Vakyapadiya (study of the concept of Sentence)

by Sarath P. Nath | 2018 | 36,088 words

This page relates ‘Pratibha: its sources’ of the study on Vakyapadiya by Bhartrhari and his treatment of the Concept of Sentence in Language. Bhartrhari was a great grammarian and philosopher who explored the depth and breadth of Sanskrit grammar. These pages analyse the concepts and discussions on sentence and sentence-meaning presented in the Vakyapadiya, against the different systems of knowledge prevalent in ancient India (such as Mimamsa, Nyaya and Vyakarana).

To Bhartṛhari, Pratibhā is ' anirvacanīya', or that cannot be described to others as 'it is this'. But he tries to explain the ways through which Pratibhā is manifested. Though the very concept is peculiar to his theory of sentence meaning, Bhartṛhari uses the word in a broad general perspective, which can be manifested in six different ways and thereby he admits six kinds of intuitions or Pratibhā.

The six sources of Pratibhā are

  1. Svabhāva,
  2. Caraṇa,
  3. Abhyāsa,
  4. Yoga,
  5. Adṛṣṭa and
  6. Viśiṣṭopahita.

Cf. Vākyapadīya, 2.152:—

svabhāvacaraṇābhyāsayogādṛṣṭopapādītām
viśiṣṭopahitāṃ ceti pratibhāṃ ṣaḍvidhāṃ viduḥ
.

Bhartṛhari does not give elucidation and examples for each kind of Pratibhā, while some explanations are seen in the Vṛtti and the commentary of Puṇyarāja. Both these commentaries differ at some points in giving examples of six kinds.

(i) svabhāva or nature:

The first kind of Pratibhā is caused by svabhāva or nature. The word ' svabhāva' refers to the instinctive knowledge of animals, which enables them to engage in activities appropriate to their species. Puṇyarāja illustrates this with an example of monkey and its activities (Vākyapadīya, 2.152). A slightly different opinion is described in the ancient commentary, the Vṛtti of Vākyapadīya. It mentions an example of natural tendency of Prakṛti (primordial matter) to evolve into Mahat and our natural tendency of waking up from deep sleep (Vākyapadīya, 2.152).

(ii) caraṇa or śiṣṭācāra:

The second cause of Pratibhā is caraṇa, which generally denotes a Vedic School. But here, it signifies śiṣṭācāra. This kind of Pratibhā is awakened, if one strictly follows the duties or karma according to his Vedic school.

Puṇyarāja gives no more explanations except for the first kind, saying that all the others are clear and they need no elucidations:

"caraṇādiṣūdāharaṇānyūhyāni",
  —(Vākyapadīya, 2.152).

The knowledge of the great seer Vasiṣṭha who acquired special illumination by strictly observing the prescription of his Vedic school is the example given in the Vṛtti

"caraṇanimittā kācit pratibhā. tadyathā-ācaraṇenaivāvadhṛtaprakāśaviśeṣāṇāṃ vasiṣṭhādīnām",
  —(Vākyapadīya, 2.152).

Raghunatha Sarma also explains the special illumination of Vasiṣṭha through which he could know the events in past, present and future. It indicates that through such observance, one may achieve a spiritual power resulting in a special capacity to perceive things that others are not able to know.

(iii) abhyāsa or repeated practice:

The third cause of intuition is Abhyāsa, which is generally translated as repeated practice. The declaration of expert hydro geologists and jewellers are prominent examples. Here, the Vṛtti suggests an example of the knowledge of a man, who can tell the existence of water for digging a well. All are not able to say where is the suitable place for digging a well, so also the knowledge of the genuineness of precious stones. This knowledge is not identical with inferential knowledge. According to Bhartṛhari, knowledge of genuineness cannot be identified with inferential knowledge for it requires long practice which enables them to attain that skill. All such knowledge tends to reach a higher stage by practice. The expert knowledge of precious stones and metals is asamākhyeya or inexplicable to others and is caused by abhyāsa (regular practice) only. It cannot be achieved by means of anumāna. Such an expertise is inherited from a long cultural tradition. This intuition is the result of āgama (tradition) accompanied by bhāvanā, the tendency to act according to the nature of the different classes of beings. If one gets some instances of referring a particular word with a particular applied meaning due to Abhyāsa, that word starts indicating that particular meaning, at least for that individual. Thus Abhyāsa is also one of the causes of Pratibhā.

(iv) yoga:

Yoga is another cause of Pratibhā. Through Yoga, one can imagine what is going on in others mind. The self-consciousness, which is all consciousness, is Pratibhā and in the light of which, all things are revealed simultaneously and in all their aspects (Gopinath M Kaviraj, 1924, p.11). The vision of Vasiṣaṭha about the real nature of Rāma can be treated as an example for this kind of Pratibhā. Unable to see Rāma wearing valkala, while getting ready to go for forest, Vasiṣṭha closed his eyes for a while. In the meantime he could see the real nature of Rāma (J Prasad, 2010, p.60).

(v) adṛṣṭa:

The fifth cause of Pratibhā is adṛṣṭa. It is the power of Rakṣas (demons) and Piśāca (the evil spirit) which enables them to enter the bodies of others and make themselves invisible (Vākyapadīya, 2.152, comm. Vṛtti). An individual is able to perform some unique activities led by some potency which he requires from his part karma. This invisible power is adṛṣṭa and due to this power, one can perform super sensible things.

(vi) viśiṣṭopahita or the grace of special person:

Lastly, Pratibhā is manifested due to viśiṣṭopahita or the grace of special person. The example illustrated in the Vṛtti is the special knowledge which Kṛṣṇadvaipāyana gave to Sañjaya and others; thereby they could see the Kurukṣetra war as such. Again, Lord Kṛṣṇa gives the mystic insight to Arjuna to see his cosmic form in the same context.

Thus it is very clear that Pratibhā has been conceived in a very comprehensive way in Vākyapadīya. Pratibhā exists in every living being accompanied by bhāvanā.

The manifestations of Pratibhā range from the basic instincts of animals and birds to the superhuman perceptions of Ṛṣis:

"ṛṣīṇāmapi yajjñānaṃ tadapyāgamapūrvakam",
  —(Vākyapadīya, 1.30).

Thus, we can conclude that the genius of a poet or a scientist or an Ṛṣi has no quantitative difference from the average man's intuition or instincts of animals.

Like what you read? Consider supporting this website: