|
CHAPTER IX
THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE ABSOLUTE SELF
For instance, when a particular object has
passed before our eyes, we decide that he is a soldier by seeing
his form and his movement, and that impression remains fixed.
in our minds. When another similar object passes before our
eyes in the wake of the first object, the same intellectual
process is repeated, and our Reason decides that that object is
a second soldier ; and when, in this way, we, by our memory
remember the various impressions, which our mind has
received one after the other, but at different moments or times,.
and synthesise them, we get the synthetical knowledge of
these various impressions that an ' army ' has been passing in
front of our eyes. When the mind has decided by looking at
the form of the object which comes after the army, that he is
a 'king', the former impression about the army, and the- new-
impression about the king, are once more synthesised by our
mind, and we say that the procession of the king is passing.
From this, it becomes necessary for us to say, that our
knowledge of the world is not some gross object which is
actually perceived by the organs, but that ' knowledge ' is the-
result of the synthesis of the various impressions received
by the mind, whioh is made by the ' Observing Atman ';
and for the same reason Knowledge (Jnana) has been defined
in the Bhagavadglta by the words : " avibhaktam vibhaktesu ",.
that is, by saying that : " that is true knowledge by-
means of which we realise the non-diversity or unity in
that which is diverse or different" [1]. [2]
But if one-
again minutely considers what that is of which impressions
are first received on the mind through the medium of the organs,
it will be seen that though by means of the eyes, ears, nose
etc., we may get knowledge of the form, sound, smell or other
qualities of various objects, yet, our organs cannot tell us
anything about the internal form of that substance which
possesses these external qualities. We see that wet earth is
manufactured into a pot, but we are not able to know what the
elementary fundamental form of that substance which we
call 'wet earth', is. When the mind has severally perceived the-
various qualities of stickiness, wetness, dirtiness of colour, or
rotundity of form in the earthenware pot, the 'Observing'
Atman synthesises all these various impressions, and says,
"this is wet earth" ; and later on when the Mind perceives the
qualities of a hollow and round form or appearance, or a firm
sound, or dryness of this very substance (for there is no reason,
to believe that the elementary form of the substance has
changed), the 'Observer' synthesises all these qualities and calls
the substance a 'pot'. In short, all the change or difference-
takes place only in the quality of 'rupa' or 'akara', that is,
'form', and the same fundamental substance gets different names
after the 'Observer' has synthesised the impressions made by
these various qualities on the Mind.
|
|
