Paper: 11; Module No: 07: E Text

(A) Personal Details:

Role Name Affiliation

Principal Investigator: Prof. Tutun Mukherjee University of Hyderabad

Paper Coordinator: Dr. Bhandaram Vani S. N. Vanita Mahavidalaya,

Hyderabad

Content Writer: Dr. Manji Bhadra Bankura University

Content Reviewer: Dr. Bhandaram Vani S. N. Vanita Mahavidalaya,

Hyderabad

Language Editor: Dr. Mrinmoy Pramanick University of Calcutta

(B) Description of Module:

Items Description of Module

Subject Name: English

Paper No & Name: Paper 11: Indian Poetics

Module Id/No: 07

Module Name: Bhartrihari: Vakyapadiya

Pre-requisites:

Objectives:

Key Words: Bhartrihari, Vakyapadiya, Sphota

Bharthari was known as a philosopher in Indian intellectual tradition. He has established

grammar as a philosophical doctrine through his text Vkyapadya. 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 Vkyapadya a commentary on

Patajali's Mahbhya, named as MahbhyadpikMahbhk) is also written by

Bharthari. Bharthari is also known as the author of atakatraya. But views differ about the

identical authorship of these two works. It is said that Bhaikvya is also authored by Bharthari.

Vkyapadya is divided in three kas(chapters), such as Brahma-ka(Ist Chapter), Vkya

ka (2nd

Chapter) and Prakra ka( 3rd

chapter). The whole text is composed in anuup

meter, called krik. To explain the text Bharthari himself wrote a commentary called vtti. This

commentary is available for first two chapters of Vkyapadya. In the commentary the author is

called as Harivabha. Though the genuine commentary which is mentioned by I-tsing, contained

7000 lokas is not available now. In the form of abridgment and adaptation of this commentary

through the works of others is available in print form.

The first two chapters of the text are commented by Vabhadeva through his commentary,

called Paddhati. Here Paddhati is found along with Vtti. But the Paddhati of the vkya- ka

is not found today, this text is lost now. Vabhadeva’s time is around first half of the eighth

century.

On the Vkya- ka the commentary of Puyarja is available in print today. From his

introduction it is understood that there was a commentary of him on the first-ka also, but it is

not available. It is inferred that his time was around ninth century, Kashmir.

On the Prakra-ka, the commentary, named Prakra-Praka of Helarja is found. His

commentary on first- two kas is named as abdaprabh. But this particular commentary and

some portion of Prakra-Praka is lost today. The lost portion is written again by Phullarja.

Helrja’s time is most probably middle of the eleventh century. The text Vkyapadya is not

taught today without these commentaries traditionally. To comprehend the text it is necessary to

know these commentaries also.

abdabrahman

As it is mentioned earlier also the first chapter of Vkyapadya is known as Brahma-ka.

Through the first four kriks Bharthari establishes the concept of abdabrahma. In this theory

the whole world turns (vivartate) 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

through 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 (jyate), existence ( asti ), transformation(vipariamate),

growing( vardhate), decay( apakyate), destroy( vinayati) are the source of the different states

among a life. These modifications depend on time (klaakti) 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), experienced ( bhokta) and experience( bhoga ). Here the term bhoga 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 Bharthari established the theory of abdabrahman.

After establishing the theory of abdabrahman Bharthari proceeds to establish Grammar as the

subject which not only helps to get the correct knowledge of vedic words and as well as laukika (

language in general), as the greatest way to attain salvation( moka). He also considers grammar

as agama-stra or smti.

The Theory of Sphoa

The term sphoa is explained as sphuyate artha yasmt 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) and the letter (vara). This entity is called sphoa. This sphoa is eternal and according to

the grammarians this sphoa is abda. This abda, it’s meaning and their relation is eternal

(nitya).

The sphoa is an abstract idea of word which resides in speaker’s intellect. It is mental linguistic

form ( budhistha abda). Bharthari explains the nature of sphoa as the fire which resides in

the churning –wood. The way this fire is the cause of the other fire, in the similar way the word

which is in the speaker’s mind becomes the cause of the different expressive words. Now the

question arises how one can comprehend sphoa or how it is grasped by hearer. It is explained

that sphoa is manifested through sound ( dhvani). Dhvani is manifester ( vyajaka/

abhivyajaka) and sphoa is manifested(vyaga). At first sphoa 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 sphoa and sound is like the reflection. If there is

reflection of moon in the water, then sphoa is compared with the moon. The water is compared

with sound and the reflection is explained as how the sphoa is manifested to the hearer. If there

are some ripples in the water then the reflection gets affected, not the object whose reflection is

on the water. The sphoa does not have any sequence or any parts. It is the whole like

abdabrahman. But sound is produced in a sequence and also consists of parts. As sphoa is

manifested through sound, it appears that sphoa has the quality of sound. Sphoa 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’s

brush. But the painting is grasped as whole. Similarly the process of grasping sphoa can have

different sequences but it is grasped as whole. The nature of sphoa is like the nature of

knowledge. Knowledge cognises other object, but it itself is cognised with its object. Thus

sphoa also cognises the meaning and is cognised through sound. 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.

Due to this when the nature of linguistic-forms is not understood, question arises “what did you

say?” 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.

The sound (dhvani) is divided into primary(prkta) and secondary(vaikta). The primary sound

is the cause of the sphoa. It appears that as if primary sound and sphoa is indifferent. Whereas

the secondary sound determines the speed of sphoa . The secondary sound cannot bring change

in the nature of sphoa, but it can determine the difference in the continuity of perception.

Later grammarians divided sphoa into eight different categories. They are: varasphoa, pada

sphoa, vkyasphoa, akhaapadasphoa, akhaavkyasphoa, varajtisphoa,

padajtisphoa, vkyajtisphoa. Bharthari seems to support the view of akhaavkyasphoa.

Grammarians accept the undivided sentence as the unit of meaning.

In Bharthari’s philosophy speech(vk) has three stages in the process of manifestation, such as

payant, madhyam, and vaikhar This stage

is not expressed linguistically. In this stage sphoa exists, but the process of articulation yet to be

started. This level is abstract linguistical level. The next stage of speech manifestation is

madhyamThough psychological in nature and can be comprehended by the intellect only, but

the utterance in phonological pattern takes place here. This stage corresponds to prkta-dhvani

The longness or shortness of letters are decided here. The third stage is called as vaikhar which

is uttered by speaker and is heard by listener. This is stage of vaikta-dhvani. 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

takes him back to again to the sphoa. As it is mentioned at the beginning that the world is the

manifestation of in the form of meaning like a bubble, the sound can go back to

its original form again.

Vkyaka

After establishing and the theory of sphoa Bharthari proceeds towards sentence.

According to Bharthari 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 Mimsakas. Though the name of any particular mimsakas 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(khyta), as a collection of linguistics

forms(abda-saghta), as the proper universal(jti )that occurs in the collection, as a single

partless linguistic forms, as a sequence of words, as what comes together in the intellect

(budhyaanusahti), as the first words, as all the words severally possessing expectancy for each

other. The definition of Ktyyana (the author of vrttika) 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 mimsakas 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 bhvan. The view of

mimsakas is presented in five different ways. According to them that the sentence is a

collection (sahata) 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 sasarga that is mutual

connection. Like the number ten exists in all the ten objects which are counted, taken together,

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.

From another view –point 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 (. This view is

known as abhihitnvayav

Some mimsakas 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.

Another view is called as anvitbhidhnavda. 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.

These views are refuted by Bharthari. The sentence is indivisible. It can be divisible when it is

manifested through utterance. But before manifestation, it resides in speaker’s 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 . It connects together the

meanings 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 pratibhthe birds and the animals

engage in their natural activities without any instruction. Pratibhincludes intelligence, intuitive

knowledge and the spontaneous activities of new-born babies. Bharthari tells six varities of

pratibh such as svabhva(natural), caraa(vedic), abhysa(through practice), yoga(yogic),

ada(through invisible factors) and upapdita(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 Bharthari accepts the splitting of sentence. But according to him these parts are not

real, 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 mican use this analysis

to interpret vedic injunctions.

The nature of sentence is whole. Though the meaning of a sentence and it’s form have an

external aspect, but actually they are inner quality. They are derived from the Brahman. They are

itself is a spark of that abdabrahman 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.

Prakra-Ka

After establishing abdabrahman and the sentence and sentence meaning as a part of it

Bharthari moves towards the discussion of grammatical analysis. Each grammatical category is

divided in sub-chapters and named as sammuddea, such as jti-sammuddea, dravya-

sammuddea, gua- sammuddea, dik- sammuddea, sdhana- sammuddea, kriy-

sammuddea, kla- sammuddea, purua- sammuddea, sakhy-sammuddea, liga-

sammuddea, vtti- sammuddea etc.

The first point among these is whether the word and its meaning is universal (jti) or

substance(dravya). Grammarians in general accept both. First they have accepted universal.

After that they have accepted particular also. Here also Bharthari mentions several views on the

topic. Vjapyyana thinks that all words and the parts of the words denote the universal. On the

other hand Vyi thinks that they denote substance. These views were placed with the

explanation of rules of Pini . According to the first view when the word gau(cow) is uttered ,

it is understood that cowness exist in all cows which are different in colours etc. Because of this

cowness 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 (vyakti) 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( upasarga)

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.

The other view is that all words denote dravya or substance, the individual, the concrete, the

particular. The dravya 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.

After dravya quality (gua) 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 in the word rjapuruatva denotes the relation of master and the servant involved

in the compound rjapurua. 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.

In Bharthari’s metaphysics four kinds of power are discussed, such as dik( direction),

sdhana(means), kriy(action), and kla(time). Among other concepts which are discussed here

in the third chapters of Vkyapadya, the concept of action and the concept of kraka or sdhana

are important. In Sanskrit language the verb is the central part of the sentence. Later the whole

bdabodha system of grammarians depends on verb. To understand a Sanskrit sentence it is

necessary to have knowledge of kraka system. These two things are very key concepts of

Sanskrit grammar.

According to Bharthari the concept of action or kriyis 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. 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(altachakra). 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( dhtu). The verb pacati

(cooking) consists of other actions such as taking water into the pot, putting the pot on the fire,

lighting 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( 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.

In Sanskrit there are six krakas such as kart,(agent) karman(object), karaa(instrumrntal),

sampradna(dative), apdna(ablative) and adhikaraa(locative). Kraka is the relation

between verb and the other word in the sentence. Bharthari names kraka as sdhana. They are

means or they help to accomplish the action. The use of the words depends on the intention of

the speaker( vivak ) 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

sthl pacati( 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 sdhana 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.

Means or sdhana or kraka 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 kraka performs some minor actions to bring the accomplishment main action

which is conveyed by the sentence. Each kraka may be dependent on the main agent (kat) in

regard to the main action but it is independent in regard to its own minor action. So a kraka is

that which helps in the accomplishment of an action by assuming different forms. Which helps in

a general way is called hetu(cause) and which makes something else known is a lakaa(sign).

The order of explaining krakas or sdhanas of Bharthari is different than Pini’s order. At

first he explained karman, whereas Pini starts with apdna. Karman 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,

vikrya, prpya. 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

modification of its material cause. The third one is that kind of object which can be reached or

obtained. After karman karaa or instrument is discussed. Instrument is that entity who takes

part in the activity ( vypra) 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 (agent) is explained as independent factor. It precedes over other

krakas in the speaker’s perspective. Whatever the speaker chooses to present as independent

becomes the agent. Sapradna is that kraka which participates in action of giving with as

recipient or destination of the object of the giving. Apdna is that fixed point from where action

of moving away takes place. Adhikaraa holds the agent or object while helping to accomplish

the action. According to grammarians sdhana is a power which inheres in objects. This power

is also manifestation of an internal reality.