[Advaita-l] anubhavAN^gaatvena

[Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian]

Fatastic analysis. Thanks!

This is also indicated by Sankaras statement that anubhavaadaya.h ca
are useful in brahma-jij~naasa.

Rama

On 6/24/07, Siva Senani Nori <sivasenani at yahoo.com> wrote:
> sarvebhyo namah.
>
> The compound word anubhavA~Ngatva can be resolved as:
>
> 1. anubhavasya a~Ngatvam (the secondariness of anubhava)
> 2. anubhavah yasya a~Ngah sa anubhavA~Ngah, tasya bhAvah anubhavA~Ngatvam (that which has anubhava as a part is anubhavA~Nga; its nature is anubhavA~Ngatvam).
> 3. anubhavasya a~Ngah anubhavA~Ngah; tasya bhAvah anubhavA~Ngatvam (a part, an element of anubhava is anubhavA~Nga; its nature is anubhavA~Ngatvam).
> 4. anubhavah eva a~Ngah, anubhavA~Ngah; tasya bhAvah anubhavA~Ngatvam (the part or element called anubhava is anubhavA~Ngah; its nature is anubhavA~Ngatvam).
>
> Now the context in which this word occurs. The relevant part of the sentence (with sandhi deconstructed) is: Sruti+anugrihIta eva hi atra tarkah anubhavA~Ngatvena ASrIyate. (2.1.6, Br. Su. Bhashya)
>
> Here (atra), only that logic sanctioned by Sruti (SrutyanugrihIta eva hi tarkah) is to be resorted to (ASrIyate). The reason for this is supplied by the word anubhavA~Ngatvena - on account of anubhavA~Ngatva. If such is the interpretation, then only meaning 1 fits in.
>
> However the tritIyA usually indicates instrumentality, not a reason (for which pa~ncamI is used, again usually); so we can also say that "Only the Sruti-sanctioned logic is to be resorted ** with ** anubhavA~Ngatvam". In such a case, meanings 2, 3 and 4 can all fit it.
>
> If 1, 2 and 4 are used anubhava is secondary in all of them. Only 3 gives importance to anubhava; and if we do use that meaning in the above sentence then the Sruti-sanctioned logic becomes the a~Nga of anubhava, which is a bit far-fetched.
>
> Considering all the alternatives, I am inclined to believe that anubhava is portrayed as secondary here.
>