Vakyapadiya of Bhartrihari
by K. A. Subramania Iyer | 1965 | 391,768 words
The English translation of the Vakyapadiya by Bhartrihari including commentary extracts and notes. The Vakyapadiya is an ancient Sanskrit text dealing with the philosophy of language. Bhartrhari authored this book in three parts and propounds his theory of Sphotavada (sphota-vada) which understands language as consisting of bursts of sounds conveyi...
This book contains Sanskrit text which you should never take for granted as transcription mistakes are always possible. Always confer with the final source and/or manuscript.
Verse 3.7.101-102
Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation of verse 3.7.101-102:
प्रागन्यतः शक्तिलाभान्न्यग्भावापादनादपि ।
तदधीनप्रवृत्तित्वात् प्रवृत्तानां निवर्तनात् ॥ १०१ ॥
अदृष्टत्वात् प्रतिनिधेः प्रविवेके च दर्शनात् ।
आरादप्युपकारित्वे स्वातन्त्र्यं कर्तुरुच्यते ॥ १०२ ॥prāganyataḥ śaktilābhānnyagbhāvāpādanādapi |
tadadhīnapravṛttitvāt pravṛttānāṃ nivartanāt || 101 ||
adṛṣṭatvāt pratinidheḥ praviveke ca darśanāt |
ārādapyupakāritve svātantryaṃ karturucyate || 102 ||101-102. The independence of the agent is accepted for the following reasons: (1) because the agent acquires his capacity before (the operation of the other accessories) and from some other source (2) because he keeps the others subordinate (to himself) (3) because the others act according to his direction (4) because the agent can hold back the others already engaged (5) because no substitute for him is seen (6) because he is present even when the others are not, even though he helps in the accomplishment of the action from a distance.
Commentary
The agent is now going to be dealt with.
[Read verse 101-102 above]
[The agent has been defined as svatantra (independent) in relation to the other accessories. It is the agent who employs the accessories and not vice-versa. It is like this. The agent desires the fruit of the action and sets about collecting the accessories. So he is free or independent from the very beginning. The other accessories are also relatively free in regard to their role but only after the agent enters the scene. In any case they are under the control of the agent. He can restrain any accessory who goes too far. There is always an agent, whether the other accessories are there or not. If there is no agent, there can be no substitute for him or rather if anybody else does the action, he would not be called a substitute as he can do the action on his own, being independent. But if any of the other accessories is not available, they can be replaced.]
It cannot be objected that an inanimate object cannot have these properties and, therefore, cannot become an agent.