[Advaita-l] FW: Kingpin status of anubhava - mistaken or out ofcontext (was re:

Siva Senani Nori sivasenani at yahoo.com
Tue May 8 12:12:09 CDT 2007

Dear Sri Bhaskar

Could you, or for that matter other followers of SSS, be so kind as to supply the original of the two sentences? If you recollect I had avoided a literary criticism and tried to grasp the intent. It is clear from your subsequent mails that the importance accorded to anubhava / lokAnubhava by SSS and other teachers is significantly different. Ever since, we have been talking orthogonally about Sruti and Anubhava, and very clearly are some way off agreeing on the issue.


----- Original Message ----
From: "bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com" <bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com>
To: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
Sent: Tuesday, May 8, 2007 10:41:34 AM
Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] FW: Kingpin status of anubhava - mistaken or out ofcontext (was re:

I already pointed out in my paper that this single quote alone was a
translation! This itself shows that as usual people are commenting
without reading.

Hare Krishna

No, in the Reference No. 19 you have merely mentioned *Sri SSS, The Basic
Tenets of Shankara  vedAnta, adhyAtma prakASa kAryAlaya, holenarsIpUr,
Dist. Hassan, Karnataka...you have not said that it is a traslated one by
Sri D.B. Gangolli...That is the reason why Sri Siva Senani Nori observed
the following : (Sri SSN prabhuji, with your kind permission I am
reproducing your observation below)...

// quote //

"While by means of empirical pramANas, certain objects or phenomena which
are prameya alone (i.e. perceptible to either our senses or conceivable by
our mind) may be cognized, but by means of this anubhava which is the
kingpin of all pramAnas, the whole consummate reality behind this universe
can be determined." (Reference No. 19 in Sri Ramakrishnan's paper, which
for your ready reference is: svAmi  satchidAnendra sarasvati, The Basic
Tenets of SA~Nkara vedAnta, adhyAtma prakASa kAryAlaya, holenarsIpUr, Dist.
Hassan, Karnataka, p 50.)

Than again in p53 of the same book: “In the same way, for this kingpin
among pramANas, viz. Anubhava, a kind of tarka is needed”

I trust Sri Ramakrishnan did not invent the sentences (before getting on to
this list, I was not familiar with SSS and do not yet have access to his
books, and hence this assumption), and the repetition of the same adjective
'kingpin' clearly shows that it was a considered statement by the Swamiji,
not an offhand confused metaphor. The only thing which remains is that of
context. Sri Ramakrishnan had indeed presented a very detailed analysis of
the topic in Section 3 of his paper, and I thought the relative importance
of Sruti and anubhava was central to the context, and so wanted to know if
the views of SSS as presented in Sri Ramakrishnan's paper are indeed the
correct ones.

// unquote //

Where were you??  when Sri SSN prabhuji clearly telling it is Swamiji's own

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/

To unsubscribe or change your options:

For assistance, contact:
listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org

No need to miss a message. Get email on-the-go 
with Yahoo! Mail for Mobile. Get started.

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list