2. Śabdapramāṇa and Sentence

Śabda is accepted as a distinct pramāṇa by most of the schools of thought born and developed in India. Therefore, the followers of each school have to define śabda in accordance with their preconceptions. In general, philosophers use the term śabda to denote word as well as sentence. Gautama defines śabda in the aphorism "āptopadeśaḥ śabdaḥ" (1.1.7), which says that śabda is that which is uttered by a trustworthy person. The commentators explain the characteristics of a trustworthy person. A trustworthy person is he, who has the knowledge of objects conducive to the attainment of what is beneficial and the avoidance of what is harmful. It is to be noted that the sentence uttered by the trustworthy person should consist of words having mutual expectancy (ākāṅkṣā), congruity (yogyatā) and proximity (sannidhi). Then only it can be accepted as valid verbal testimony or śabdapramāṇa. Thus the commentators interpret this aphorism, by elaborating the word upadeśa into the context of verbal testimony. The word upadeśa signifies the medium, through which something is communicated. It is generally accepted by almost all philosophers that sentence is the basic unit of communication, through which a complete idea hitherto unknown is communicated. Thus the definitions of śabda by various philosophers can be applied only to sentence, neither to words nor to syllables. Mutual expectancy, congruity and proximity are the qualities of a sentence, but not of a word.

Vācaspatimiśra in his commentary on Nyāyavārtika, clearly states that the word upadeśa denotes the cognition of sentence-meaning

"upadiśyate' nena iti upadeśo vākyajñānam",
  —(1967, p.173).

Jagadīśa airs his idea about śabdapramāṇa in the opening verse of Śabdaśaktiprakāśikā, a treatise on verbal testimony of the Nyāya School.

anubhavahetuḥ sakale sadyaḥ samupāsitā manuje sākāṅkṣāsannā ca svārthe yogyā sarasvatī devī. (1)

Goddess Sarasvatī is worshipped in this verse. Equivocally he refers to śabdapramāṇa, which should be sākaṅkṣam (having mutual expectancy), āsannam (proximate) and yogyam (congruent). These characteristics of śabda obviously denote a sentence.

Gaṅgeśa defines śabdapramāṇa in his Tattvacintāmaṇi as:

"atha śabdo nirūpyate. prayogahetubhūtārthatattvajñānajanyaḥ śabdaḥ pramāṇam" (1).

According to him, the word, which is caused by the speaker's knowledge of facts and which causes an utterance of that word, only can be taken as śabdapramāṇa.

In Tarkasaṅgraha, Annambhaṭṭa defines śabda as;

"āptavākyaṃ śabdaḥ"
  —(1971, p.65).

He is also of the view that śabda is the sentence, uttered by a trustworthy person. Govardhana, while commenting on this statement, says that a trustworthy person is the person who has the knowledge of an object which is the cause of verbal expression (Nyāyabodhinī, 1971, p.65). In all these definitions, the word śabda is used in the technical sense of a sentence.

Mīmāṃsā philosophy contributed much in the scenario of śābdabodha or verbal cognition. This school admits the unquestioned authenticity of Vedas, which are in the form of śabda. Thus śabdapramāṇa is one of the most important valid sources of knowledge in this philosophy. They also accept śabdapramāṇa in the form of sentence.

Śabara, the author of the Bhāṣya of Mīmāṃsā Sūtras, opines that,

"śāstram śabdavijñānād asannikṛṣṭe' rthe vijñānam"
  —(Under Jaimini, 1.1.5).

He clarifies this statement saying that,

"yaḥ śabdaḥ svaviṣayakajñānena mānāntaraprāptābādhitārthajñānaṃ janayati sa pramāṇam".

That word, which is already known and gives rise to the cognition and that is not known by any other valid means of knowledge or pramāṇa and also not contradicted subsequently, is known as śabdapramāṇa. Here, the word which gives rise to the cognition is also in the form of a sentence.

Vedānta also accepts śabdapramāṇa as a distinct valid source of knowledge.

Vedāntadeśika defines śabdapramāṇa as,

"anāptānuktavākyam śabdaḥ"
  —(Quoted by Ramanuja Tatacharya, Introduction, 2005, p.9).

According to this definition, the sentence, which is not uttered by an untrustworthy person, is the valid source of knowledge. In this statement, he uses two negatives ' na', to affirm that the sentence uttered by a trustworthy person only should be considered as authentic. Thus, it can be applied to both Vedas, which are not uttered by anyone as well as secular statements, uttered by a trustworthy person.

While in his Vedāntaparibhāṣā, Dharmarāja Adhvarin puts forth a different opinion that,

"yasya vākyasya tātparyaviṣayībhūtaḥ saṃsargaḥ mānāntareṇa na bādhyate tad vākyaṃ pramāṇam iti"
  —(1985, p.208).

Here, the sentence which gives rise to a valid cognition of the relation between the words and is not cancelled by any other pramāṇa subsequently, is accepted as the valid source of knowledge. In both the definitions, the term vākya is used and hence they also admit the authenticity of śabda. Hence it can be concluded that almost all Indian schools of thought, who accept śabdapramāṇa, accept it in the form of sentence.