[Advaita-l] Pramanas - Sruti vs. Anubhava

[Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian]

On 5/4/07, Siva Senani Nori <sivasenani at yahoo.com> wrote:

> * You are absolutely right till here, Sir. Whatever Sruti teaches about Brahman, is indeed possible to be realised in the realm of anubhava, but please note that the absence of such a realisation does not negate Sruti. When SSS holds that the bhagavatpAda interprets Sruti in a way consistent with anuvhava, the implied meaning is that whenver Sruti means something not consistent with anubhava, such a reading is not favoured by the bhagavatpAda or is ignored. Such an understanding is held to be incorrect. Sri Sankara interprets Sruti correctly, period. anubhava is always consistent with Sruti, but at no point is there a requirement to re-examine Sruti because somehow anuvhava differs.

Dear Siva Senani,

Sorry to nitpick. But also note my point that examination of anubhava
in the context of brahma-jij~naasa is

a) completely dependent on shruti for *how* to examine anubhava
b) this examination cannot reveal the true nature of the self, but
only reinforce the teaching for less mature minds by pointing out what
is not real (explicitly stated by Sureshvara!)

So the question is not just the implication of reinterpreting shruti
based on anubhava.

anubhava is directly experienced and not controverted by anything. But
*examination* of anubhava, in the context of brahma-jij~naasaa, is
completely dependent on shruti for validating the tarka being used.
That's why it's called shrutyanugR^ihiita tarka. So, any which way
shruti is the master pramaaNa. I'll add some verses by Sureshvara to
reinforce this in my next version.

Rama