Sambodhi 1993 Vol 18

Author(s): J B Shah, N M Kansara
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad

Page 33

26
SAMBODHI FOOT NOTES : 1. Bhate and Khar published an index to the VP in 1992. The index is based on the text as given
in Rau's edition. Rau's text has been reproduced without the critical apparatus, and without indicating that some text portions are not found in manuscripts of an entire branch in the stemma (Rau gives these portions in a smaller type, because they may not have belonged to the archetype). A few misprints and mistakes in Rau 1977 and 1988 are tacitly corrected in Bhate and Khar, 1992, e.g. VP 2.127d, last word vācyatam-> vācyatām in Bhate and Khar,
1992, p. 14 of text; Index, Rau 1988 praciti-> pracita in Bhate and Khar, 1992:120. 2. See my discussion of VP 1.172 and 173, in "Bhartmhari's Perspectivism (1): The Vrtti and
Bhartmari's Perspectivism in the first Kānda of Vākyapadiya" (forthcoming); and the
discussion of VP 3.1.42 and 43 below. 3. Two other articles in preparation are devoted to Bharthari's perspectivism in the first and
second Kānda. Article no. 4 in this series (a preliminary version of which was presented as a paper at the World Sanskrit conference in Melbourne, January 1994) discusses Bharthari's familiarity with technical and doctrinal aspects of Jaina thinkers, in order further to illustrate the scope of his perspectivism and his encyclopedic approach. In one or more subsequent articles, I hope to deal with possible philosophical similarities and contrasts between Bharthari's perspectivism and Jainism and Vedānta, which developed a perspectivisim which is clearly subservient to the deeper aim of proving the superiority of the own view. The numbers of the articles indicate the order in which they should be read at the end, but
say nothing about the order of finalization or publication. 4. The second Kända discusses a whole gamut of views on the sentence and the word, their
meanings, their mutual relations (word and sentence, word and sentence-meaning, wordmeaning and sentence-meaning, etc.) and the relative, linguistic and philosophical importance of the different units. The two extreme positions between which all views have a cetain place are the position according to which the sentence and its meaning are entirely indivisible, and the position according to which it is merely a combination of individual words and word meanings. Statements representing the radical'indivisible sentence' position are often qualified in preceding or following statements. Even if word meanings are said to be inexistent, they are assigned a role as the means towards the understanding of the full, meaning (2.43-414); or they can be analyzed aftrwards from the sentence meaning (2.443,445); or the sentence meaning, a flash of intuition, is brought about by the word meaning (2.143). In another group of theories, the reality of individual word meanings is not utterly denied, but they are said to be neither existent nor non-existent (2.428), or not independent (2.423-424), or not fixed (2.445-446). From all these points of view, as from the point of view that word meanings are well-defined individual basic units, it is necessary to
discuss the word and its meaning. 5. 3.1.1. dvidhā kaiścit padam bhinnam caturdhā pañcadhāpi vā /
appoddhrtyaiva vākyebhyah prakrtipratyādivat // 3.1.2. padārthānām apoddhāre jātir vā dravyam eva vā /
padārthau sarvaśabdānām nityāv evopavarạitau || 6. tad evam sabdārthayoh sambandham uktvā... "Having explained thus the relation between