{"id":70,"date":"2019-05-29T07:17:21","date_gmt":"2019-05-29T07:17:21","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/engp11.epgpbooks.inflibnet.ac.in\/?post_type=chapter&p=70"},"modified":"2019-05-30T11:06:41","modified_gmt":"2019-05-30T11:06:41","slug":"bhartrihari-vakyapadiya","status":"publish","type":"chapter","link":"https:\/\/ebooks.inflibnet.ac.in\/engp11\/chapter\/bhartrihari-vakyapadiya\/","title":{"rendered":"Bhartrihari: Vakyapadiya"},"content":{"raw":"
\"epgp<\/a>\r\n<\/span><\/div>\r\n \r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n \r\n
\r\n

Bhart hari was known as a philosopher in Indian intellectual tradition. He has established grammar as a philosophical doctrine through his text V kyapad ya. His personal details are not found in great length. It is said that he existed around 450- 510 A.D. He was mentioned in the travelogue of the Chinese monk I-tsing or Yijing. Along with V kyapad ya a commentary on Pata jali's Mah bh ya, named as Mah bh yad pik Mah bh k ) is also written by Bhart hari. Bhart hari is also known as the author of atakatraya. But views differ about the identical authorship of these two works. It is said that Bha ik vya is also authored by Bhart hari.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

V kyapad ya is divided in three k as<\/em>(chapters), such as Brahma-k a(Ist Chapter), V kya k a (2nd Chapter) and Prak r a k a( 3rd chapter). The whole text is composed in anu up<\/em> meter, called k rik<\/em> . To explain the text Bhart hari himself wrote a commentary called v tti<\/em>. This commentary is available for first two chapters of V kyapad ya. In the commentary the author is called as Hariv abha. Though the genuine commentary which is mentioned by I-tsing, contained 7000 lokas<\/em> is not available now. In the form of abridgment and adaptation of this commentary through the works of others is available in print form.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

The first two chapters of the text are commented by V abhadeva through his commentary, called Paddhati. Here Paddhati is found along with V tti. But the Paddhati of the v kya- k a\u00a0is not found today, this text is lost now. V abhadeva\u2019s time is around first half of the eighth century.<\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n

On the V kya- k a the commentary of Pu yar ja is available in print today. From his introduction it is understood that there was a commentary of him on the first-k a also, but it is not available. It is inferred that his time was around ninth century, Kashmir.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

On the Prak r a-k a, the commentary, named Prak r a-Prak a of Helar ja is found. His commentary on first- two k as<\/em> is named as abdaprabh . But this particular commentary and some portion of Prak r a-Prak a is lost today. The lost portion is written again by Phullar ja.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

Hel r ja\u2019s time is most probably middle of the eleventh century. The text V kyapad ya is not taught today without these commentaries traditionally. To comprehend the text it is necessary to know these commentaries also.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

Abdabrahman<\/strong><\/p>\r\n \r\n

As it is mentioned earlier also the first chapter of V kyapad ya is known as Brahma-k a. Through the first four k rik s<\/em> Bhart hari establishes the concept of abdabrahma. In this theory the whole world turns (vivartate<\/em>) or manifested into the meaning from the Brahman who does not have any beginning or end, who is all-pervaded, whose very essence is word. Brahman is a principle beyond all conceptual constructions. The manifestation of Brahman appears as temporal and spatially ordered. But The Brahman remains unaffected. So the world is created from Brahman, but he did not create it. The world is manifested. This manifestation is understood linguistically and the Brahman is to be considered as permanent syllable. This manifestation is like a bubble. It can go back to its origin. The permanent letter is manifested\u00a0through the meaning and this meaning is the whole world. Brahman is single, but appeared as many due to its various powers. The powers and Brahman appears to be different, but Brahman is not different from its powers. The universal and particular are not different from each other. But they appear different, when they assume the form of different objects which figure in them. The six modifications, such as birth (j yate<\/em>), existence ( asti<\/em> ), transformation(vipari amate),<\/em> growing( vardhate<\/em>), decay( apak yate<\/em>), destroy( vina yati<\/em>) are the source of the different states among a life. These modifications depend on time (k la akti<\/em>) which is the power of Brahman. Other powers depend on the independent power of time. These modifications have sequential occurrences. This sequence is marked with the scale of time. Through this process the circle of existence works. The single seed of all things have three different characters. It is the experience (bhokt<\/em> ), experienced ( bhokta<\/em>) and experience( bhoga<\/em> ). Here the term bhoga<\/em> is interpreted as the experience of happiness, sadness etc. The one Brahman is the substratum of powers. These powers cannot be defined either identical or different from it. These can be explained as the state of dream. In the dream one can experience different things at one time, but those experiences do not have any existence in reality other than dream. These three different things are actually manifestation of Brahman. Thus Bhart hari established the theory of abdabrahman<\/em>.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

After establishing the theory of abdabrahman<\/em> Bhart hari proceeds to establish Grammar as the subject which not only helps to get the correct knowledge of vedic words and as well as laukika<\/em> ( language in general), as the greatest way to attain salvation( mok a<\/em>). He also considers grammar as agama- stra<\/em> or sm ti<\/em>.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

The Theory of Sphoa<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\r\n \r\n

The term spho a<\/em> is explained as sphu yate artha yasm t<\/em> i.e from which meaning is blossomed. According to grammarians words convey meaning. Now the problem is where this meaning does reside or what the substratum of meaning is. The meaning can be resided on letters. But letters are perishable. The meaning which is eternal cannot be stayed in the perishable object. To comprehend a word each and every letter is necessary. It is not the case that from the first letter itself the meaning is comprehended, then other letters of the word would be redundant. If it is said that the arrangement of letter holds the meaning, then there would be question that how an arrangement of perishable object can become eternal. Because in a word letters come one by one, and when one letter is uttered and destroyed, then only another letter could come into existence. Considering these issues grammarians postulate a meaning bearing entity, other than word (pada<\/em>) and the letter (var a<\/em>). This entity is called spho a<\/em>. This spho a<\/em> is eternal and according to the grammarians this spho a<\/em> is abda<\/em>. This abda<\/em>, it\u2019s meaning and their relation is eternal (nitya<\/em>).<\/p>\r\n \r\n

The spho a<\/em> is an abstract idea of word which resides in speaker\u2019s intellect. It is mental linguistic form ( budhistha\u00a0\u00a0 abda<\/em> ). Bhart hari explains the nature of spho a<\/em> as the fire which resides in the churning \u2013wood. The way this fire is the cause of the other fire, in the similar way the word which is in the speaker\u2019s mind becomes the cause of the different expressive words. Now the question arises how one can comprehend spho a<\/em> or how it is grasped by hearer. It is explained that spho a<\/em> is manifested through sound ( dhvani)<\/em>. Dhvani<\/em> is manifester ( vya jaka\/<\/em> abhivya jaka<\/em>) and spho a <\/em>is manifested(vya ga<\/em>).\u00a0 At first spho a <\/em>is conceived in the mind. Then it is applied to some meaning. After that it is manifested by the sounds which are produced by the articulatory organs. The relation between spho a<\/em> and sound is like the reflection. If there is reflection of moon in the water, then spho a<\/em> is compared with the moon. The water is compared with sound and the reflection is explained as how the spho a<\/em> is manifested to the hearer.\u00a0 If there are some ripples in the water then the reflection gets affected, not the object whose reflection is on the water. The spho a<\/em> does not have any sequence or any parts. It is the whole like\u00a0abdabrahman<\/em>. But sound is produced in a sequence and also consists of parts. As spho a <\/em>is manifested through sound, it appears that spho a<\/em> has the quality of sound. Spho a<\/em> appears to have sequence and parts but in reality it is sequence-less and part-less. The process is similar to the process of painting. A painting is come to existence through different stages of painter\u2019s brush. But the painting is grasped as whole. Similarly the process of grasping spho a<\/em> can have different sequences but it is grasped as whole.\u00a0 The nature of spho a<\/em> is like the nature of knowledge. Knowledge cognises other object, but it itself is cognised with its object. Thus spho a <\/em>also cognises the meaning and is cognised through sound.\u00a0 As light has two powers, that of being revealed, and that of being revealer, linguistic- forms have also two distinct powers like light. Linguistic-forms convey meaning when they themselves become contents of awareness.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

Due to this when the nature of linguistic-forms is not understood, question arises \u201cwhat did you say?\u201d These two abstracted powers of linguistic-forms becomes the reason towards the grasping of meaning. Though these two powers are not different to each other, but in practice they appear as different.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

The sound (dhvani<\/em>) is divided into primary(pr k ta<\/em>) and secondary(vaik ta<\/em>). The primary sound is the cause of the spho a.<\/em> It appears that as if primary sound and spho a<\/em> is indifferent. Whereas the secondary sound determines the speed of spho a<\/em> . The secondary sound cannot bring change in the nature of spho a<\/em>, but it can determine the difference in the continuity of perception.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

Later grammarians divided spho a<\/em> into eight different categories. They are: var\u00a0 aspho a, pada\u00a0<\/em>spho a, v kyaspho a, akha apadaspho a, akha av kyaspho a<\/em>, var aj tispho a<\/em>, padaj tispho a, v kyaj tispho a<\/em>. Bhart hari seems to support the view of akha av kyaspho a. <\/em>Grammarians accept the undivided sentence as the unit of meaning.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

In Bhart hari\u2019s philosophy speech(v k<\/em>) has three stages in the process of manifestation, such as pa yant , madhyam <\/em>, and vaikhar <\/em>This stage is not expressed linguistically. In this stage spho a<\/em> exists, but the process of articulation yet to be started. This level is abstract linguistical level. The next stage of speech manifestation is madhyam <\/em>Though psychological in nature and can be comprehended by the intellect only, but the utterance in phonological pattern takes place here. This stage corresponds to pr k ta-dhvani<\/em> The longness or shortness of letters are decided here. The third stage is called as vaikhar<\/em> which is uttered by speaker and is heard by listener. This is stage of vaik ta-dhvani<\/em>. In this stage the rapidity of utterances differ according to the pronunciation of the speaker. At the level of listener when he comprehend the meaning from linguistical utterances of speaker the dhvani<\/em> takes him back to again to the spho a<\/em>. As it is mentioned at the beginning that the world is the\u00a0manifestation of in the form of meaning like a bubble, the sound can go back to its original form again.<\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

\r\n

Vkyak<\/strong>a<\/strong><\/p>\r\n \r\n

After establishing and the theory of spho a<\/em> Bhart hari proceeds towards sentence. According to Bhart hari sentence and the sentence meaning are indivisible units. Communication takes place through sentence only, not by individual words. In order to establish his view he mentions the views on sentences from other school of philosophy. He refutes the views of others, especially of Mim sakas. Though the name of any particular mim sakas<\/em> is not mentioned. At the beginning of the 2nd chapter he has also mentioned the eight ways to define sentence according to the view of logicians, such as- as verb( khy ta<\/em>), as a collection of linguistics forms( abda-sa gh ta<\/em>), as the proper universal(j ti<\/em> )that occurs in the collection, as a single\u00a0partless linguistic forms, as a sequence of words, as what comes together in the intellect (<\/span>budhyaanusa h ti<\/em>), as the first words, as all the words severally possessing expectancy for each other. The definition of K ty yana (the author of <\/span>v rttika<\/em>) is explained as a sentence is that where a verb exists along with the indeclinable, case words, and qualifiers. On the other hand according to <\/span>mim sakas<\/em> a sentence is that in which the words have mutual expectancy which does not require additional words has action as its principle element, has other subordinate words and is a single linguistic form. This principle element is explained as <\/span>bh van .<\/em> The view of <\/span>mim sakas <\/em>is presented in five different ways. According to them that the sentence is a collection (<\/span>sa hata)<\/em> of words. A word which is outside of a sentence has certain meaning. When it enters in a sentence it conveys the same meaning, neither more nor less. The words get-together and lead to a sentential meaning. This sentential meaning is a new meaning, over and above the meanings of individual world. This meaning is called <\/span>sa sarga<\/em> that is mutual connection. Like the number ten exists in all the ten objects which are counted, taken together,\u00a0<\/span>not in each of them. The word meaning is universal, capable of denoting all particulars. In the presence of another words, the meaning becomes restricted to one single particular. In that state it is called sentence meaning.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

From another view \u2013point sentence is not verbal. Because in comes in a sequence and sequence cannot comes under the perception (hearing is also one kind of perception). Sequence is a property of time and it is superimposed on the individual words. In this view also the sentence meaning consists of connection of individual words. It emphasises on the sequence, not the individual words which are heard. The sentence meaning does not come from individual words, but from their meanings which are incomplete and require one another.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

Some mim sakas<\/em> think that the verb is the sentence. Verb denotes action. The accomplishment of the action is also comprehended from verb. Thus the meaning is completed. So the verb can be considered as sentence.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

Another view is called as anvit bhidh nav da<\/em>. Here the connection with the meaning of other words is part of the meaning of a word. Word- meanings are connected. This connection is experienced by the users of the sentences. The very first word conveys the meaning as connected with other words. The first word conveys only the abstracted unconnected universal. This universal becomes connected with the other the meaning which emerges from connected universal. This is called sentence meaning.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

These views are refuted by Bhart hari. The sentence is indivisible. It can be divisible when it is manifested through utterance. But before manifestation, it resides in speaker\u2019s mind as indivisible, complete entity. According to him the meaning is comprehended in flash of understanding of the meaning of the whole sentence. It is quite different than the meaning of an individual word. This flash or intuition is described as pratibh<\/em> . It connects together the\u00a0meanings conveyed by the different words of a sentence. It relates the sentence as a whole on which it rests. Even it exists in animals also. Because of this pratibh<\/em> the birds and the animals engage in their natural activities without any instruction. Pratibh<\/em> includes intelligence, intuitive knowledge and the spontaneous activities of new-born babies. Bhart hari tells six varities of pratibh <\/em>such as svabh va(<\/em>natural), cara a(<\/em>vedic), abhy sa(<\/em>through practice), yoga(<\/em>yogic), ad a<\/em>(through invisible factors) and upap dita<\/em>(through instruction or intervention) The chief characteristic of sentence is the completeness. This completeness does not depend on any particular number of words in a sentence. When a verb expresses an action or process, with other words as accessories, a sentence is considered to be complete. Though, to serve practical purposes Bhart hari accepts the splitting of sentence. But according to him these parts are not\u00a0real, they are all imaginable. Grammar does the analysis for understanding of ordinary mortals. This analysis can be used by others to serve their purpose. As <\/span>mi<\/em> can use this analysis to interpret vedic injunctions.<\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n

The nature of sentence is whole. Though the meaning of a sentence and it\u2019s form have an external aspect, but actually they are inner quality. They are derived from the Brahman<\/em>. They are itself is a spark of that abdabrahman<\/em> which represents the total knowledge. The meaning is manifested. Before the meaning of sentence is fully grasped, some other elements, such as individual words and they are meanings are cognised. But they are not real. They are the means by which the final clear cognition takes place.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

Prakra-K<\/strong>a<\/strong><\/p>\r\n \r\n

After establishing abdabrahman<\/em> and the sentence and sentence meaning as a part of it Bhart hari moves towards the discussion of grammatical analysis. Each grammatical category is divided in sub-chapters and named as sammudde a<\/em>, such as j ti-sammudde a, dravya-sammudde a, gu a- sammudde a, dik- sammudde a, s dhana- sammudde a, kriy -\u00a0<\/em>sammudde a, k la- sammudde a, puru a- sammudde a, sa khy -sammudde a, li ga-sammudde a, v tti- sammudde a <\/em>etc.<\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n \r\n

The first point among these is whether the word and its meaning is universal (j ti<\/em>) or substance(dravya)<\/em>. Grammarians in general accept both. First they have accepted universal. After that they have accepted particular also. Here also Bhart hari mentions several views on the topic. V japy yana thinks that all words and the parts of the words denote the universal. On the other hand Vy i thinks that they denote substance. These views were placed with the explanation of rules of P ini . According to the first view when the word gau<\/em> (cow) is uttered , it is understood that cowness exist in all cows which are different in colours etc. Because of this\u00a0cowness the cow is comprehended across the time and the place. But this universal must resides in some kind of substratum. The suffix part of the verb conveys the idea of universal. The nouns in a sentence convey the universals of the accessories in a specific way and the universal of the v action conveyed by the verb enters into a relation with them through the particular where they reside. In the particular (<\/span>vyakti<\/em>) there is universal and also the power of accessory. The universal is eternal. But any particular instance of it is a process and not eternal. The pre-fixes( <\/span>upasarga<\/em>) of verb expresses peculiarity of that very action which is universal in nature. Even proper names denote the universals and the permanent aspect of particular persons who are constantly changing from infancy to old age.<\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n

The other view is that all words denote dravya<\/em> or substance, the individual, the concrete, the particular. The dravya<\/em> as presented by word is defined as something which is to be qualified, to be distinguished from other things and which can be referred to by a pronoun. Sometimes a distinction is made between the same colour of two different things, such as the red in rose or the red in the sky during sun-set. Here red is not a quality, it is a substance. The word rose and the sunset qualify it. The universal works as a common distinguishing property. But it is presented in a word as something to be qualified and becomes dravya<\/em>.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

\r\n

After dravya<\/em> quality (gu a<\/em>) is discussed. The question arises here that how different grammatical categories such as suffixes etc bring out the special quality of word. For example the suffix tva<\/em> in the word r japuru atva<\/em> denotes the relation of master and the servant involved in the compound r japuru a.<\/em> Quality gives a name to an entity and distinguishes it from other things. The quality can be expressed in term of degree also. An object without an attribute cannot come within the range of speech. After being qualified by an attribute it can expressed in words. It is difficult to distinguish one from its attribute. Quality is not confined to its own excellence, isolated from the object, not to that object, isolated from its own.<\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n

In Bhart hari\u2019s metaphysics four kinds of power are discussed, such as dik(<\/em> direction),<\/em> s dhana(<\/em>means), kriy (<\/em>action), <\/em>and k la(<\/em>time). <\/em>Among other concepts which are discussed here in the third chapters of V kyapad ya, the concept of action and the concept of k raka<\/em> or s dhana<\/em> are important. In Sanskrit language the verb is the central part of the sentence. Later the whole bdabodha <\/em>system of grammarians depends on verb. To understand a Sanskrit sentence it is necessary to have knowledge of k raka<\/em> system. These two things are very key concepts of Sanskrit grammar.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

According to Bhart hari the concept of action or kriy<\/em> is beyond perception. According to him whenever something, whether completed or uncompleted is designated as something to be completed, it is to be called as an action or kriy<\/em> . It can be inferred. It is explained as a process. A process means something which has parts arranged in a temporal sequence. The parts come into existence to serve one single purpose and they are unified in one act of cognition. The whole action cannot be perceived, but it is grasped from its perceptible parts, like the fire wheel(al tachakra<\/em>). The primary meaning of action is that the moment after which the result occurs. Prior moments of the final one are also parts of the action, because they have the same outcome as their purpose. The Action is in whole is conveyed by root( dh tu<\/em>). The verb pacati<\/em> (cooking) consists of other actions such as taking water into the pot, putting the pot on the fire,\u00a0lighting the fire etc. The action cooking is conceived as a unity. Though some parts of the action are removed from the ultimate result than others, but they all are essential to the production of the ultimate result. While using a verb, one has the ultimate result in the mind. So the name of cooking is used at the very first moment and present tense is used. The root expresses the action as process. This remains its predominant meaning when a ti<\/em> ( verbal suffix) suffix is added to it and formed a verb. The meaning of the root needs accessories for its accomplishments. The association between roots and its accessories is seen as a process.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

In Sanskrit there are six k rakas<\/em> such as kart ,<\/em>(agent) karman<\/em>(object), kara a<\/em>(instrumrntal),<\/em> samprad na<\/em>(dative), ap d na<\/em>(ablative) and adhikara a(<\/em>locative). K raka <\/em>is the relation between verb and the other word in the sentence. Bhart hari names k raka<\/em> as s dhana<\/em>. They are means or they help to accomplish the action. The use of the words depends on the intention of the speaker( vivak<\/em> ) than on the outside reality. The non existence or practically impossible concepts can be expressed through language. For example , if someone uses the sentence such as sth l pacati<\/em>( the pot cooks). Grammatically, semantically this sentence is correct. But actually according to the world knowledge this expression is absurd. But in the world of language, these expressions are quite common. So the whole system of s dhana<\/em> depends on the intentions of speaker. A story teller tells the tales from history where he was not present, the listeners are not present but the whole story is present in the mind of story teller and it is evoked in the mind of hearer also.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

Means or s dhana<\/em> or k raka<\/em> is the power to bring about the action expressed in the sentence. It needs not always physically present in entities. Intellect assumes to be preset there. Powers are latent in substances which become means of action. These powers are revealed at the time of action. Each k raka<\/em> performs some minor actions to bring the accomplishment main action which is conveyed by the sentence. Each k raka<\/em> may be dependent on the main agent (kat<\/em> ) in regard to the main action but it is independent in regard to its own minor action. So a k raka<\/em> is\u00a0that which helps in the accomplishment of an action by assuming different forms. Which helps in a general way is called hetu<\/em>(cause) and which makes something else known is a lak a a<\/em>(sign). The order of explaining k rakas<\/em> or s dhanas<\/em> of Bhart hari is different than P ini\u2019s order. At first he explained karman<\/em>, whereas P ini starts with ap d na. Karman<\/em> is the object of action. It is that what the agent wishes most to reach through his action. It is divided into three as nivartya,<\/em> vik rya, pr pya<\/em>. The first one is such kind of object which is brought into existence. It is not transformation of its material cause. The second one is that kind of object which is the\u00a0modification of its material cause. The third one is that kind of object which can be reached or obtained. After karman kara a<\/em> or instrument is discussed. Instrument is that entity who takes part in the activity ( vy p ra) and after whose activity the result takes place. There need not be only one instrument for an action. All entities are viewed as more instrumental in bringing about the action. Next to it the kat<\/em> (agent) is explained as independent factor. It precedes over other k rakas <\/em>in the speaker\u2019s perspective. Whatever the speaker chooses to present as independent becomes the agent. Sa prad na<\/em> is that k raka<\/em> which participates in action of giving with as recipient or destination of the object of the giving. Ap d na<\/em> is that fixed point from where action of moving away takes place. Adhikara a<\/em> holds the agent or object while helping to accomplish the action. According to grammarians s dhana<\/em> is a power which inheres in objects. This power is also manifestation of an internal reality.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n
you can view video on Bhartrihari: Vakyapadiya<\/strong><\/td>\r\n\"\"<\/a><\/td>\r\n<\/tr>\r\n<\/tbody>\r\n<\/table>","rendered":"
\"epgp<\/a>
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n

Bhart hari was known as a philosopher in Indian intellectual tradition. He has established grammar as a philosophical doctrine through his text V kyapad ya. His personal details are not found in great length. It is said that he existed around 450- 510 A.D. He was mentioned in the travelogue of the Chinese monk I-tsing or Yijing. Along with V kyapad ya a commentary on Pata jali’s Mah bh ya, named as Mah bh yad pik Mah bh k ) is also written by Bhart hari. Bhart hari is also known as the author of atakatraya. But views differ about the identical authorship of these two works. It is said that Bha ik vya is also authored by Bhart hari.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

V kyapad ya is divided in three k as<\/em>(chapters), such as Brahma-k a(Ist Chapter), V kya k a (2nd Chapter) and Prak r a k a( 3rd chapter). The whole text is composed in anu up<\/em> meter, called k rik<\/em> . To explain the text Bhart hari himself wrote a commentary called v tti<\/em>. This commentary is available for first two chapters of V kyapad ya. In the commentary the author is called as Hariv abha. Though the genuine commentary which is mentioned by I-tsing, contained 7000 lokas<\/em> is not available now. In the form of abridgment and adaptation of this commentary through the works of others is available in print form.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

The first two chapters of the text are commented by V abhadeva through his commentary, called Paddhati. Here Paddhati is found along with V tti. But the Paddhati of the v kya- k a\u00a0is not found today, this text is lost now. V abhadeva\u2019s time is around first half of the eighth century.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

On the V kya- k a the commentary of Pu yar ja is available in print today. From his introduction it is understood that there was a commentary of him on the first-k a also, but it is not available. It is inferred that his time was around ninth century, Kashmir.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

On the Prak r a-k a, the commentary, named Prak r a-Prak a of Helar ja is found. His commentary on first- two k as<\/em> is named as abdaprabh . But this particular commentary and some portion of Prak r a-Prak a is lost today. The lost portion is written again by Phullar ja.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Hel r ja\u2019s time is most probably middle of the eleventh century. The text V kyapad ya is not taught today without these commentaries traditionally. To comprehend the text it is necessary to know these commentaries also.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Abdabrahman<\/strong><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

As it is mentioned earlier also the first chapter of V kyapad ya is known as Brahma-k a. Through the first four k rik s<\/em> Bhart hari establishes the concept of abdabrahma. In this theory the whole world turns (vivartate<\/em>) or manifested into the meaning from the Brahman who does not have any beginning or end, who is all-pervaded, whose very essence is word. Brahman is a principle beyond all conceptual constructions. The manifestation of Brahman appears as temporal and spatially ordered. But The Brahman remains unaffected. So the world is created from Brahman, but he did not create it. The world is manifested. This manifestation is understood linguistically and the Brahman is to be considered as permanent syllable. This manifestation is like a bubble. It can go back to its origin. The permanent letter is manifested\u00a0through the meaning and this meaning is the whole world. Brahman is single, but appeared as many due to its various powers. The powers and Brahman appears to be different, but Brahman is not different from its powers. The universal and particular are not different from each other. But they appear different, when they assume the form of different objects which figure in them. The six modifications, such as birth (j yate<\/em>), existence ( asti<\/em> ), transformation(vipari amate),<\/em> growing( vardhate<\/em>), decay( apak yate<\/em>), destroy( vina yati<\/em>) are the source of the different states among a life. These modifications depend on time (k la akti<\/em>) which is the power of Brahman. Other powers depend on the independent power of time. These modifications have sequential occurrences. This sequence is marked with the scale of time. Through this process the circle of existence works. The single seed of all things have three different characters. It is the experience (bhokt<\/em> ), experienced ( bhokta<\/em>) and experience( bhoga<\/em> ). Here the term bhoga<\/em> is interpreted as the experience of happiness, sadness etc. The one Brahman is the substratum of powers. These powers cannot be defined either identical or different from it. These can be explained as the state of dream. In the dream one can experience different things at one time, but those experiences do not have any existence in reality other than dream. These three different things are actually manifestation of Brahman. Thus Bhart hari established the theory of abdabrahman<\/em>.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

After establishing the theory of abdabrahman<\/em> Bhart hari proceeds to establish Grammar as the subject which not only helps to get the correct knowledge of vedic words and as well as laukika<\/em> ( language in general), as the greatest way to attain salvation( mok a<\/em>). He also considers grammar as agama- stra<\/em> or sm ti<\/em>.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

The Theory of Sphoa<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

The term spho a<\/em> is explained as sphu yate artha yasm t<\/em> i.e from which meaning is blossomed. According to grammarians words convey meaning. Now the problem is where this meaning does reside or what the substratum of meaning is. The meaning can be resided on letters. But letters are perishable. The meaning which is eternal cannot be stayed in the perishable object. To comprehend a word each and every letter is necessary. It is not the case that from the first letter itself the meaning is comprehended, then other letters of the word would be redundant. If it is said that the arrangement of letter holds the meaning, then there would be question that how an arrangement of perishable object can become eternal. Because in a word letters come one by one, and when one letter is uttered and destroyed, then only another letter could come into existence. Considering these issues grammarians postulate a meaning bearing entity, other than word (pada<\/em>) and the letter (var a<\/em>). This entity is called spho a<\/em>. This spho a<\/em> is eternal and according to the grammarians this spho a<\/em> is abda<\/em>. This abda<\/em>, it\u2019s meaning and their relation is eternal (nitya<\/em>).<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

The spho a<\/em> is an abstract idea of word which resides in speaker\u2019s intellect. It is mental linguistic form ( budhistha\u00a0\u00a0 abda<\/em> ). Bhart hari explains the nature of spho a<\/em> as the fire which resides in the churning \u2013wood. The way this fire is the cause of the other fire, in the similar way the word which is in the speaker\u2019s mind becomes the cause of the different expressive words. Now the question arises how one can comprehend spho a<\/em> or how it is grasped by hearer. It is explained that spho a<\/em> is manifested through sound ( dhvani)<\/em>. Dhvani<\/em> is manifester ( vya jaka\/<\/em> abhivya jaka<\/em>) and spho a <\/em>is manifested(vya ga<\/em>).\u00a0 At first spho a <\/em>is conceived in the mind. Then it is applied to some meaning. After that it is manifested by the sounds which are produced by the articulatory organs. The relation between spho a<\/em> and sound is like the reflection. If there is reflection of moon in the water, then spho a<\/em> is compared with the moon. The water is compared with sound and the reflection is explained as how the spho a<\/em> is manifested to the hearer.\u00a0 If there are some ripples in the water then the reflection gets affected, not the object whose reflection is on the water. The spho a<\/em> does not have any sequence or any parts. It is the whole like\u00a0abdabrahman<\/em>. But sound is produced in a sequence and also consists of parts. As spho a <\/em>is manifested through sound, it appears that spho a<\/em> has the quality of sound. Spho a<\/em> appears to have sequence and parts but in reality it is sequence-less and part-less. The process is similar to the process of painting. A painting is come to existence through different stages of painter\u2019s brush. But the painting is grasped as whole. Similarly the process of grasping spho a<\/em> can have different sequences but it is grasped as whole.\u00a0 The nature of spho a<\/em> is like the nature of knowledge. Knowledge cognises other object, but it itself is cognised with its object. Thus spho a <\/em>also cognises the meaning and is cognised through sound.\u00a0 As light has two powers, that of being revealed, and that of being revealer, linguistic- forms have also two distinct powers like light. Linguistic-forms convey meaning when they themselves become contents of awareness.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Due to this when the nature of linguistic-forms is not understood, question arises \u201cwhat did you say?\u201d These two abstracted powers of linguistic-forms becomes the reason towards the grasping of meaning. Though these two powers are not different to each other, but in practice they appear as different.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

The sound (dhvani<\/em>) is divided into primary(pr k ta<\/em>) and secondary(vaik ta<\/em>). The primary sound is the cause of the spho a.<\/em> It appears that as if primary sound and spho a<\/em> is indifferent. Whereas the secondary sound determines the speed of spho a<\/em> . The secondary sound cannot bring change in the nature of spho a<\/em>, but it can determine the difference in the continuity of perception.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Later grammarians divided spho a<\/em> into eight different categories. They are: var\u00a0 aspho a, pada\u00a0<\/em>spho a, v kyaspho a, akha apadaspho a, akha av kyaspho a<\/em>, var aj tispho a<\/em>, padaj tispho a, v kyaj tispho a<\/em>. Bhart hari seems to support the view of akha av kyaspho a. <\/em>Grammarians accept the undivided sentence as the unit of meaning.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

In Bhart hari\u2019s philosophy speech(v k<\/em>) has three stages in the process of manifestation, such as pa yant , madhyam <\/em>, and vaikhar <\/em>This stage is not expressed linguistically. In this stage spho a<\/em> exists, but the process of articulation yet to be started. This level is abstract linguistical level. The next stage of speech manifestation is madhyam <\/em>Though psychological in nature and can be comprehended by the intellect only, but the utterance in phonological pattern takes place here. This stage corresponds to pr k ta-dhvani<\/em> The longness or shortness of letters are decided here. The third stage is called as vaikhar<\/em> which is uttered by speaker and is heard by listener. This is stage of vaik ta-dhvani<\/em>. In this stage the rapidity of utterances differ according to the pronunciation of the speaker. At the level of listener when he comprehend the meaning from linguistical utterances of speaker the dhvani<\/em> takes him back to again to the spho a<\/em>. As it is mentioned at the beginning that the world is the\u00a0manifestation of in the form of meaning like a bubble, the sound can go back to its original form again.<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

Vkyak<\/strong>a<\/strong><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

After establishing and the theory of spho a<\/em> Bhart hari proceeds towards sentence. According to Bhart hari sentence and the sentence meaning are indivisible units. Communication takes place through sentence only, not by individual words. In order to establish his view he mentions the views on sentences from other school of philosophy. He refutes the views of others, especially of Mim sakas. Though the name of any particular mim sakas<\/em> is not mentioned. At the beginning of the 2nd chapter he has also mentioned the eight ways to define sentence according to the view of logicians, such as- as verb( khy ta<\/em>), as a collection of linguistics forms( abda-sa gh ta<\/em>), as the proper universal(j ti<\/em> )that occurs in the collection, as a single\u00a0partless linguistic forms, as a sequence of words, as what comes together in the intellect (<\/span>budhyaanusa h ti<\/em>), as the first words, as all the words severally possessing expectancy for each other. The definition of K ty yana (the author of <\/span>v rttika<\/em>) is explained as a sentence is that where a verb exists along with the indeclinable, case words, and qualifiers. On the other hand according to <\/span>mim sakas<\/em> a sentence is that in which the words have mutual expectancy which does not require additional words has action as its principle element, has other subordinate words and is a single linguistic form. This principle element is explained as <\/span>bh van .<\/em> The view of <\/span>mim sakas <\/em>is presented in five different ways. According to them that the sentence is a collection (<\/span>sa hata)<\/em> of words. A word which is outside of a sentence has certain meaning. When it enters in a sentence it conveys the same meaning, neither more nor less. The words get-together and lead to a sentential meaning. This sentential meaning is a new meaning, over and above the meanings of individual world. This meaning is called <\/span>sa sarga<\/em> that is mutual connection. Like the number ten exists in all the ten objects which are counted, taken together,\u00a0<\/span>not in each of them. The word meaning is universal, capable of denoting all particulars. In the presence of another words, the meaning becomes restricted to one single particular. In that state it is called sentence meaning.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

From another view \u2013point sentence is not verbal. Because in comes in a sequence and sequence cannot comes under the perception (hearing is also one kind of perception). Sequence is a property of time and it is superimposed on the individual words. In this view also the sentence meaning consists of connection of individual words. It emphasises on the sequence, not the individual words which are heard. The sentence meaning does not come from individual words, but from their meanings which are incomplete and require one another.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Some mim sakas<\/em> think that the verb is the sentence. Verb denotes action. The accomplishment of the action is also comprehended from verb. Thus the meaning is completed. So the verb can be considered as sentence.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Another view is called as anvit bhidh nav da<\/em>. Here the connection with the meaning of other words is part of the meaning of a word. Word- meanings are connected. This connection is experienced by the users of the sentences. The very first word conveys the meaning as connected with other words. The first word conveys only the abstracted unconnected universal. This universal becomes connected with the other the meaning which emerges from connected universal. This is called sentence meaning.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

These views are refuted by Bhart hari. The sentence is indivisible. It can be divisible when it is manifested through utterance. But before manifestation, it resides in speaker\u2019s mind as indivisible, complete entity. According to him the meaning is comprehended in flash of understanding of the meaning of the whole sentence. It is quite different than the meaning of an individual word. This flash or intuition is described as pratibh<\/em> . It connects together the\u00a0meanings conveyed by the different words of a sentence. It relates the sentence as a whole on which it rests. Even it exists in animals also. Because of this pratibh<\/em> the birds and the animals engage in their natural activities without any instruction. Pratibh<\/em> includes intelligence, intuitive knowledge and the spontaneous activities of new-born babies. Bhart hari tells six varities of pratibh <\/em>such as svabh va(<\/em>natural), cara a(<\/em>vedic), abhy sa(<\/em>through practice), yoga(<\/em>yogic), ad a<\/em>(through invisible factors) and upap dita<\/em>(through instruction or intervention) The chief characteristic of sentence is the completeness. This completeness does not depend on any particular number of words in a sentence. When a verb expresses an action or process, with other words as accessories, a sentence is considered to be complete. Though, to serve practical purposes Bhart hari accepts the splitting of sentence. But according to him these parts are not\u00a0real, they are all imaginable. Grammar does the analysis for understanding of ordinary mortals. This analysis can be used by others to serve their purpose. As <\/span>mi<\/em> can use this analysis to interpret vedic injunctions.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

The nature of sentence is whole. Though the meaning of a sentence and it\u2019s form have an external aspect, but actually they are inner quality. They are derived from the Brahman<\/em>. They are itself is a spark of that abdabrahman<\/em> which represents the total knowledge. The meaning is manifested. Before the meaning of sentence is fully grasped, some other elements, such as individual words and they are meanings are cognised. But they are not real. They are the means by which the final clear cognition takes place.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Prakra-K<\/strong>a<\/strong><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

After establishing abdabrahman<\/em> and the sentence and sentence meaning as a part of it Bhart hari moves towards the discussion of grammatical analysis. Each grammatical category is divided in sub-chapters and named as sammudde a<\/em>, such as j ti-sammudde a, dravya-sammudde a, gu a- sammudde a, dik- sammudde a, s dhana- sammudde a, kriy –\u00a0<\/em>sammudde a, k la- sammudde a, puru a- sammudde a, sa khy -sammudde a, li ga-sammudde a, v tti- sammudde a <\/em>etc.<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

 <\/p>\n

The first point among these is whether the word and its meaning is universal (j ti<\/em>) or substance(dravya)<\/em>. Grammarians in general accept both. First they have accepted universal. After that they have accepted particular also. Here also Bhart hari mentions several views on the topic. V japy yana thinks that all words and the parts of the words denote the universal. On the other hand Vy i thinks that they denote substance. These views were placed with the explanation of rules of P ini . According to the first view when the word gau<\/em> (cow) is uttered , it is understood that cowness exist in all cows which are different in colours etc. Because of this\u00a0cowness the cow is comprehended across the time and the place. But this universal must resides in some kind of substratum. The suffix part of the verb conveys the idea of universal. The nouns in a sentence convey the universals of the accessories in a specific way and the universal of the v action conveyed by the verb enters into a relation with them through the particular where they reside. In the particular (<\/span>vyakti<\/em>) there is universal and also the power of accessory. The universal is eternal. But any particular instance of it is a process and not eternal. The pre-fixes( <\/span>upasarga<\/em>) of verb expresses peculiarity of that very action which is universal in nature. Even proper names denote the universals and the permanent aspect of particular persons who are constantly changing from infancy to old age.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

The other view is that all words denote dravya<\/em> or substance, the individual, the concrete, the particular. The dravya<\/em> as presented by word is defined as something which is to be qualified, to be distinguished from other things and which can be referred to by a pronoun. Sometimes a distinction is made between the same colour of two different things, such as the red in rose or the red in the sky during sun-set. Here red is not a quality, it is a substance. The word rose and the sunset qualify it. The universal works as a common distinguishing property. But it is presented in a word as something to be qualified and becomes dravya<\/em>.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n

After dravya<\/em> quality (gu a<\/em>) is discussed. The question arises here that how different grammatical categories such as suffixes etc bring out the special quality of word. For example the suffix tva<\/em> in the word r japuru atva<\/em> denotes the relation of master and the servant involved in the compound r japuru a.<\/em> Quality gives a name to an entity and distinguishes it from other things. The quality can be expressed in term of degree also. An object without an attribute cannot come within the range of speech. After being qualified by an attribute it can expressed in words. It is difficult to distinguish one from its attribute. Quality is not confined to its own excellence, isolated from the object, not to that object, isolated from its own.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

In Bhart hari\u2019s metaphysics four kinds of power are discussed, such as dik(<\/em> direction),<\/em> s dhana(<\/em>means), kriy (<\/em>action), <\/em>and k la(<\/em>time). <\/em>Among other concepts which are discussed here in the third chapters of V kyapad ya, the concept of action and the concept of k raka<\/em> or s dhana<\/em> are important. In Sanskrit language the verb is the central part of the sentence. Later the whole bdabodha <\/em>system of grammarians depends on verb. To understand a Sanskrit sentence it is necessary to have knowledge of k raka<\/em> system. These two things are very key concepts of Sanskrit grammar.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

According to Bhart hari the concept of action or kriy<\/em> is beyond perception. According to him whenever something, whether completed or uncompleted is designated as something to be completed, it is to be called as an action or kriy<\/em> . It can be inferred. It is explained as a process. A process means something which has parts arranged in a temporal sequence. The parts come into existence to serve one single purpose and they are unified in one act of cognition. The whole action cannot be perceived, but it is grasped from its perceptible parts, like the fire wheel(al tachakra<\/em>). The primary meaning of action is that the moment after which the result occurs. Prior moments of the final one are also parts of the action, because they have the same outcome as their purpose. The Action is in whole is conveyed by root( dh tu<\/em>). The verb pacati<\/em> (cooking) consists of other actions such as taking water into the pot, putting the pot on the fire,\u00a0lighting the fire etc. The action cooking is conceived as a unity. Though some parts of the action are removed from the ultimate result than others, but they all are essential to the production of the ultimate result. While using a verb, one has the ultimate result in the mind. So the name of cooking is used at the very first moment and present tense is used. The root expresses the action as process. This remains its predominant meaning when a ti<\/em> ( verbal suffix) suffix is added to it and formed a verb. The meaning of the root needs accessories for its accomplishments. The association between roots and its accessories is seen as a process.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

In Sanskrit there are six k rakas<\/em> such as kart ,<\/em>(agent) karman<\/em>(object), kara a<\/em>(instrumrntal),<\/em> samprad na<\/em>(dative), ap d na<\/em>(ablative) and adhikara a(<\/em>locative). K raka <\/em>is the relation between verb and the other word in the sentence. Bhart hari names k raka<\/em> as s dhana<\/em>. They are means or they help to accomplish the action. The use of the words depends on the intention of the speaker( vivak<\/em> ) than on the outside reality. The non existence or practically impossible concepts can be expressed through language. For example , if someone uses the sentence such as sth l pacati<\/em>( the pot cooks). Grammatically, semantically this sentence is correct. But actually according to the world knowledge this expression is absurd. But in the world of language, these expressions are quite common. So the whole system of s dhana<\/em> depends on the intentions of speaker. A story teller tells the tales from history where he was not present, the listeners are not present but the whole story is present in the mind of story teller and it is evoked in the mind of hearer also.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Means or s dhana<\/em> or k raka<\/em> is the power to bring about the action expressed in the sentence. It needs not always physically present in entities. Intellect assumes to be preset there. Powers are latent in substances which become means of action. These powers are revealed at the time of action. Each k raka<\/em> performs some minor actions to bring the accomplishment main action which is conveyed by the sentence. Each k raka<\/em> may be dependent on the main agent (kat<\/em> ) in regard to the main action but it is independent in regard to its own minor action. So a k raka<\/em> is\u00a0that which helps in the accomplishment of an action by assuming different forms. Which helps in a general way is called hetu<\/em>(cause) and which makes something else known is a lak a a<\/em>(sign). The order of explaining k rakas<\/em> or s dhanas<\/em> of Bhart hari is different than P ini\u2019s order. At first he explained karman<\/em>, whereas P ini starts with ap d na. Karman<\/em> is the object of action. It is that what the agent wishes most to reach through his action. It is divided into three as nivartya,<\/em> vik rya, pr pya<\/em>. The first one is such kind of object which is brought into existence. It is not transformation of its material cause. The second one is that kind of object which is the\u00a0modification of its material cause. The third one is that kind of object which can be reached or obtained. After karman kara a<\/em> or instrument is discussed. Instrument is that entity who takes part in the activity ( vy p ra) and after whose activity the result takes place. There need not be only one instrument for an action. All entities are viewed as more instrumental in bringing about the action. Next to it the kat<\/em> (agent) is explained as independent factor. It precedes over other k rakas <\/em>in the speaker\u2019s perspective. Whatever the speaker chooses to present as independent becomes the agent. Sa prad na<\/em> is that k raka<\/em> which participates in action of giving with as recipient or destination of the object of the giving. Ap d na<\/em> is that fixed point from where action of moving away takes place. Adhikara a<\/em> holds the agent or object while helping to accomplish the action. According to grammarians s dhana<\/em> is a power which inheres in objects. This power is also manifestation of an internal reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
you can view video on Bhartrihari: Vakyapadiya<\/strong><\/td>\n\"\"<\/a><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n","protected":false},"author":11,"menu_order":8,"template":"","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"pb_show_title":"on","pb_short_title":"","pb_subtitle":"","pb_authors":["dr-manji-bhadra"],"pb_section_license":""},"chapter-type":[],"contributor":[61],"license":[],"class_list":["post-70","chapter","type-chapter","status-publish","hentry","contributor-dr-manji-bhadra"],"part":3,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/ebooks.inflibnet.ac.in\/engp11\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/70","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/ebooks.inflibnet.ac.in\/engp11\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/ebooks.inflibnet.ac.in\/engp11\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/chapter"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ebooks.inflibnet.ac.in\/engp11\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/11"}],"version-history":[{"count":8,"href":"https:\/\/ebooks.inflibnet.ac.in\/engp11\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/70\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":272,"href":"https:\/\/ebooks.inflibnet.ac.in\/engp11\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/70\/revisions\/272"}],"part":[{"href":"https:\/\/ebooks.inflibnet.ac.in\/engp11\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/parts\/3"}],"metadata":[{"href":"https:\/\/ebooks.inflibnet.ac.in\/engp11\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/70\/metadata\/"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/ebooks.inflibnet.ac.in\/engp11\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=70"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"chapter-type","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ebooks.inflibnet.ac.in\/engp11\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapter-type?post=70"},{"taxonomy":"contributor","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ebooks.inflibnet.ac.in\/engp11\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/contributor?post=70"},{"taxonomy":"license","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ebooks.inflibnet.ac.in\/engp11\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/license?post=70"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}