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 3.7.164-165
Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation of verse 3.7.164-165:
संबोधनं न वाक्यार्थ इति वृद्धेभ्य आगमः ।
उद्देशेन विभक्त्यर्था वाक्यार्थात् समपोद्धृताः ॥ १६४ ॥
विभक्त्यर्थेऽव्ययीभाववचनादवसीयताम् ।
अन्यो द्रव्याद् विभक्त्यर्थः सोऽव्ययेनाभिधीयते ॥ १६५ ॥saṃbodhanaṃ na vākyārtha iti vṛddhebhya āgamaḥ |
uddeśena vibhaktyarthā vākyārthāt samapoddhṛtāḥ || 164 ||
vibhaktyarthe'vyayībhāvavacanādavasīyatām |
anyo dravyād vibhaktyarthaḥ so'vyayenābhidhīyate || 165 ||164(ab). It is handed down from the ancients that the vocative is not part of the meaning of the sentence.
164(cd). The meanings of the case affixes are analysed out of the meaning of the sentence.
165. As the formation of an avyayībhāva compound in the meaning of a case affix has been taught, one has to understand that the meaning of the case affix is other than substance and that is expressed by the indeclinable.
Commentary
Even when indirectly connected with action, the meaning of the vocative is not part of the meaning of the sentence.
[Read verse 164(ab) above]
[The meaning of the word in the vocative case can be understood without reference to the meanings of the other words in the sentence. So even if it is indirectly connected with action, it is the meaning of the individual word and not to the sentence. The idea of karma, for instance, presupposes action if it is to become the means but, for that reason, it does not become the sentence meaning. The same thing can be said about the idea of the vocative.]
[Read verse 164(cd) above]
The author now points out an indication from the śāstra to show that the meaning of the case affix is different from that of the stem.
[Read verse 165 above]
[In P. 2.1.6, the formation of an avyayībhāva compound in the sense of a case affix is taught and we get forms like adhistri. If the case affix conveyed the substance, it would have no place in the compound because the word ‘strī’ itself conveys substance. From this teaching it also becomes clear that the stem cannot convey the notions of karma, etc. According to the above sūtra, the indeclinable which expresses the notion of abode enters into a compound with a following word: In stanza 43, it was shown by the method of agreement and difference that the stem and the case affix have different meanings. It is stated here that indications in the śāstra also confirms it. The conclusion is that whether one adopts the view that the stem conveys five things (pañcaka) or less, the case affix expresses or illuminates a meaning having a fixed power and different from substance.]
From P. 3.2.25 and P. 3.4.21, one understands that substance can be means. How has it then been stated that the meaning of the case affix, namely the means (sādhana) is different from substance. To answer this objection, it is now stated that it is power which is the means.