The main difference of the Jains from the Buddhists in the theory of perception lies, as we have already seen, in this, that the Jains think that perception (pratyak@sa) reveals to us the external objects just as they are with most of their diverse characteristics of colour, form, etc., and also in this, that knowledge arises in the soul

_______________________________________________________

_________

[Footnote 1:  Illusion consists in attributing such spatial, temporal or other kinds of relations to the objects of our judgment as do not actually exist, but the objects themselves actually exist in other relations.  When I mistake the rope for the snake, the snake actually exists though its relationing with the “this” as “this is a snake” does not exist, for the snake is not the rope.  This illusion is thus called satkhyati or misrelationing of existents (sat)].

[Footnote 2:  See Jaina-tarka-varttika of Siddhasena, ch.  I., and v@rtti by S’antyacarya, Prama@nanayatattvalokala@mkara, ch.  I., Pariksa-mukha-sutra-v@rtti, ch.  I.]

184

from within it as if by removing a veil which had been covering it before.  Objects are also not mere forms of knowledge (as the Vijnanavadin Buddhist thinks) but are actually existing.  Knowledge of external objects by perception is gained through the senses.  The exterior physical sense such as the eye must be distinguished from the invisible faculty or power of vision of the soul, which alone deserves the name of sense.  We have five such cognitive senses.  But the Jains think that since by our experience we are only aware of five kinds of sense knowledge corresponding to the five senses, it is better to say that it is the “self” which gains of itself those different kinds of sense-knowledge in association with those exterior senses as if by removal of a covering, on account of the existence of which the knowledge could not reveal itself before.  The process of external perception does not thus involve the exercise of any separate and distinct sense, though the rise of the sense-knowledge in the soul takes place in association with the particular sense-organ such as eye, etc.  The soul is in touch with all parts of the body, and visual knowledge is that knowledge which is generated in the soul through that part of it which is associated with, or is in touch with the eye.  To take an example, I look before me and see a rose.  Before looking at it the knowledge of rose was in me, but only in a covered condition, and hence could not get itself manifested.  The act of looking at the rose means that such a fitness has come into the rose and into myself that the rose is made visible, and the veil over my knowledge of rose is removed.  When visual knowledge arises, this happens in association with the eye; I say that I see through the visual sense, whereas in reality experience shows that I have only a knowledge of the