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 1.95
Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation of verse 1.95:
न चानित्येष्वभिव्यक्तिर्नियमेन व्यवस्थिता ।
आश्रयैरपि नित्यानां जातीनां व्यक्तिरिष्यते ॥ ९५ ॥na cānityeṣvabhivyaktirniyamena vyavasthitā |
āśrayairapi nityānāṃ jātīnāṃ vyaktiriṣyate || 95 ||95. Manifestation is not necessarily confined to that which is transitory. The manifestation of the eternal universals by their substrata is admitted.1
Commentary
Some put forward the fact of manifestation itself as a reason for concluding that it is non-eternal, as follows—The word is non-eternal, because it is manifested, like a jar. It js seen that non-eternal objects like a jar are manifested by a lamp etc. The word is manifested by sounds;therefore, it is non-eternal. If it is held that it is not manifested, that would mean that it is produced. That also makes it non-eternal. Now, to those who hold that universals exist and that they are eternal, it is answered; the reason given (in the above syllogism) is not a real reason, because it is seen both ways. Against those who hold nothing to be eternal and, therefore, maintain that the invalidity of the reason is not proved, those who consider the word to be eternal declare even before them that the invalidity is not established. How? Against the opponent (one who does believe in eternality) the reason “because it is manifested” is not a good reason because it is doubtful and would lead to option and as the other incidental properties also would be attributed, the discussion would lead to regressus ad infinitum.2
Notes
1. Verses 95 to 101 answer objections to the manifestation theory. The objections are made clear in the Vṛtti.
2. Prasaṅgo vānuṣaṅgiṇām ityanavasthā syāttarkasya. If the word is said to be non-etemal, because it is manifested, like a jar by the light of a lamp, why not attribute the other properties of the jar, like visibility also to the word? There would then be no end to the process (anavasthā)]