APPROACHING THE VAKYAPADIYA.

• Author: CARDONA, GEORGE

In connection with a recent work on the Sambandhasamudde[acute{s}]a of the v[bar{a}]kyapad[bar{i}]ya, I consider some major issues concerning Bhartrhari, the tradition he represents, and how a modern scholar might approach the V[bar{a}]kyapad[bar{i}]ya. I discuss theoretical principles which have been set forth as a basis for dealing with Bhartrhari and evidence from the V[bar{a}]kyapad[bar{i}]ya in connection with these principles, chiefly what is referred to as Bhartrhari's perspectivism. I take up in some detail one large issue: the status of the received high language, associated with a group of model speakers called [acute]{s}]ista, who use speech forms characterized as "correct" (s[bar{a}]dhu) linguistic units ([acute{s}]abda) opposed to incorrect linguistic units (as[bar{s}]dhu[acute{s}]abda, apa[acute{s}]abda), that are viewed as corruptions (apabhram[acute{s}]a), with respect to how meanings are understood by users. The principal issue here is: do apa[acute{s}]abdas directly signify meanings for [acute{s}]istas when they communicate with someone using a vernacular, or do these speakers resort to a translation technique such t hat the apa[acute{s}]abda used calls to mind a s[acute{s}]dhu[acute{s}]abda, which then directly signifies a meaning? This topic also involves another important question: how one should consider the Vrtti and other commentaries in relation to what is said in the k[bar{a}]rik[bar{a}] text.

1. Bhartrhari's V[bar{a}]kyapad[bar{i}]ya is, without any doubt the single most important work in the long history of P[bar{a}]ninian grammar, after the works of the three munis: P[bar{a}]nini, K[bar{a}]ty[bar{a}]yana, and Pta[bar{n}]jali. It certainly is the most widely cited early treatise concerning what scholars generally refer to as Indian "philosophy of grammar," not only among subsequent scholars in India in various schools of thought but also among modern scholars. [1] Recent years have witnessed a growing interest in the V[bar{a}]kyapad[bar{i}]ya and Bhartrhari's Mah[bar{a}]bh[bar{a}]syad[bar{i}]pik[bar{a}]. The work under review here, a revised version of Houben's doctoral dissertation, treats principally one section of the third k[bar{a}]nda of the V[bar{a}]kyapad[bar{i}]ya, the Sambandhasamudde[acute{s}]a, [2] where in eighty-eight verses Bhartrhari treats questions concerning relations between linguistic items and meanings.

   The subtitle of his work reflects Houben's main concern, to which the central part of the book is devoted: "The Sa[dot{m}]bandha-samudde[acute{s}]a, Translation and Discussion of the K[bar{a}]rik[bar{a}]s" (pp. 137-324), an annotated translation of the Sambandhasamudde[acute{s}]a, followed by an appendix, "Hel[bar{a}]r[bar{a}]ja's Commentary 'Prak[bar{a}]rnaprak[bar{a}][acute{s}]a' on the Sa[dot{m}]bandha-samudde[acute{s}]a" (pp. 325-424). The other two major sections of Houben's book are "Sa[dot{m}]bandha in some early Indian traditions and in Bhartrhari's Philosophy of Language" (pp. 29-79) and "The Third K[bar{a}]nda and the immediate context of the Sambandha-samudde[acute{s}]a" (pp. 81-135). These are preceded by an introduction (pp. 1-27); the book ends with a bibliography (pp. 425-48) and three indices: a general index (pp. 449-53), an index locorum (pp. 453-57), and an index referring to text-critical observations on the Sambandhasamudde[acute{s}]a and Hel[bar{a}]r[bar{a}]ja's commentary (pp. 457-60).

   Houben exhibits an impressively wide-ranging erudition together with considerable attention to philological detail and to what other scholars have said. This can be brought home more vividly by noting the contents of this work in greater detail.

   In his introduction, Houben takes up Bhartrhari's life and time (pp. 3-10) and the V[bar{a}]kyapad[bar{i}]ya and its interpretation (pp. 11-22), then considers research that has been done on the Sambandhasamudde[acute{s}]a and the notion of sambandha, "relation" (pp. 23-26). The introduction ends with a brief note on the present work (p. 27).

   The first major part of this book is divided into four sections. Most of the second section concerning early grammarians is devoted to the Mah[bar{a}]bh[bar{a}]sya discussion on the first part of the v[bar{a}]rttika siddhe [acute{s}]abd[bar{a}]rthasambandhe lokato rthaprayukte [acute{s}]abd[bar{a}]prayoge [acute{s}][bar{a}]strena dharmaniyamah. In the third section, Houben considers views of Mim[bar{a}]ms[bar{a}] (pp. 46-47), vai[acute{s}]esika (pp. 48-53), Buddhism (pp. 53-58), and "other schools: S[bar{a}][dot{m}]khya, Ved[bar{a}]nta" (pp. 58-63) on the notion of "relation." As Houben notes (p. 46), these discussions "[ldots] are mainly based on presently available secondary literature." [3] The last section on sambandha in the V[bar{a}]kyapad[bar{i}]ya consists of four subsections in which the following topics are treated: the assumption that there is a beginningless relation between words and meanings (pp. 64-66), the relation between sounds and signifiers (pp. 66-75), "the intimate relation between [acute{s}]abda 'language', artha 'reality' and j[bar{n}][bar{a}]na 'knowledge'" (pp. 75-77), and "sa[dot{m}]bandha and the primary unit in language" (pp. 77-79). Part two of Houben's work is devoted to a description and discussion of the organization of the V[bar{a}]kyapad[bar{i}]ya's third k[bar{a}]nda.

   The third and largest part of Houben's book consists of three sections: "General Remarks" (pp. 139-40), "Analysis of the Sa[dot{m}]bandha-samudde[acute{s}]a" (pp. 141-44), and "Translation and Discussion of the k[bar{a}]rik[bar{a}]s" (pp. 145-324). The translation in turn is divided into two parts, each further subdivided into two parts, covering respectively k[bar{a}]rik[bar{a}]s 1-38, 39-51, 52-59, and 60-88. Houben first gives his translations, then deals with grammatical and semantic issues concerning terms and syntax, and finally discusses the import of k[bar{a}]rik[bar{a}]s--individually and in groups--in the light of what is said elsewhere in the k[bar{a}]rik[bar{a}] text, in the available Vrtti [4] on the first and second k[bar{a}]ndas, and, even more extensively, in light of what Hel[bar{a}]r[bar{a}]ja has to say. This leads to redundancy. In the appendix containing the translation and comments on Hel[bar{a}]r[bar{a}]ja's Prak[bar{i}]rnaprak[bar{a}][acute{s}]a the transliterated text of the eighty-eight k[bar{a}]rik[bar{a}]s appears again, Houben's translations of these k[bar{a}]rik[bar{a}]s is repeated with occasional slight variations to take Hel[bar{a}]r[bar{a}]ja' s interpretation into account, and there is additional discussion of what Hel[bar{a}]r[bar{a}]ja says.

   Houben's book affords an opportunity to consider some major issues concerning Bhartrhari, the tradition he represents, and how a modern scholar--from whatever background that scholar be--might approach Bhartrhari's major work. My discussion is organized as follows. First (section 2), I outline the theoretical principles Houben sets forth as the basis for his dealing with Bhartrhari, then (section 3) I consider evidence from the V[bar{a}]kyapad[bar{a}]ya in connection with Houben's principles, chiefly what he refers to as Bhartrhari's perspectivism. I subsequently take up (section 4) one large issue: the status of the received high language, associated with a group of model speakers called [acute{s}]ista, [5] who use speech forms characterized as "correct" (s[bar{a}]dhu) linguistic units ([acute{s}]abda) opposed to incorrect linguistic units (as[bar{a}]dhu[acute{s}]abda, apa[acute{s}]abda), that are viewed as corruptions (apabhra[dot{m}][acute{s}]a), with respect to how meanings are understood by users. The principal issue here is: do apa[acute{s}]abdas directly signify meanings for [acute{s}]istas when t hey communicate with someone using a vernacular, or do these speakers resort to a translation technique such that the apa[acute{s}]abda used calls to mind a s[bar{a}]dhu[acute{s}]abda, which then directly signifies a meaning? This topic also involves another important question: how one should consider the Vrtti and other commentaries in relation to what is said in the k[bar{a}]rik[bar{a}] text. [6] Following this discussion, I take up (section 5) some points concerning Houben's translation. [7]

2. As I said at the outset, I think Houben's book demonstrates considerable learning. It is to be expected, then, that Houben will have his own particular views to propound and devote more attention to the views of some scholars than to those of others. The very breadth of the work and the attention paid to details both in the translations and in the annotations make it difficult to write a general review or to make critical remarks without seeming to be a nitpicker. What is more, in connection with a work such as this, there is the danger of being viewed as a "traditionalist" as opposed to a more open-minded "modern" scholar. Despite these risks, however, Houben's book exhibits qualities--both good and bad--which invite such comments.

   2.1 The most important chapter in the introduction is the second, concerning the V[bar{a}]kyapad[bar{a}]ya and its interpretation. Here, Houben expresses his doubts with respect to generally held opinions concerning how one should understand what Bhartrhari intended to set forth and postulates three principles which, he says (p. 16), "[ldots] clarify, in my view, a great deal of Bhartrhari's thought, and particularly of his treatment of the notion of sambandha 'relation'."

   Houben accepts (p. 18) that "[ldots] Bhartrhari did have some theoretical preferences [ldots]" At the same time, he expends considerable energy arguing against some scholars who see certain basic ideas maintained and defended in the V[bar{a}]kyapad[bar{i}]ya. Thus, he remarks (p. 15): "According to Peri Sarveswara, the whole of the VP is to be understood on the basis of the first four k[bar{a}]rik[bar{a}]s [ldots] But what would happen if we were to take first other parts of the VP into account and...