tman_and_moksa

SR No.: 020053
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: G N Joshi
Publisher: Gujarat University
Publication Year: 1965
Total Pages: 901
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 12 MB

Page 387

Acharya Shri Kailashsagarsuri Gyanmandir
Sarakhya
355
when connected with buddhi.' S. Radhakrishnan brings out the difference between the two philosophers in the following way "While Vacaspati thinks that the self knows the object through the mental modi. fication on which it casts its reflection, Vijñānabhiksu holds that the mental modification which takes in the reflection of the self and assumes its form is reflected back on the self, and it is through this reflection that the self knows the object.”? A. B. Keith also expresses Vijñānabhiksu's view in the similar way-—"Vijñānabhiksu admits, therefore, a real contact of spirit and intellect, while denying that contact involves any change in spirit; change is confined to intellect alone; when these changes are reflected in spirit there arises the idea of spirit as an experiencer, and when spirit is reflected back in intellect, its states appear as conscious."3 The consciousnessforce that reflects in the buddhi assumes the form of the modification of the buddhi, and this is known as the apprehension or upalabdhi. S. Radhakrishnan expresses this phenomenon as follows-"The reflection of the Purusa is not an actual intercourse, but is only apparent being due to the failure to perceive the distinction between the Purusa and buddhi. The connection of the Purusa, as reflected in the buddhi, with the object is called knowledge, and the connection of the Purusa with this knowledge is seen in the resulting determination that "I act”,
Radhakrishnan S.: See Indian Philosophy, Vol. II, p. 292. 2 Ibid. p. 295, foot note. 3 Keith A. B.: The Samkhya System, p. 116.
For Private And Personal