Unveiling Perception: Dharmakirti's View

Dharmakirti, a renowned Buddhist philosopher, offers a meticulous definition of perception,

separating it from both mental constructions and illusions. This essay delves into the essence of
his definition, unpacking the key phrase "Pratyaksam Kalpana Podham."

Direct Knowledge: The Core of Perception

The text emphasizes that "direct knowledge" forms the heart of perception. It signifies a kind of
cognition that presents objects to us immediately, without the intervention of judgment or
reasoning. We directly experience the object's presence, unfiltered by mental constructs.

Dharmakirti's Strategy: Separating the Wheat from the Chaff

The text employs a clever strategy to define direct knowledge. Instead of directly providing its
essence, it carves out a space for it by distinguishing it from what it's not:

Non-Constructive: Perception is not a product of mental arrangement or judgment. We don't

construct the object through mental processes; rather, we directly experience its presence.

Non-Illusive: Perception doesn't contradict reality. It accurately reflects the object as it truly
exists. Imagine seeing a red rose. The perception of redness corresponds to the actual quality
of the rose, not an illusory color superimposed by the mind.

Addressing Potential Confusion: Familiarity with Perception

The text anticipates a potential confusion. Since the terms "non-constructive" and "non-illusive"
might seem unfamiliar, one might assume Dharmakirti is referring to some exotic form of
perception. However, the text clarifies that the foundation for understanding these
characteristics lies in our everyday experience of sense perception.

Sense Perception: The Familiar Grounding

We all grasp the concept of perception through our senses – seeing a red rose, feeling the
warmth of the sun. This familiar experience serves as the starting point for understanding the
broader category of direct knowledge.

Dissecting "Pratyaksam Kalpana Podham"

Now, let's dissect the phrase "Pratyaksam Kalpana Podham":

Pratyaksam: This translates to "direct knowledge" or "perception."

Kalpana: This signifies "construction" or "judgment."

Podham: This translates to "free from" or "lacking."

Therefore, "Pratyaksam Kalpana Podham" literally translates to "direct knowledge free from
construction."

The Essence Revealed: Perception Stripped Bare

By negating the characteristics of construction and illusion, Dharmakirti arrives at the essence of
perception. It's a form of cognition that presents objects to us directly, unadulterated by mental
manipulation or erroneous apprehension.

The Nuances of Non-Illusion: Distinguishing Error from Valid Perception

Dharmakirti acknowledges that his two defining characteristics for perception – being
non-constructive and non-illusive – serve a specific purpose. While "non-constructive" could
potentially suffice in differentiating direct from indirect knowledge, the additional characteristic of
"non-illusive" addresses a particular misconception.

The Misleading Case of the Moving Tree

The text presents a scenario to illustrate this point: someone traveling on a ship might perceive
a tree as moving due to the motion of the vessel. This perception, according to some, could be
considered valid because it leads to reaching a real tree – the underlying reality exists. Since
the perception isn't a mental construct, it might be seen as a form of direct knowledge.

Why the Moving Tree Perception is an Illusion

Dharmakirti argues against this view by introducing the concept of non-illusion. The perception
of a moving tree, despite leading to encountering a real tree, is ultimately an error. It doesn't
correspond to the actual reality – the tree is stationary, not moving.

The text clarifies that this erroneous perception isn't a valid inference either, as it doesn't rely on
any reliable signs. Additionally, there's no other category of knowledge that can accommodate
this experience.

Reconciling Perception and Action: The Underlying Reality

The text acknowledges the seemingly contradictory aspect – if the perception is an error, how
does acting upon it lead to encountering a real tree?

The explanation lies in the distinction between the perceived object and the actual object
encountered. The moving tree is the mental image arising from the erroneous perception, while
the actual tree reached is a separate entity with a fixed position.

The Importance of Non-Illusion: Avoiding the Illusion of Success

The text emphasizes that the characteristic of non-illusion is crucial for eliminating the
misconception that successful action can validate an erroneous perception. In the case of the
moving tree, reaching a real tree is a coincidence, not a confirmation of the initial, illusory
perception. The actual encounter with the tree relies on a separate, correct cognitive process.

Clarifying Non-Illusion: Distinguishing Perception from Inference

The previous section explored how the characteristic of "non-illusion" safeguards against
mistaking illusions for direct perception. Here, the text addresses a potential confusion arising
from this characteristic.

Non-Illusion and Inference: Avoiding Misinterpretation

Some might interpret "non-illusion" as a way to differentiate direct cognition from inference.
However, the text clarifies that this isn't the primary purpose. The characteristic of
"non-constructive" already serves to distinguish perception from theories that involve mental
manipulation in direct knowledge.

Inference and the Realm of the Unreal

The text highlights a key distinction between perception and inference. Inference, by its nature,
deals with mental contents that are initially "unreal" or general in character. Through a process
of reasoning, it arrives at a conclusion about a real fact. Perception, on the other hand, directly
apprehends "pure reality" from the outset, not something unreal that needs further analysis.

Non-Illusion and Consistency: Avoiding Redundancy

The text cautions against misinterpreting "non-illusive" as simply meaning "consistent." All direct
knowledge is inherently consistent by nature. To claim that direct perception is free from
construction and also consistent would be redundant.

The True Meaning of Non-Illusion: Reflecting Reality

The text clarifies the intended meaning of "non-illusive" in Dharmakirti's definition. It signifies
that direct perception doesn't contradict the underlying essence of reality, the reality that
possesses effectiveness. In simpler terms, perception accurately reflects the object as it truly
exists, not some distorted or illusory version.

The Nature of Construction: Mental Concepts and Verbal Labels

The text concludes this section by briefly mentioning what constitutes "construction" in
Dharmakirti's definition. Construction, or judgment, refers to a distinct mental process that
creates a mental image capable of being expressed through language. This mental image can
potentially deviate from the actual object being perceived.

Construction in Perception: The Intrusion of Mental Labels

Dharmakirti sheds light on the concept of "construction" mentioned earlier in his definition of
perception. This section explains how mental labels and preconceived notions can interfere with
pure perception.

Mental Concepts and Verbal Labels: The Ingredients of Construction

The text breaks down the concept of "construction" into two key components:

Distinct Cognition of a Mental Reflex: This refers to a specific mental process that creates a
mental image or concept. This image might not perfectly correspond to the actual object being
perceived.

Coalescing with a Word: This signifies the act of associating the mental image with a verbal
label, a word that supposedly represents the object. The problem arises when this association
becomes so ingrained that the word and the mental image become fused in our perception.

The Illusory Jar: An Example of Construction

The text offers an example to illustrate this point. Imagine someone familiar with the word "jar"
encountering a particular object. Instead of directly perceiving the object's unique qualities, their
mind might create a mental image of a generic "jar" based on past experiences and the word
association. This mental image, fused with the word "jar," becomes their perception, obscuring
the true nature of the object.

The Peril of Construction: Distorted Perception

By relying on constructed mental images and labels, we risk distorting our perception of reality.
We come to see the world through a filter of pre-existing concepts and language, potentially
missing the unique details and nuances of the object before us.

The Subtlety of Constructions: Beyond Words

Dharmakirti expands on his notion of "construction" in perception, highlighting how it can occur
even without the explicit use of language.

Constructions Beyond Verbal Labels: The Case of the Infant

The text acknowledges that constructions can exist even when not accompanied by words. An
example is provided – a baby encountering its mother's breast.

The concern arises – how can we be certain that a mental image in the baby's mind,
unaccompanied by a word, is still a construction?

Unbounded Mental Images: Not Limited by Perception

The text explains that these non-verbal constructions arise because the mental image is not
strictly limited to the current perception. Unlike a direct perception triggered by a specific object
(like a patch of color), a construction is not bound by the present experience.

The Creativity of Construction: Imagination at Play

The text clarifies that constructed knowledge doesn't originate directly from the object being
perceived. It's a product of the mind's creative faculty, a "synthesis of productive imagination."
This imagination can combine elements from past experiences with the current perception,
creating a mental image that goes beyond what is strictly present.

The Hungry Baby: An Illustration of Non-Verbal Construction

The text offers an example to illustrate this point. Imagine a hungry baby crying and searching
for its mother's breast. The baby might see its mother's breast in the present moment, but its
mental image likely incorporates elements from past nursing experiences. It might be a mental
synthesis of the present sight of the breast with the memory of the comforting sensation of
feeding from the breast in the past. This combined image, not strictly limited to the present
perception, is a form of construction.

The Absence of the Past Object: The Key to Identifying a Construction

The text concludes this section by explaining how to identify a construction, even a non-verbal
one. The key lies in the object of the cognition. In the case of the baby, the mental image
incorporates a past experience (the previous feeding) which is no longer present. Since a true
perception directly apprehends the present object, the presence of a past element within the
mental image signifies a construction.

The Uniqueness of Sense Perception: Why It's Not a Construction

Dharmakirti now contrasts the realm of "construction" with genuine sense perception. This
section clarifies why direct sensory experience, unlike constructions, is not considered a form of
mental manipulation.

Sense Perception: Bound by the Present Object

The text emphasizes that sense perception is fundamentally dependent on the object being
perceived. It's a "receptive" process that can only apprehend what is truly present before the
senses. The object itself acts as a limiting factor, ensuring that the resulting cognition remains
specific and tied to the present experience.

The Limited Reflex of Sense Perception

Dharmakirti uses the concept of a "reflex" to explain this further. A reflex is a mental response
triggered by an external stimulus. In the case of sense perception, the object acts as the
stimulus, and the resulting cognition is a limited reflex that reflects only the unique qualities of
that specific object. This limited reflex, unlike a construction, cannot be easily associated with a
general word because it captures the unique essence of the present experience.

The Case of Sounds: Uniqueness and Meaning

The text acknowledges that even sounds, which can possess meaning, are considered
non-constructive in their unique, momentary form. Although a specific sound might be
associated with a particular word and meaning, the actual perception of that unique sound itself
isn't a construction. It's a direct reflex of the specific sound wave reaching the ear.

The Distinction Lies in the Object: Construction vs. Direct Experience

The key distinction lies in the object of cognition. A construction, whether verbal or non-verbal,
incorporates elements beyond the present object. It might combine past experiences,
memories, or the mind's creative imagination. In contrast, sense perception is confined by the
present object and its unique qualities, resulting in a limited reflex that accurately reflects that
specific experience.
The Illusion of Meaning in Sense Perception: Addressing a Challenge

Dharmakirti anticipates a potential objection to his distinction between sense perception and
construction. This section clarifies how even though a sound might have meaning, the actual
perception of that sound remains a non-constructive experience.

The Challenge: Sound, Meaning, and the Lure of Construction

The objection argues that since a specific sound can have a meaning associated with it, the
perception of that sound should be considered a construction. After all, isn't the association of
sound with meaning a form of mental synthesis?

Dharmakirti's Response: Meaning as Past Experience, Not Present Perception

Dharmakirti counters this objection by arguing that the association of sound with meaning is not
a direct aspect of the present perception. When we perceive a sound, we might recognize it as
having a meaning because of past experiences during the formation of language. However, the
act of perception itself doesn't directly apprehend both the sound and its meaning
simultaneously.

The Impermanence of Past Experience: No Direct Grasp of Meaning

The text emphasizes that past experiences, like the initial association of sounds with meaning
during language learning, are no longer present realities. They have vanished. Just like we
cannot directly perceive an object through a past experience, we also cannot directly perceive a
sound and its meaning together in the present moment.

The Limits of Sense Perception: Focused on the Present Sound

The text concludes by reiterating that auditory sensation, or sense perception in general,
remains focused on the present object – the sound itself. It cannot directly grasp the meaning
associated with the sound because that meaning originates from a past experience that is no
longer present.

In essence, this section clarifies that Dharmakirti acknowledges the connection between sounds
and meaning. However, he argues that the act of perceiving a sound and recognizing its
meaning are two distinct processes. Sense perception remains confined to the present sound
wave, while the association with meaning arises from past experiences.

The Yogis' Special Case and Recap of Perception's Definition

The Yogi's Exceptional Knowledge: Beyond Duality

The text acknowledges a special case – the extraordinary knowledge possessed by Yogis.
These Yogis, through their deep meditation practices, are said to directly perceive the meaning
of all words. This knowledge transcends the limitations of ordinary perception and the
association of sounds with meaning based on past experiences.

Dharmakirti emphasizes that this Yogic knowledge, despite its unique nature, still falls outside
the category of "construction" as defined earlier.

Recap of Perception's Definition

The text circles back to the core definition of perception offered by Dharmakirti. Perception is
characterized by two key absences:

Absence of Construction: It's not a product of mental manipulation or judgment. The mind
directly apprehends the object without adding its own interpretations.

Absence of Illusion: It accurately reflects the object's true nature. The perception is not distorted
by errors or sensory limitations.

The Importance of Both Characteristics: Defining Perception Holistically

The text clarifies that these two characteristics – absence of construction and absence of
illusion – work together to define perception. They are not separate criteria, but rather two sides
of the same coin.

In essence, this section acknowledges the existence of extraordinary forms of knowledge but
emphasizes that even in these cases, the core definition of perception based on the absence of
construction and illusion remains applicable.

Unveiling the Causes of Illusion: Safeguarding Perception

Dharmakirti, having established the core definition of perception, now delves into the factors that
can impede it – illusions. This section explores various causes that can distort our perception of
reality.

The Many Faces of Illusion: A Range of Causes

The text offers a variety of factors that can lead to illusory experiences:

Physiological Causes: Colour blindness exemplifies an eye disease that disrupts the sense
organ itself, causing distorted perception of color.

Object-Related Illusions: Rapid movement, like swinging a burning brand, can create the illusion
of a fiery circle due to the limitations of our visual processing.

Environmental Factors: Traveling by ship can lead to the illusion of moving trees on the shore
because of our relative position on the moving vessel.

Internal Causes: Diseases affecting the body's humors (a historical concept) can also create
internal illusions, like seeing a flaming post.

The Unifying Role of the Sense Organ:

The text emphasizes that regardless of the source – be it the sense organ, the object itself, or
internal factors – illusions ultimately affect the way we perceive the world. Only a healthy and
functioning sense organ can guarantee accurate perception.

Beyond Examples: A Broader Scope

The text acknowledges that the list provided is not exhaustive. It serves as an illustration of the
various categories of causes that can potentially distort our perception. The additional phrase
"and other causes" expands the scope to encompass other physiological conditions, external
factors like rapid movement, and even internal effects of injuries.

The Importance of Non-Illusion: Revisited

The section concludes by reiterating the significance of "non-illusion" in Dharmakirti's definition

of perception. Only when our cognition remains free from the distortions caused by these
various factors can it be considered true perception.

In essence, this section highlights the importance of recognizing the diverse causes of illusion. It
emphasizes that for perception to be valid, it must be free from the distortions arising from these
internal and external factors.