Author Topic: Sri Adi Sankaracharya's Aparokshanubuthi  (Read 3315 times)


  • Guest
Sri Adi Sankaracharya's Aparokshanubuthi
« on: August 20, 2008, 11:26:17 AM »
Hi Friends,

Sri Adi Sankaracharya's work called Aparokshanubuthi is very useful for sincere seekers. This thread is dedicated to discussions on Aparokshanubuthi.

Basically there are two kinds of knowledge : pratyaksha and paroksha. Pratyaksha is , i experience something and therefore i know.
Paroksha is , my guru or someone told me, i believe it to be true.

now, the question arises: Is Self Knowledge Pratyaksha or Paroksha ? Please see this. For it to be Pratyaksha Jnanam the Self has to become an object. Since it can never be an object of perception / thought --- it cannot be pratyaksha.
It is not even Paroksha, coz Someone need not tell me I AM. I AM and thats why someone gets a chance to tell or speak abt my presence. Hence, I AM Preceeds any paroksha jnana --- hence its not Paroksha Jnana.

Hence, Sri Adi Sankaracharya names his work : Aparoksha-Anubuthi.
the nearest translation in English would be:"Non-Indirect;Self-Reveling. "

What is the aim of this text ? At the end of it , Self Revelation has to happen. If it does not happen, the text has not been understood. This is the objective with which i shall try to present this text.

Firstly This Self Revelation can happen to one and all. Only someone needs to put aside all their notions and see what is being said by Sri Adi Sankara and allow Sankaracharya to speak directly to us.



  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 546
    • View Profile
Re: Sri Adi Sankaracharya's Aparokshanubuthi
« Reply #1 on: August 20, 2008, 04:09:59 PM »
Aparokshanubhuti means the direct experience of adjunctless self-conscious being.


  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 48312
    • View Profile
Re: Sri Adi Sankaracharya's Aparokshanubuthi
« Reply #2 on: August 20, 2008, 04:22:28 PM »
Dear sr kudai,  A very good piece.  Please select a few verses
and explain.  It is neither indirect, no direct, and as you said
in English, one can say only as Non Indirect perception. Self
is not an object to be perceived, it is not something which
Guru can make you to realize, because Guru can only show
the way and confer his grace upon you to merge in the Target.

Dear Raju, Even though we call it as Direct perception, since
it is an Experience and not a Perception, there cannot be
a correct translation.  That way, in Sanskrit, certain words
cannot be translated.  For example, for Brahman, we say the Self,
because there is no correct word available.  Bhagavan said,
"Thaan" to denote the Self and "Naan" to denote the mind &
ego.  In English, Osborne used I-I and I, mainly for want
of correct equivalent.  This gave rise to another problem.
Why I-I and I?  Why not "I" and 'i" ?  There is no end.
That is why, Upanisahads say,  "Brahman is That, to which
words try to go and come back, failing!"

Arunachala Siva.