[Advaita-l] Defintion of anubhava

[Praveen R. Bhat]

Namaste Chandramouliji,

On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 11:09 AM, H S Chandramouli <hschandramouli at gmail.com>
wrote:


> I had intentionally written  “definition’ (within inverted comma), and not
>> just definition which would have made it like a dictionary meaning.
>>
> ​Sure, but the intention for a clear definition is to either express
particular difference(s) between ज्ञान and अनुभव or to say both are the
same.


> My understanding is that in the sense used in the Vivekachudamani I have
>> mentioned, there is indeed no difference between ज्ञान, अनुभव or अनुभूति.
>>
>>
> ​Agreed in the very first post.​


> Reg  << That's an interesting point, which I too subscribe too, but it
>> has a slight tilt towards Bhamati, since lack of त्रिपुटि usually means
>> निर्विकल्पकसमाधि। I am okay with that, but I'm not sure if everyone is,
>> especially those who have trouble using the word अनुभव।>>,
>>
>>
>>
>> any tilt towards Bhamati is unintended because I am myself not
>> comfortable with many concepts of Bhamati. निर्विकल्पकसमाधि yes, but as
>> understood in the advaitic sense and not as in Yoga shastra sense.
>> Regarding अनुभव I have clarified my understanding above.
>>
> ​IMO, Bhamati is advaitic sense. Although it is a slightly different
discussion, I would state that Advaitin's only issue with yoga is that it
ends in duality, but the same word निरोध is used by Sw. Vidyaranya in
Panchadashi chapter 9, replaced with the word वृत्तिशून्य in
Brahmavidashirvadapaddhati and by Bhashyakara under mantras Mandukya
3.3.4-35 by saying मनः निरुध्यते। The difference is clearly in the
culmination of non-duality and that Bhashyakara specifically says with the
introduction to these mantras by raising a question as to what is the
difference between both suShupti and nirvikalpaka mind since they are same
due to commonality of having no प्रत्यय = वृत्ति (सर्वप्रत्ययाभावे and
प्रत्ययाभावाविशेषात्). The reply given is that in the former there is the
seed form of duality and in the latter the seed form is destroyed by
understanding of non-dual self.

Anyway, we have differed earlier on this point as to your saying that
वृत्ति exists in निर्विकल्पकसमाधि and my not agreeing. The difference
doesn't matter, since when the tripuTibheda is gone, whether the vRtti
exists or not is a technicality irrelevant to tattva, at least for me. On a
technical difference, I'll choose to say it does not.

Summarizing my understanding with specific reference to your query, the
>> term  अनुभव in the context of Brahman cannot be defined in the manner
>> you are looking for.
>>
>
​Surely so. However, please recall that I already​ mentioned that the
definition need not be limited to the context of Brahman. That is, it can
be same for laukika usage, completely different or qualified with
adjectives. What I intend to show is that one will indeed arrive at is that
अनुभव is ज्ञान alone repackaged, or one has to discard the latter word as
well, since the word ज्ञान has the same issues of definition when it comes
to the context of Brahman.

Thanks much.

​
​
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] */
​