AruNandi's Disconstruction of Materialism -1
One of the elements that the Tamil philosophical tradition embodies and which is of universal interest is the HERMENEUTICAL principles it upholds in philosophic matters.
While it is true of both the Saiva and Vaishnava traditions, it appears that, beginning from the Civanyanabotham of Meykandar it became so well developed that metaphysics itself became transformed into a field of Hermeneutic Science. This notion was carried over by his foremost student Arunandi who wrote TWO classics in Tamil philosophy, 'Irupa Irupatu' and the massive 'Civanjana Citiyaar'. The 'Ciitiyaar' is divided into TWO parts - the 'Parapakkam' and 'Supaakkam' and the whole book is organized on the basis of disconstruction. The 'parapakkam' constitutes the darsanas that are discontructible and the Supaakkam that which cannot and within which is located Saiva Siddhanta.
Within 'Parapakkam', Arunandi takes up first and discontructs the Lokayatas who have been in the whole of India in various shades and from very ancient times. The Lokayata's view that seeing is the same as sensing and that there are no interpretive movements of the mind where from the surface structures, the deep structures are inferred ( anumana) is that which is disconstructed here. What is interesting is that no authorities - Vedic or Agamic are brought in to substantiate the view. Everything remains hermeneutical, matters concerned with UNDERSTANDING and hence something of universal application. It is shown that human understanding in general in being historical is also temporal and because of this, SEEING is different from sensing for seeing involves TEMPORALITY but not pure sensing.
In this there are some parallels between Heidegger and Arunandi. However, while Saiva Siddhanta notes that anma is 'sat-asattu' i.e. historical-ahistorical and hence with the possibility to become totally and completely ahistorical and hence atemporal, such a notion is absent in Heidegger.
In the following verse that is concerned about the genesis of 'njaanam' that I have translated as 'Understanding', Arunandi argues that it is a product of INTERPRETIVE processes and hence in a way inferential. In this way he points out that in ordinary life we do infer and our thinking in general involves such interpretive movements of the mind and which in turn generates understanding. Understanding does not come to be there just because the senses meet the objects, there are many interpretive and hence inferential processes at work before something is understood as such and such.
35
kaaNdaloo anumaanam aavatum
kaadci munnatum kaadciyeel
puuNda puuta udambinuL ezu
pootam enkodu kaNadnai
maaNda vaayin manangkoL njaanam
uNarntatum anumaanam enRu
iiNdu puutam iyaintatu ivvudal
enpatu en piramaaNamee
Now while there is such a thing as historical understanding, the understanding of the past that the hermeneuts claim is after all sensorial only, that they are perceptions that have become a matter of the past, and hence there are no inferential processes over the sensorial - thus says the Lokayata.
However let me ask you: you have granted that there is such a thing as 'understanding' ; now tell me how do you come to this conclusion? My view is that it is through a process of induction, a species of the inferential. The physical stimuli that impinge upon the senses are processed by the cognitive mechanisms of the mind and because of which there is understanding and consciousness. Thus the notion that there is understanding even now is after all inferential, it is going beyond the sensory stimulations. So is also the case with the conclusions you have made about the physical bodies - that they are generated from the five fold basic elements.
Notes:
The whole thrust of the disconstruction of the Lokayatas that Arunandi practices here presupposes hermeneutics in which the notions of understanding and interpretations are central. The Lokayatas have no choice but to accept the fact that our understanding is HISTORICAL, that it goes to the past from the present and PROJECTS into future on the basis of the understanding of the present. Within the framework of historical understanding such as this, the Lokayatas observe, the past is after all the perceived but which has become the past and hence there is no getting away from the fact that everything is sensorial and hence there is no necessity to bring in the inferential and so forth.
However Arunandi considers now the PRESENT that is also a part of the historical understanding and the basic fact that UNDERSTANDING as such is acknowledged even by the Lokayatas. The point Arunandi makes is that, the understanding that exists even now is NOT purely sensorial and that it is generated only because of the INTERPRETIVE processes of the mind. There are various kinds of stimuli that impinge upon the senses and they will remain purely physical stimuli unless they are PROCESSED as such and INTERPRETED as being this and that. Such interpretive processes are a species of the inferential or inductive as they involve going beyond the physically given.
The conclusion that there is such a thing as understanding and to which is related consciousness or njaanam and which is inductive and a kind of anumaanam, or inferential. It is also claimed that Lokayatas' central doctrine of Physicalism, that all bodies are ultimately generated from the four basic elements of earth fire water and wind, is also similar, something that presupposes inductive kind of thinking though the Lokayatas remain blind to it.
ULLAGANAR
( Editing and re-paragraphing by his student Ariwalagan )