Part 2 - Sphoṭa—A Historical Overview

The concept of sphoṭa is the unique contribution of the Indian grammarians to the philosophy of language. This is the theory which explains the working of the speech process. Though this sphoṭa was fully developed and systematized by the great Grammarian philosopher Bhartṛhari, we don’t have sufficient evidence, in our hand to establish as to who was the first founder of the sphoṭa theory. Haradatta in his Padamañjarī and Nāgeśa Bhaṭṭa in his Sphoṭavāda claim that the Sphoṭāyana is the first founder of the sphoṭa doctrine.^[1]

Various views on Sphoṭa

Vyāḍi: In the history of the development of the doctrine of sphoṭa, the great Grammarian Vyāḍi,^[2] who is earlier than Kātyāyana and Patañjali, wrote a work on the Philosophy of grammar, called the Saṃgraha, which might have recorded some discussions about the sphoṭa theory; but the work is unfortunately lost to us, and nothing can be said definitely about it. The distinction between the prākṛta dhvani and the vaikṛta dhvani^[3] mentioned in the Vākyapadīya is supposed to have been made by the great Grammarian philosopher Vyāḍi.

Pāṇini:

Pāṇini was a Sanskrit grammarian who gave a comprehensive and scientific theory of phonetics, phonology and morphology. He is considered to be the founder of the language and literature. The most important of Pāṇini’s work is the Aṣṭādhyāyī, which is a grammar that essentially defines the Sanskrit language. Some grammarians claim that the origin of the sphoṭa theory goes back to Pāṇini’s Aṣṭādhyāyī which mentions the name of Sphoṭāyana.^[4] Whether the name Sphoṭāyana of one of the authorities mentioned by Pāṇini was due to his having held the doctrine of sphoṭa will remain an uncertainty, though there is a tradition recorded by Nāgeśa in his Sphoṭavāda, that the doctrine was Sphoṭāyana’s.^[5] In his Padaman ~ jarī, Haradatta has also said that the sphoṭa doctrine was fully propounded by Sphoṭāyana.^[6]

However, certainly we don’t know who is the first propounder of the sphoṭa doctrine, irrespective of the fact that Pāṇini himself mentions the name of Sphoṭāyana. The specific mention of the name Sphoṭāyana neither sufficiently indicates that Pāṇini knew anything similar to the sphoṭa theory, nor does it point out that this doctrine was originally belonged to the sage Sphoṭāyana.

The correct explanation of śabdādvaita in the form of sphoṭa is not given by Pāṇini and Kātyāyana in their works Aṣṭādhyāyī and the Vārttika respectively.

Yet very few sūtras of Pāṇini [such as the following] signify the essence of the sphoṭa doctrine:

tad aśiṣyaṃ saṃjñā pramāṇatvāt^[7].

Pāṇini contends that words have long been in existence and their continuous usage alone is the best authority. He believes the śabda to be nitya and vyāpaka.

Pāṇini does not believe the terms like śabdaḥ jāyate, śabdaḥ naśyati, means production and destruction, but by the word jāyate, he means ‘to be revealed’ and by the word naśyati, he means ‘to be conceded’; that is why he reads as ṇaś adarśane and janiprādubhāve in Dhātupāṭha. Actually śabda is nitya and vyāpaka. According to Pāṇini, it can neither be produced nor perished. This eternality of śabda according to Pāṇini may be called the fundamental background of the eternality of śabda, as propounded by Maṇḍana Miśra in his Sphoṭasiddhi.

Kātyāyana

After Pāṇini, there was a succession of thinkers of language, grammar and philosophy of language, like Kātyāyana who commented on Pāṇini’s rules. The Vārtikakāra Kātyāyana does not mention the word sphoṭa in his Vārttika. But his explanation of śabda takes us nearer to the sphoṭa doctrine. The distinction between the virtual and permanent element in language and the ephemeral elements at the various instances of its actualization is known even to Kātyāyana, though he does not apply the terms sphoṭa and dhvani to them. While explaining upon Pāṇiniān rule taparastatkālasya,^[8] he says that the letters are fixed and the styles of diction (vṛtti) dependon the speech habits of the speaker.^[9] This statement of Kātyāyana, regarding the nature of word and the difference in tempo takes us near to the sphoṭa doctrine. Moreover, Kātyāyana does not, however, make mention of the word sphoṭa, but lays down in his Vārttika the great principle that śabda is nitya (eternal or permanent), artha is nitya, and their mutual relation i.e. vācyavācakabhāva is also nitya.^[10]

Patañjali:

Patañjali is one of the most prominent grammarians to deal with sphoṭa. He has written a commentary on the Pāṇini’s Aṣṭādhyāyī. It is known as Mahābhāṣya which is the most important treatise on Sanskrit Grammar and the later grammatical works have been influenced by it. Here it should be admitted that though earlier thinkers speak of the eternal and pervasive character of word as an element or unit, the clear picture of sphoṭa theory is not found before Patañjali. He discusses the idea of sphoṭa, under Pāṇinisūtra I.1.70^[11] and Pāṇinisūtra VIII.2.18,^[12] where the word sphoṭa is not applied to the meaning bearing element, but to a permanent aspect of phonemes.

The term sphoṭa as used by Patañjali always stands for the structure of expression which may or may not have any meaning. The idea that the meaning bearing word is the sphoṭa is not implicitly or explicitly stated by Patañjali. He says that śabda is what is perceived by the auditory organs, grasped through the intellect, revealed by the sounds pertaining to the region of the sky.^[13]

The question whether śabda is eternal or created is one of the fundamental problems of the linguistic science that has been taken up by all the systems of Indian philosophy supporting either of the view. According to Patañjali, this question is one that was elaborately dealt with in the Saṃgraha, a huge work on grammar attributed to the authorship of Vyāḍi.^[14]

In opposition to the Naiyāyika’s standpoint according to which śabda is momentary and consequently liable to both destruction and production, Patañjali has supported the permanent character of śabda. In the Mahābhāṣya, Patañjali has brought out its real nature by such epithets as kūṭastha (subtle), avichala (motionless), avikāri (without modification), annutpanna (without origin), anupāya (indestructible), which are according to Vedāntic conception, frequently used to signify the supreme being.^[15] Under the Vārttika, siddhe śabdārtha saṃbandhe, Patañjali has clearly shown that words as well as their meaning and relation are all interrupted nityatva. That is also eternal where of the essence is not really destroyed,^[16] will tend to strengthen one’s view in regard to the eternality of the word.

According to Patañjali, sphoṭa is not identical with śabda. It is rather a permanent element of śabda, where as dhvani represents its non-permanent aspect. The sphoṭa is not audible like dhvani.^[17] It is manifested by the articulated sounds. The dhvani element of speech may differ in phonetic value with reference to the variation in the utterance of different speakers. Differences in speed of utterances and time distinctions are attributes of dhvani, which cannot affect the nature of sphoṭa revealed by the sound. When a sound passes from a speaker’s lips, sphoṭa is revealed instantaneously. But before the listener comprehends anything, dhvani elements manifest the permanent element of śabda. So, sphoṭa comes first and manifesting dhvani also continues to exist after the revelation of sphoṭa. That is why Patañjali remarks that dhvani is actualized and ephemeral elements are attributes of sphoṭa.^[18]

The sphoṭa as described by Patañjali governs a single letter or a fixed pattern of letters and is the norm, it remains constant and is not affected by the peculiarities of the individual speakers. Even when pronounced by different speakers with different tempos, its linguistic value is the same. The absolute vowel length and the individual peculiarities of the particular instances are the dhvanis and depend on the individuality of the speaker and the effort with which the words are uttered. The sphoṭa is the permanent and unchanging entity and is manifested by the ephemeral dhvanis is uttered by the speaker and heard by the listener. Patañjali defines word as that which, when uttered, brings about the notion of the thing meant. At the beginning of the Mahābhāṣya^[19], he raises the question: In ‘gauḥ’ what is to be considered as word? The answer given there is: ‘It is that by means of which, when uttered, there arises an understanding of creatures with dewlap, tail, hump, hooves and horns’.^[20] Here the term uttered is used in the sense of revealing.

Thus it is clear that for Patañjali, the sphoṭa is a unit of sound as an isolated letter or a series of letters which can be analysed as a succession of sound units; it has a normal and fixed size. The difference in the speed of utterance does not affect the sphoṭa, but it is felt to be associated with it, due to the difference in the sounds which manifest the sphoṭa.

Bhartṛhari

It is Bhartṛhari, the celebrated author of the Vākyapadīya, who is the first Grammarian to have presented a systematic treatment of the concept of sphoṭa. In interpreting the doctrine of sphoṭa, Bhartṛhari follows the tradition handed down by his predecessors like Patañjali and others. While explaining the notion of sphoṭa, he not only gives his own view but also gives the views of others without mentioning their names. Traditionally it is believed that they may be Mīmāṃsakas and Naiyāyikas. In the succeeding pages of the dissertation, Bhartṛhari’s theory of sphoṭa will be discussed in detail.

Footnotes and references:

[back to top]

[1]:

sphoṭāyanaḥ sphoṭapratipādanaparo vaiyākaraṇācāryaḥ / Padamañjarī under Pāṇinisūtra , VI.1.123

[2]:

Pāṇinisūtra , I.2. 64

[3]:

varṇasya grahaṇe hetuḥ prākṛto dhvaniriṣyate /
vṛttibhede nimittatvaṃ vaikṛtaḥ pratipadyate // Vākyapadīya , I. 77

[4]:

avaṅ sphoṭāyanasya / Pāṇinisūtra , VI.1.123

[5]:

vaiyākaraṇanāgeśaḥ sphoṭāyanaṛṣermataṃ /
pariṣkṛtyoktavāṃstena prīyatāṃ jagadīśvaraḥ // Ślokavārttka , p. 102

[6]:

sphoṭo’yanaṃ pārāyaṇaṃ yasya sa sphoṭāyanaḥ /
sphoṭapratipādanaparo vaiyākaraṇācāryaḥ // Padamañjarī under Pāṇinisūtra , VI.1.123

[7]:

Pāṇinisūtra , I.2.53

[8]:

Ibid., I.1.70

[9]:

avasthitā varṇā vaktuścirāciravacanād vṛttayo viśiṣyante/ Mahābhāṣya , I, p. 181

[10]:

siddhe śabdārthasambandhe lokataḥ arthaprayukte śabdaprayoge śāstreṇa dharmaniyamo yathā laukikavaidikeṣu / Ibid., pp. 65-66

[11]:

taparas tatkālasya /

[12]:

kṛpo ro laḥ /

[13]:

śrotropalabdhirbuddhinigrārhyaḥ prayogeṇabhijvalitaḥ
ākāśadeśaḥśabdaḥ, ekaṃ ca punarākāśam / Mahābhāṣya , Vol. I, p. 97

[14]:

kiṃ punaḥ nityaḥ śabdaḥ āhosvit kāryaḥ? saṃgrahe etat prādhānyena parīkṣitam. nityo vā syāt kāryyo veti / Ibid., pp. 57-58

[15]:

nityāśca śabdāḥ. nityeṣu ca śabdeṣu kūṭasthairavicalābhiḥ varṇaiḥ bhavitavyamanapāyo-ṣajanavikāribhiḥ. bhavitavyamanapāyopajanavikāribhiḥ / Ibid., pp. 96-97

[16]:

tadapi nityaṃ yasmin tatvaṃ na vihanyate / Ibid., p. 64

[17]:

dhvaniḥ sphoṭaśca śabdānāṃ dhvanistu khalu lakṣyate /
alpo mahāṃśca keṣāṃcidubhayaṃ tat svabhāvataḥ // Mahābhāṣya , I, p. 181

[18]:

evaṃ tarhi sphoṭaḥ śabdaḥ dhvaniḥ śabdaguṇaḥ / Ibid., p. 181

[19]:

atha gauḥ iṭyatra kaḥ śabdaḥ? Ibid., p. 12

[20]:

yenoccāritena sāsnālāṅgūlakakudakhuraviṣāṇināṃ sampratyayo bhavati saḥ śabdaḥ / Ibid., p. 16