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 3.3.27
Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation of verse 3.3.27:
असाधिका प्रतिज्ञेति नेयमेवाभिधीयते ।
यथा तथास्य धर्मोऽपि नैव कश्चित् प्रतीयते ॥ २७ ॥asādhikā pratijñeti neyamevābhidhīyate |
yathā tathāsya dharmo'pi naiva kaścit pratīyate || 27 ||27. The statement: “a mere assertion does not prove the point” does not apply to that statement itself. Similarly, the property (incorrectness) is not understood as applicable to this sentence.
Commentary
[It is true that incorrectness cannot be attributed to the meaning of the sentence sarvam mithyā bravīmi without its giving up its expressivity (vācakatva) and becoming the expressed (vācya). But incorrectness may be attributed to it in another way. After all, it is also one of the sentences uttered by the person in question and if all that the person says is wrong, this sentence would also be wrong. To meet this objection, another illustration is given. Sādhyanirdeśaḥ pratijñā sādhanāṅgam na bhavati is a statement of the Bauddhas which means: “A statement of the thing to be proved is what is called assertion and it cannot become part of the proof.” This does not apply to this very statement. Otherwise, it cannot convey what is intended to be conveyed. Therefore, the statement that assertion is not part of the proof does not apply to this assertion. It applies to others. In the same way, the incorrectness mentioned in the sentence; ‘sarvam mithyā bravīmi’ does not apply, to that- sentence itself. All this reasoning applies to the word avācya as applied to samavāya.]