Darsan and Illusions

By -
In Rolf Nelson's lecture today, we discussed synesthetic perceptions, a topic we have touched on many times previously. I think our fascination with this topic is because synesthesia is a concrete example of how our perception can differ from other's and from reality. But who is to say that one reality is correct over another, especially when perception is so flawed and changing?  In Darsan: Seeing the Divine Image in India, perception is used as an intense form of worship. We learn of sight as a connection with others and the divine. The act of looking at a depiction of a deity is a way of linking oneself with that god, and vice versa. Essentially, I see the god, and the god sees me. This exchange is vulnerable and opening, and Hindu culture and religion equates this sight with honesty. The Brahmanas state that "the eye is the truth" (Eck 9), because the god sees the authenticity and reality of a person. Eck presents that "In India, as in many cultures, words for seeing have included within their semantic fields the notion of knowing" (9), for example, people can provide insight into a problem, implying clarity. There is a strong belief in being able to see through the haze of convoluted thought and action to find the truth, and this makes sense in the cultural context, since using sight as worship is so dominant. However, today's lecture established that what we see is not the truth. Our eyes lie to us regularly, and are notoriously incorrect in many instances. Optical illusions, misfiring neurons, and mirages are all instances of misinterpreting eyes.


And yet Hindu culture trusts their eyes over anything else. There is another dimension to the Hindu appreciation of sight, however. It uses sight as a form of contact, almost touch, similar to instances of synesthesia. In Hindu culture, "seeing... is a going forth of sight towards the object. Sight touches it and acquires its form" (9). In this case, the form is that of an ethereal and untouchable deity. Sight can bridge this gap, however. It allows for the connection to form with an abstract concept by using contact. I think this interpretation of sight, as a multi-faceted sense with links to touch, validates the truth of sight and perception in this context. After all, seeing is believing.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The most primitive sense

By -
Image
Smell the Flowers by Kirsten Star Smell, to me, is the most primitive sense. When most mammals are born, they immediately can recognize their mother’s smell and form an attachment to that smell. Mammals like puppies are almost entirely limited to only the sense of smell until they develop more of their other senses. The sense of smell also becomes the most primitive when considering humans and the phenomenon of perfume. For years, humans hunted certain animals for the purpose of obtaining the musk produced in the anal gland. This musk in small doses can act as an aphrodisiac when put into a perfume even though it has incredibly primitive origins. Though most of Western culture has an aversion to smells considered gross or undesirable, the wealthiest of women are still willing to pay heavy prices to spray a smell once obtained from the anal glands of other animals. The sense of smell is not something that humans can control and adjust but rather it is only changed by evolution over
Read more

Cannibalism and Symbolism

By -
Symbolism plays an important role in religious ceremonies because people cannot have the divine being where they want him all the time. So they start creating ways to be in touch with God. Such as in Christianity, eating bread is symbolized to be eating God-made flesh. There are similar rituals in Judaism where they eat the food of God. A big difference between taste and the other senses is that the object that is being sensed is internalized, whereas all the other senses use an external sensation. Taste cannot extend anywhere like the other senses can. This allows the humans to have no barrier between the divine (symbolized as food) and themselves. This is the closest they can get to God, but internalizing Him.  This thought of getting the closest they can to someone by ingesting and gaining power from it led my mind to wander to the thought of serial killers that also happen to be cannibals. I know that it might be a stretch, but there are some similarities. I als
Read more

Wrap-Up Post

By -
Image
Alright, let’s tie this up in a nice little bow. I genuinely did not know what to expect coming into this class. The extent of my knowledge of the senses comes from elementary school when we had to make it a little song to get the information through our tiny heads. Beyond that, everything seemed pretty cut and dry. We have five senses. We need to use all of them to survive. It’s as simple as that. I did not know how there was enough to talk about the senses to fill an entire college course, especially one specifically regarding the relationship between the senses and religion. But the fact that we were barely able to fit all the content in before the semester ended proves just how wrong I was. Let’s talk about why that is and what some of the things I learned were. First off, even the most basic assumption about the senses, that there are five of them, was questioned immediately. The sixth sense may not have been as clearly defined as the other senses, but there was certainly a lot to
Read more