[Advaita-l] Definition of Anubhava
H S Chandramouli
hschandramouli at gmail.com
Sat Dec 7 03:22:25 EST 2019
Namaste Praveen Ji,
Reg << However, this is like the Vedantaparibhasha (VP) definition of
jnAna as chaitanya in siddhAnta and everything else with the upAdhi to
chaitanya, other than which nothing exists >>,
upAdhis do exist indeed, at tarka level (vyAvahArika sattA ).
Reg << At the level of tarka, my understanding is still that we agree with
jnAna (different from smRti) as anubhava >>,
Undoubtedly. This is not refuted. The VPS definition itself confirms this.
What is indeed refuted is the nyAya view that jnAna/anubhava are attributes
of the Self. As per Sidhanta, they are Self itself, with or without upAdhis
as the case may be.
On Fri, Dec 6, 2019 at 7:42 PM Praveen R. Bhat <bhatpraveen at gmail.com>
> Namaste Chandramouliji,
> On Fri, Dec 6, 2019 at 7:21 PM H S Chandramouli <hschandramouli at gmail.com>
>> Namaste Praveen Ji,
>> I am referring back to an earlier thread couple of years back wherein you
>> had raised some questions on अनुभव ( anubhava ).
>> << I couldn't find the definition of अनुभव in that thread. The
>> interpretation,however, looks same as what I said in my first post
>> अपरोक्षज्ञानम्। This is
>> not at all at dispute. To clarify, I wish to know:
>> 1) Whether we agree with the Nyaya definition स्मृतिभिन्नज्ञानम् अनुभवः।
>> 2) What is our definition of अनुभव?
>> Please note that this definition should not and need not be limited
>> to ब्रह्मज्ञान, as it is applied everywhere >>.
>> Link to the thread is
>> I am not sure if you could get a satisfactory answer to your questions
>> either in that thread or since then. During my search through Vivarana
>> Prameya Samgraha recently in some other context, I came across the
>> following conclusion concerning अनुभव ( anubhava ).
>> << तथा चात्म्यैव बिषयोपाधिको ऽनुभव इति व्यपदिश्यते
>> अविवक्षितोपाधिश्चात्मेति । >>
>> << tathA chAtmyaiva biShayopAdhiko .anubhava iti vyapadishyate
>> avivakShitopAdhishchAtmeti | >>
>> << And thus the Self itself as conditioned by objects is spoken of as
>> experience ; and when the adjuncts are not intended, ( it is called ) the
>> Self >> ( Translation by Prof Suryanarayana Shastri ).
>> Note this definition is not limited to ब्रह्मज्ञान ( BrahmajnAna ).
>> There is an exhaustive discussion as well wherein the other views,
>> including that of Nyaya is rejected.
>> If you are still interested in the topic, you may like to lookup the text
>> itself for further details. Also of course Panchapadika Vivarana itself.
> Thanks for referring back and responding to this old query of mine. This
> is definitely useful and I shall further look up your pointers to try and
> understand the refutation of Nyaya. However, this is like the
> Vedantaparibhasha (VP) definition of jnAna as chaitanya in siddhAnta and
> everything else with the upAdhi to chaitanya, other than which nothing
> exists. At the level of tarka, my understanding is still that we agree with
> jnAna (different from smRti) as anubhava. Even VP gives out a similar
> sense. On a related note, samAdhi is explained as brahma-rUpa-samAdhi, but
> we also agree with yoga definition as chitta-vRtti-nirodha.
> Kind rgds,
> --Praveen R. Bhat
> /* येनेदं सर्वं विजानाति, तं केन विजानीयात्। Through what should one know
> That owing to which all this is known! [Br.Up. 4.5.15] */
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list