5. Characteristics of Pratibhā

Bhartṛhari expounds the characteristic features of this concept in several verses. He states that though Pratibhā is experienced by everyone within himself, it cannot be explained to others as 'it is this'.

Even the subject, who experienced it, is not able to render an account of it to himself.

idaṃ taditi sānyeṣāmanākhyeyā kathañcana
pratyātmavṛttisiddhā sā kartrāpi na nirūpyate.
  —(Vākyapadīya, 2.144)

K A S Iyer explains this verse by citing an example of a drink made up of many ingredients. It is difficult to explain the taste of such a drink to others, even by the one who tastes it (Vākyapadīya, 2.146).

Thus, Bhartṛhari calls the Pratibhā as ' Avicārita' or indefinable.

upaśleṣamivārthānāṃ sā karotyavicāritā sārvarūpyamivāpannā viṣayatvena vartate.
  —(Vākyapadīya, 2.145)

Puṇyarāja explains that, this flash of understanding brings about an amalgamation (Upaśleṣa) of the meanings of the individual words, which were not connected before (Asaṃsṛṣṭa).

Bhartṛhari suggests that Pratibhā would be revealed when the speech faculty comes into action.

Pratibhā is produced either through the words or through the Bhāvana, one's predispositions.

sākṣācchabdena janitāṃ bhāvanānugamena vā itikartavyatāyāṃ tāṃ na kaścidativartate.
  —(Vākyapadīya, 2.146)

Thus, there are two possibilities in the production of pratibhā. If it is manifested by the uttered speech, it can be produced here and it should be inherited from previous births, if produced by the bhāvanā. Bhartṛhari argues that none can avoid its presence in his/her activities. Each and every activity is motivated by the Pratibhā. People indulge it their activities only when they are motivated either by mental stimulation or from the previous impressions acquired (even from previous births). A mental stimulation is the idea originated in the mind or inspired by the audible sounds. What is worthy of note here is that, the flash of understanding is always preceded by the linguistic faculty or śabdabhāvanā.

Pratibhā is the cause of any sentient being indulged in any activity. In other words, any action in this world presupposes a will to act. When it is impregnated with words, it becomes cognizable by the listener.

Thus Bhartṛhari opines that the whole world considers Pratibhā as an authority.

pramāṇatvena tāṃ lokaḥ sarvaḥ samanuśyati
samārambhāḥ pratāyante tiraścāmapi tadvaśāt.
  —(Vākyapadīya, 2.147)

No activity of a living being is possible without the precedence of Pratibhā. Bhartṛhari argues that Pratibhā is the reason behind the transformation of the voice of male cuckoo during the spring season. The same pratibhā teaches animals and birds to build nests. Pratibhā motivates the stimulations of hunger, thirst, love etc. in animals and birds (Vākyapadīya, 2.148151). Here, Bhartṛhari says that Pratibhā or śabda is present in every living being by birth itself. In living beings other than human beings, it is not fully developed. In new born babies, it is the reason behind their communication through crying, laughing etc. They cannot speak, only because their speech organs are not mature enough.

1. Pratibhā: A Semantic Concept

Pratibhā is the semantic unit of communication, where sentencemeaning shines forth. The semantic characteristics of Pratibhā have been glimpsed elaborately in the previous chapter (under 3.5.1.6). The whole discussions of Bhartṛhari on sentence-meaning is to be understood on the basis of the concept of Pratibhā elucidated by him. Sphoṭa and Pratibhā are the two major linguistic components underlying the synactico-semantic analysis of sentence in Vākyapadīya. "According to Bhartṛhari, sentence is the meaningful linguistic unit. Every expression consists of three elements i.e. dhvani (nāda or the physical sound), sphoṭa (intermediary mental word) and artha (meaning)" (Gayatri Rath, 2000, p.149). Thus apart from the physical sound dhvani and the intermediary auditory image sphoṭa, there is another knowledge which prevails in the intellect. This transforms sphoṭa into meaning in a flash and is known as Pratibhā. This transformation takes place so fast that the gap between the flash and the understanding of the sentence-meaning cannot be noticed.

2. Pratibhā: Indivisibility of meaning

Bhartṛhari advocates that sentence cannot be divided into smaller parts rather it is a single unit. Modern scholars also suggest that the whole expression should be taken into account in a conversation to understand the meaning. Bhartṛhari's Akhaṇḍa school considers sentence as a unified whole, which cannot be derived from its parts viz. words or syllables (Vākyapadīya 1.73). Though the words in a sentence are grasped successively, the perception of the sentence is simultaneous, when the meaning is flashed in the listener's mind. (Raja, 1962, p.134-135).

According to the Akhaṇḍa School, Pratibhā is also devoid of parts or sequence. It cannot be divided into word-meanings. In other words, sentence-meaning is not evolved as a result of the summation of individual meanings of the components. Mīmāṃsakas as well as Naiyāyikas, who belong to the Sakhaṇḍa school advocate that the sentence-meaning is evolved from the word-meanings. Here, word is considered as the unit of meaning and not a product of sentence analysis. According to Bhartṛhari, the concept of sentence can be perceived from both the levels of communication and grammar. In the level of communication, sentence is the meaningful unit of language and is a unified whole or devoid of components. Sentence-meaning is also grasped as a whole by the hearer. Thus words and word-meanings have no independent status in communicating a thought or an idea. While sentence is analysed for the purpose of grammatical studies, words are only abstracted from the sentence (apoddhāra). In linguistics and grammar, words and word-meanings abstracted from sentence have great importance. Thus according to Bhartṛhari, components of a sentence are significant only for studying grammar (śāstra vyavahāra) and they have no independent status in communication.

As the sentence-meaning Pratibhā is grasped as a whole, it lacks any sequential nature. Bhartṛhari states that śabda, which is devoid of divisions, is also devoid of any sequence (Vākyapadīya, 1.48).

To quote A N Hota:-

According to Bhartṛhari, sequence which belongs to the phonological act is imposed upon time. Intellect gets expanded along with sequence of sounds it perceives and so sequence leaves its marking on intellect. Intellect has a dual ability, namely to grasp wholes with or without sequence, and so becomes capable of perceiving one object in 'singleness' and diversity. Lastly, since sounds appear in our notion with a sequence, the meaning which comes from sounds also appear to have a sequence in our notion, although it is indivisible. These are presuppositions for understanding the character of meaning (1985, p.143).

3. Extra-lingual Meaning

Bhartṛhari rightly observes that apart from the ordinary meaning, sentences express some extra lingual meanings very often in verbal communication (Vākyapadīya, 2.310-313). Some philosophers call it as ' Lakṣaṇa' or secondary meaning, which is either depending upon speaker's intention or on contextual factors. Even though sentence is considered as the meaningful unit of language, in most of the cases, a sentence cannot be analysed apart from the context in which it is uttered. The circumstances, in which the communication takes place, obviously influence the meaning. Here, the word 'context' includes not just the environmental surroundings of the speaker, but it signifies several factors that help the hearer to fix the meaning. Bhartṛhari refers to a list of several factors, which influence the meaning of a sentence (Vākyapadīya, 2.316-317) and these are elucidated in the previous chapter. Thus, the coalescence of word-meanings cannot determine the sentence-meaning. This supports the indivisibility theory of sentence-meaning.

School of Vyākaraṇa accept only the primary sense which is based on lexical meaning. But even in the conversations of our daily life, we use expressions and phrases whose meaning cannot be understood by knowing the sentence-meaning or word-meanings. In these situations, the primary sense fails to convey the meaning of the expression. Philosophies like Nyāya, Vedānta etc. as well as the school of Alaṅkāraśāstra accept several levels of meanings beyond the lexical meaning like lakṣyārtha (secondary meaning), vyaṅgyārtha (suggestive meaning), tātparyārtha, prakaraṇārtha etc. They are the extra-lingual meanings which are over and above the ordinary meanings of the sentence. Bhartṛhari's concept of Pratibhā includes these infinite levels of meaning that shines forth from a conversation.

4. Pratibhā: An Intuitive Instict

Bhartṛhari emphasises that nobody can avoid Pratibhā in one's activities, which is produced either through words or through bhāvana.

sākṣācchabdena janitāṃ bhāvanānugamena vā
itikartavyatāyāṃ tāṃ na kaścidativartate.
  —(Vākyapadīya. 2.146)

Each and every activity of living beings is preceded by this intuitive knowledge. In communication, it is produced by the words while it is born with a predisposition (itikartavyatā) in the case of children or animals. The day-to-day activities of all animals develop because of this Pratibhā. It is not only comprehension or manifestation of an idea, but also the knowledge of how to act. Here, Pratibhā is conceived at the level of instincts of animals and birds. As we know, all animals have a tendency to act according to the nature of their classes of beings. Sometimes they tend to act in response to the stimulations from the outer environment also. But from where does this tendency arise, is the central problem. Zoologists as well as Psychologists show their interest in this field. They suggest that animals act according to their instincts. Without instincts the organism would be an inert lifeless mass only. They are the motivators and shapers of all individuals and their social life. Instincts are inborn complex patterns of behaviour that exist in most members of the species. Any behaviour is instinctive if it is performed without being based upon prior experience, and is therefore an expression of innate biological factors. Sea turtles, newly hatched on a beach will automatically move towards the ocean. Communication of honeybees by dancing in the direction of food source is another example.

Other examples include animal fighting, animal courtship behaviour, internal escape functions and the building of nests.

In general, it is defined as:-

“Largely inheritable and unalterable tendency of an organism to make a complex and specific response to environmental stimuli without involving reason.”^[1]

These instincts or behaviour patterns are inherited or inborn and manifested in response to certain stimuli.

Bhartṛhari tries to answer these complex behaviours and instincts of animals through the concept of Pratibhā. He remarks that intuitions are produced just as some substances acquire the power to intoxicate without the help of any external efforts. According to him, Pratibhā is an intuitive knowledge and this transforms the voice of the male cuckoo in spring season as well as teaches animals to build nests etc. Pratibhā stimulates animals and birds on to actions like eating, loving, hating, swimming etc. associated with particular species (Vākyapadīya, 2.148-150, Trans. K A S Iyer). Puṇyarāja compares this intuition to the conscience of good people (sajjana), which enables them to decide what is right and what is wrong quite instinctively.

To support this argument, he also quotes Kāḷidāsa's famous verse:

"satām hi sandehapadeṣu vastuṣu pramāṇamantaḥkaraṇapravṛttayaḥ"
  —(Vākyapadīya, 2.147).

Kāḷidāsa tries to convey the idea that 'for good people, their own conscience is the guiding force or authority, in matters of doubt'. Puṇyarāja remarks that these intuitions are caused by predispositions, peculiar to every living being of different species and these are deeply rooted in the intuitive knowledge Pratibhā.

Bhartṛhari again puts forth an idea that this intuition is the result of āgama (tradition), accompanied by bhāvanā.

bhāvanānugatād etad āgamād eva jāyate
āsattiviprakarṣābhyām āgamastu viśiṣyate.
  —(Vākyapadīya, 2.151)

In this verse, the words āgama, bhāvanā, āsatti and viprakarṣa are not clear. It is difficult to decide what Bhartṛhari meant by these words. Puṇyarāja understands the word ' āgama' as śabda or the word. Therefore, śabda, either proximate or remote is the cause of intuition. Bhāvanā is the tendency to act according to the nature of the different classes of beings. Thus Pratibhā arises from āgama, which is assisted by Bhāvanā.

Raghunatha Sarma explains this verse as follows:-

bhāvanāsahakāreṇa Pratibhāyā hetubhūtaḥ āgamaḥ dvividhaḥ - āsanno viprakṛṣṭaśca. tatrāsanna iha janmani, viprakṛṣṭo janmāntare ityevamāsattiviprakarṣābhyām śabda eva Pratibhāheturiti.
  —(Vākyapadīya 2.151)

It gets clear from this explanation, that the word or śabda is the root of Pratibhā. It is proximate if it arises in this very life and is remote when it is inherited from the previous births. K A S Iyer have some pertinent suggestions in this regard. He doubts when Puṇyarāja says that the word ' āgama' signifies śabda, whether he has the words of Veda in mind.

Similarly, by the word ' bhāvanā', does Bhartṛhari mean what he calls ' śabdabhāvanā' in Vākyapadīya 1.114 (Vākyapadīya, 2.151, Trans. K A S Iyer, 63).

Bhartṛhari's theory of śabdabrahma can also be conjoined here. He says that:-

na so' sti pratyayoloke yaḥ śabdānugamādṛte
anuviddhamiva jñānam sarvam śabdena bhāsate.
  —(Vākyapadīya, 1.123)

Every cognition in this world is associated with śabda and nothing is omitted from the light of śabda. Thus the intuitive knowledge Pratibhā and the instincts are all deeply rooted in śabda or the word. This clearly indicates the all pervasiveness of Bhartṛhari's language theory which intrudes into the deeper levels of human thoughts.

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/instinct