________________
"Tātparya"
377 This pratibhā again, is six-fold, as arising from nature, exercise, repeated practice, concentration of mind, actions done in previous lives and special efficiency or aptitude :
"svabhāva-acarana-abhyāsayogāt drstā upapāditā, viśistopahitā ceti
pratibhām șadvidhām viduḥ.” V.P. II. 54 It is really difficult to define precisely a sentence. From the logical point of view, it is not mereby a group of words as Jagadīša remarks rightly. The words that constitute a sentence should be having ākānksā/expectancy, yogyatā/compatibility and asatti or sannidhi i.e. proximity. These are indespensable for the making of a sentence. Proximity pertains to the formal closeness of words and has very little to do with meaning. Expectancy and Compatibility refer, on the other hand, to the logical aspect i.e. consistent correlation of meaning: The Laghumañjusā (pp. 497) observes : "ayam arthórthántara-sākānksa iti vyavahārāt.” Āsatti or sannidhi implies the extreme proximity of words, without which the very idea of combination becomes impossible - The S.D. of Viśvanātha puts it in this way : (S.D. II. I. vịtti) - "yogyatā padárthānām paraspara-sambandhe badhábhāvaḥ. padoccayasya tad abhāvépi vākyatve, ‘agninā’ siñcati” ity ady api vākyam syāt. ākānksā pratītiparyavasāna-virahaḥ. sa ca śrotur jijñāsārūpaḥ. nirākānkşasya vākyatve, 'gaur aśvah puruso hastī-ity adīnām api vākyatvam syāt. āsattih buddhyavacchedah buddhi-vicchede’pi vākyatve idānīm uccaritasya devadatta-śabdasya, dinántoccaritena gacchati iti padena sangatiḥ syāt. atra ākānksā-yogyatayor ātmárthadharmatve'pi padoccaya-dharmatvam upacārāt.” Thus, a mere combination, i.e. inconsistent group of words, whether subanta or tinganta, is not competent to be a sentence : "sup-tin-cayo naivam, ativyāptā"di doşatah” - observes ś. ś. pra. pp. 13.
This is why Jagadīša rejects the definition given by Amarasimha as ativyāpta and avyāpta or too-wide and too-narrow. There is some peculiarity in the logical conception of a sentence. Sometimes, a single inflected word (pada) is as good as a sentence. To the Naiyāyikas, the form 'ghatam' is as good as a sentence, as it conveys karmatva, or the status of being an object, pertaining to a pot : 'ghatavrtti-karmatva'. Thus, according to this view, ghatam karoti' should therefore be regarded as a mahāvākya or a compound-sentence.
Mīmāmsakas : According to the Mimāmsakas, a sentence is a combination of words, with oneness of sense : "arthaikatvād ekam vākyam, sākānksam ced
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
