________________
16
kalidas Bhattacharya
order and the central distinctive feature that places him in that higher order is exactly his freedom-his capability of standing aside Nature and knowing it from outside, if not also o rearranging its items into new set ups, man being considered in either case as, so fai, a centie of subjectivity as against the whole world as a system of objects Pan objecti visi could justify itself if, and only if, the distinctive feature of man-his subjectivity=freedom-could be denied Few--and least of all, the Advaitins-have denied it
Pan objectivism rejected, there is no question of getting rid of subjectivity There is also no conceivable possibility of subjectivity, understood as subjectivity pi oper, forming any sort of unity to be called the individual person, with any object understood explicitly as object For, subjectivity under stood as subjectivity is at least its dissociation from, its not teing one with, object. The only alternative left is, then, for object to be reduced to subjectivity in the way we have been suggesting Here, in our piesent case, the apparent objectivity of the mental states has to be understood as what has to be transcended, the new states to be realized being that of sub jectivity This ineans, in effect, that the objectivity to be transcended is at its best only a symbolic construction. 11
For the pan objectivist, objects are independent things (padārthas) For man-centric philosophers, on the other hand, object (ysaya) is necessarily what is perceived or imagined to be perceived They need not deny that there are things the minimuni they intend is that object, at the lowest level, ie in perception, coalesces with the thing For them, in non. perceptual knowledge object is what is only imagined to be perceived, a mental presentation somehow midway between 11 This is, of course, from the point of view of subjectivity as know
ledge. If, as by some philosophers, it is understood as (transcendental) will, the mental states—and, therefore, everything that is at any lower level--have to be understood as created by that will The Advaitin has not understood it as will. At the transcendent level he reluces will to knowledge