How we see objects, from the Vedas, and Beyond

Indian philosophy, as described by Nitin Kumar, identifies five means through which we can gain knowledge of an object. I would affirm four of the five different pramanas, described below. But the fifth, the “word of God,” I would replace with intellectual intuition of the Spirit-Will-To-Godhood residing within life, which activates life to evolve to Godhood, shaped by outside evolution and selection. 

Direct physical sense perception (Pratyaksha). Objects in the world all fall into one of the following categories: sound, touch, form, taste and smell. “These five sense objects are perceived through the five sense organs: ears, skin, eyes, tongue and nose. These sense organs come in contact with the respective sense object and the contact results in the definite knowledge of the object.

Inference of means ( Anumana Pramana) “Other than direct sense perception, there are other means of knowledge also. Many a times, we draw upon partially perceived data and arrive at a conclusive knowledge of something which does not immediately fall under the scope of direct perception. For example, because we have seen fire and smoke many times together, when we see smoke on a far off mountain top, we infer that that place is on fire. In colloquial expression this is referred to as guessing.

Similarity (Upamana) A city dweller wants to know about a wild animal named ‘gavaya’. The forest dweller tells him that gavaya is just like a cow. Here gavaya is the object whose knowledge is desired. The upamana is the cow, the familiar object whose knowledge is already established. Not all features of the two animals are identical since the gavaya does not have the folds of skin which hang from a cow’s throat; however, only similarities are to be taken into account for the purpose of identifying the object of enquiry through an already known object.

Presumption (Arthapatti) It is not possible to survive without taking any food. But there is a man named Devadatta whom nobody has seen taking food and yet he is strong and sturdy. How to reconcile these two facts? It is done through presumption. We presume that even though nobody has seen Devadatta take food, he must be eating without being noticed by anybody. Otherwise, it is not at all possible to remain healthy and active as he appears to all. Arthapatti is in fact a method of assumption of an unknown fact in order to account for a known fact that is otherwise inexplicable."

But it is when the Vedas, and other traditional religious texts, are thought of as the absolute word of God---beyond the natural world, the absolute truth created not by human beings---that the Vedas go off track and become definitions and abstractions rather than real objects only defined by truth. 

We evolve to material or supermaterial Godhood in the material/super material world, we do not evolve from God. We can know the truth of objects in the first four ways mentioned above, but the fifth way to truth which I do admit is the intellectual intuition of the Spirit-Will-To-Godhood residing within life, which activates life to evolve to Godhood, shaped by outside evolution and selection. We can know the truths of the Spirit-Will increasingly as we evolve materially to higher consciousness and intelligence. But the Spirit-Will is not Godhood since it seeks Godhood by activating the material vehicle it lives within to evolve to Godhood, with a material and supermaterial method of evolution.