But Locke thinks the qualities so discovered belong in part to the perceiver and in part to the substance outside the mind.
Let us now follow the fortunes of the other phase of subjectivism--that which develops the conception of the perceiver rather than the perceived.
But it was evident even to the early exponents of this theory that according to such an account, each perceiver is relegated to a world peculiar to his own stand-point.
There is first the imagination of a perceiver or soul (jîva) and then along with it the imaginary creations of diverse inner states and the external world.
What happens here is simply this, that only the features common to conch-shell and silver being noticed, the perceiver fails to apprehend the difference between these two things, and this gives rise to the cognition of silver.
There is no permanent entity asperceiver or knower, but the knowledge-moments are at once the knowledge, the knower and the known.
But he says that every perception involves a relationship between the perceiverand the perceived, wherein the perceiver behaves as the agent whose activity in grasping the object is known as cognition.
Moreover if all things were momentary there would be no permanent perceiver to observe the change, and there being nothing fixed there could hardly be any means even of taking to any kind of inference.
All cognitive acts presuppose this illusory identification, for without it the pure self can never behave as a phenomenal knower or perceiver, and without such a perceiver there would be no cognitive act.
Both give rise to the same kind of activity on the part of the agent, for in illusory perception the perceiver would be as eager to stoop and pick up the thing as in the case of a real perception.
There is also the nature of knowledge (which takes things as the perceiver and the perceived) and there is also the instinct in the mind to experience diverse forms.
If I or you or any otherperceiver did not exist, the things would continue to exist all the same.
The flow of knowledge creates both the percept and the perceiver and unites them.
If a Zen art work is truly successful, the perceiver has no sense of "I" and "it.
Finally, Zen cultural forms use the nonverbal, nonrational powers of the mind to produce in the perceiver a complete sense of identification with the object.
This explains what he means by saying that in direct knowledge the perceiver is the object perceived.
According to this view, perception would be a response that adjusted the perceiver to the fact perceived, and made him ready to do something appropriate.
Often, as we have seen, the fact is by no means fully presented to the senses, and often it is far from easy for the perceiver to tell on what signs the perception depends.
To some of the old Brahman schools the atman constitutes a metaphysical being in man, which is the thinker of his thoughts, the perceiver of his sensations, and the doer of his doings.
If there is no permanent self that does our deeds, then there is no self; there is no actor behind our actions, no perceiver behind our perception, no lord behind our deeds.
It is the ultimate ground at the same time of knowing and of being, of the perceiver and the perceived, of the subjective and the objective, of the ideal and the real, though exalted itself above such a division.
Know both (the Perceiver and the Perceived) to be reflected in me, the Supreme and the Immutable.
Atma pervades all beings as the conscious Perceiver (Atma).
The soul is identical with this Âtman and after death may be one with it in a union excluding all duality even of perceiver and perceived.
There is no seer beside him, no hearer beside him, no perceiver beside him, no knower beside him.
