________________
xx] Perception according to later Rāmānujists 223 mutual comparison of similar concepts, as involved in the process of savikalpa perception. What distinguishes it from memory is the fact that memory is produced only by the rousing of the subconscious impressions of the mind, whereas savikalpa perception is produced by the subconscious impressions (samskāra) working in association with the sense-organs?. Though the roused subconscious impressions co-operate with sense-impressions in savikalpa perception, yet the savikalpa can properly be described as genuine sense-perception.
It may be pointed out in this connection that difference is considered in this system not as a separate and independent category, but as apprehended only through the mutual reference to the two things between which difference is realized. It is such a mutual reference, in which the affirmation of one makes the affirmation of the other impossible, that constitutes the essence of “difference" (bheda).
Venkațanātha strongly controverts the Sankarite view of nirvikalpa pratyakșa in the case where a perception, the materials of which are already there, is made on the strength of auditory sensation in the way of scriptural instructions. Thus, when each of ten persons was counting upon leaving himself out of consideration, and counting nine persons instead of ten, another observer from outside pointed out to the counting person that he himself was the tenth. The Sankarites urge that the statement or affirmation “thou art the tenth" is a case of direct nirvikalpa perception. But Venkațanātha points out that, though the entity indicated by “thou" is directly perceived, the proposition itself cannot be directly perceived, but can only be cogitated as being heard; for, if whatever is heard can be perceived, then one can also perceive or be directly acquainted with the import of such propositions as "thou art virtuous”-dharmavāms tvam. So the mental realization of the import of any proposition does not mean direct acquaintance by perception. It is easy to see how this view controverts the Sankarite position, which holds that the realization of the import of the proposition "thou art that”-tat tvam asi-constitutes direct ac
i smrtāv iva savikalpake samskārasya na svātantryena karanatuam yena pratyakşatvam na syāt kintu indriya-sahakaritaya tathā ce'ndriya-janyatvena pratyakşam eva savikalpakam. Nyāya-sāra p. 8o.
2 yad-graho yatra yad-āropa-virodhi sa hi tasya tasmād bhedah. Nyāyaparisuddhi, p. 86.
