Mentalism considers that mind is the sole reality, because all phenomena are mere transformations of latencies, it argues that extra-mental objects possess no independent existence apart from the consciousness. Objects come into existence only when sensory consciousness perceives them. A similar notion was also seen in Berkeley’s concept of case est percipi which means “to be is to be perceived”. Dharmakirti and Dignaga stress apperception in order to prove that a conscious entity is a true phenomenon. Are they first to argue for this? The notion of apperception and their refutation of extra-mental objects will be portrayed briefly in the following.
They developed a new argument called the ‘necessary simultaneity of observation‘ in order to negate any extra-mental phenomenon. Through this argument they attempts to prove the existence of a non-duality of subject and object. This non-duality is the ultimate reality of mentalism. However, it is important to note that among Yogacara philosophers, there is two groups. The main difference between critical and traditional mentalists (also sometimes referred as speculative and traditional group) is that the former does not accept the ‘store consciousness’ whereas the latter do. On this particular subject of consciousness and its categorization, another entry will elaborate in detail later.
Mentalists regard all phenomena as representation of the mind, because phenomena emerge only when a latent potency finds for itself suitable circumstances. Hence, phenomena is not produced by the force of external causes and conditions. For instance, if an earthen jar is an extra-mental object, then it should be produced by the force of a conglomeration of atoms, yet when these atoms are elaborately analyzed, a stage of indivisibility is reached. It is difficult to say that indivisible atoms group together to form an earthen jar, since there is no atom which is partless. As Vasubandhu said in his Twenty Standzas, “one atom joined at once to six other atoms must have six parts. On the other hand, if they are said to occupy more than the same place, then these aggregates would be noting more than a single atom”.
The mentalists, therefore say that both the visual perception of an earthen jar and the appearance of an earthen jar simultaneously emerge because they have evolved from a latency potency in the mind. The earthen jar is not projected to the visual perception from the outside world, but grows from a latent predisposition in the mind. The earthen jar and the perception of it cannot be differentiated into two separate entities. Therefore, the empty nature of a duality of subjectivity and objectivity is the ultimate reality. The earthen jar appears to the visual consciousness from a distance when we perceive it. This appearance is an illusion which emerges from a latency existing in the mind due to due ignorance.
The existence of apperception is established, because it experiences itself, and no other consciousness is required to perceive it. Therefore it is called apperception, or self-consciousness. When visual consciousness perceives the color blue, at the same time apperception apprehends the visual consciousness. The visual consciousness, therefore, has two active constituents, namely, perception and apperception. Dharmakirti simply used the words: perceiving the subject aspect and perceiver of the perceiving subject aspect to denote perception and apperception, the word apperception was coined by Leibniz to mean “self-awareness”.
In order to defend the theory of mere consciousness, it is essential to refute extra-mental objects and to establish the existence of apperception. If there is no apperception, how can the conscious entity be proven?
References:
Jeffrey Hopkins, Emptiness in the Mind-Only School of Buddhism, Dynamic Responses to Dzong-Ka–Ba’s The Essence of Eloquence: I, University of California Press, Berkeley.
Mind Only School and Buddhist Logic, Dialogue Series-1, a collection of seminar papers, edited by Doboom Tulku, New Delhi: Tibet House and Aditya Prakashan, 1990.
Tillemans, Tom, “Dharmakīrti”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2011 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2011/entries/dharmakiirti/>.
Emptinez 