savikalpa and nirvikalpa demystified by yathiraja

savikalpa and nirvikalpa roughly means determinate and non determinate perception. mayaa vadins opine that in savikalpa perception subject object difference is perceived, in other words object is viewed as distinct from the perceiver. in nirvikalpa there is no subject or object as distinct but merged i.e the subject and object become one and perception is of an unqualified entity.
Ramanuja gives a better explanation grounded with logic and veritable principles of cognition. he says savikalpa is formed when you see an object whose prototype is already known . when we see cows of different colours we recognise them deterministically by comparing the memory of cow prototype and the present cow. In nirvikalpa , the object is seen for the first time so it is not cognized as some thing already known but as a new (non deterministic entity). suppose we see a a green animal with three heads and two tails, we dont cognize it but form a new perception called as nirvikalpa . this is accepted even by neoro science today. also ramanuja further opines that , perception can reveal only objects marked by difference. when we perceive some object we perceive it as something unique and different from rest. cognitive science agrees with the view that unless there is any difference between the environment and the object, the object can never be perceived by brain. also perception can never reveal an object without any attributes , for such an object can neither be proved to exist nor can be logically inferred.
Ramanuja further continues that a word that has a root and ending and is made up of different syllables can only point at a differentiated entity { meaning that if the entity has no attributes then no syllable is needed to describe it, for syllables point at some attribute or quality or a mixture} eg: {this is adiyens commentary-take amma or appa or any word the syllables a and ma shows a differentiated entity called mother and all words behave the same way. take the word unqualified and non differentiated , they are self destructive like the phrase -living corpse . they suffer from the same dosha .so the word "unqualified" has to point to an entity that is different from qualified entities and hence qualifies the object with the attribute "unqualified" and hence self destructive & non differentiated has to point to an object that is different from differentiated one and in both cases presence of another object different from the one implied by the words is proved and hence self destructive phrases} some may find it tough to comprehend this for it requires a knowledge on nyaya and tarkam to understand the significance of the afore said.
sentences made up of different words cannot describe a arrtibuteless object for the afore said reason. thus either by speech, words or inferrence only qualified objects can be perceived.
In short words with differentiated syllables & ,sentences with differentiated words cannot convey an idea of attributeless non-difference.
the method of deploying logic is mind bogling and the argument is presented to perfection with his unmatched dharshana in vedartha samgraha. the only other logician who can match this style is Vedanta Desika. Desika goes a step forward in satha dushini logically drawing out the prequisites for perception. he says the very need for perception arises because of difference. if there is a non differentiated un qualified object , what is the need for perception and who is the perceiver? what does that perceiver perceive? . why there is need to perceive a non diff -unqualified entity ? so desikan says the need for perception is to get cognizance on an object with attributes. desikan refutes the mayavadins view -that non difference is perceived .