceivers mind,

silver is not unreal and it is

‘out there’. He discovered later that silver that he saw was not real since

it is nacre and not silver. Hence illusion or false is neither real nor unreal

– sat asat vilakshaNam – is defined as mithyA. It is some what similar to

prAtibhAsika satyatvam but not exactly in the sense that is perceived by the

perceiver’s mind, but at the same time it is not like mental projection as in

dream. The object silver is ‘out there’ for him to see and thus external to

him like any other vyaavahaarika satyam. It propelled him to act, in order to

acquire that silver that he sees. Vyaavahaarika objects exists for vyavahaara,

that is before and after perception, and are available for transactions during

transmigratory existence. Since the belong to Iswara sRiShTi. On the other hand,

illusory objects exist only as long as they are perceived. They do not

disappear by themselves. Negation of them requires an experience that is

contradictory to their

perception. They are not unreal like son of a barren woman, who cannot be

experienced. At the same time they are not real for transactions; I can not

make silver ornament out of the silver that I see where nacre is. Since it is

neither real nor unreal it is called anirvacanIyam or inexplicable.

 

With this background we will now take up Vedanta ParibhASha analysis of this

error.

[Guest guest]

praNAms Shri Sada-ji,

 

> 7. AnirvacanIya khyAti †" This is advaitic theory of error. That ‘this is

silver’ is

 

I have a simple question here: Can you please tie this 'khyAti' with the 'bAdha'

or sublation/subration that was discussed some time back? Both seem to

involve similar concepts of a better understanding replacing the older one.

 

Also related to the bAdha is the following question: Given that time and

space are the two fundamental characteristics of vyavahAra, what does

sublation of time and sublation of space mean? In particular, what does

trikAla bAdha mean? Does it mean going " beyond time " (which sounds

a little mystical) and cannon happen until the body drops off? Or, does

it mean living in the *moment*, which happens to be eternal? (Using Shri

Swami Dayananda-ji's example).

 

Also, can you please answer Shri Murthy-ji's example, where we are

trying to solve a mathematical problem and make a wrong assumption.

After some time, we retract that assumption and find a solution. What

type of khyAti is this?

 

Thanks

praNAms for such expositions,

Ramakrishna