Vakyapadiya of Bhartrihari
by K. A. Subramania Iyer | 1965 | 391,768 words
The English translation of the Vakyapadiya by Bhartrihari including commentary extracts and notes. The Vakyapadiya is an ancient Sanskrit text dealing with the philosophy of language. Bhartrhari authored this book in three parts and propounds his theory of Sphotavada (sphota-vada) which understands language as consisting of bursts of sounds conveyi...
This book contains Sanskrit text which you should never take for granted as transcription mistakes are always possible. Always confer with the final source and/or manuscript.
Verse 1.144
Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation of verse 1.144:
अनादिमवà¥à¤¯à¤µà¤šà¥à¤›à¤¿à¤¨à¥à¤¨à¤¾à¤� शà¥à¤°à¥à¤¤à¤¿à¤®à¤¾à¤¹à¥à¤� करà¥à¤¤à¥ƒà¤•ामà¥� à¥�
शिषà¥à¤Ÿà¥ˆà¤°à¥à¤¨à¤¿à¤¬à¤§à¥à¤¯à¤®à¤¾à¤¨à¤¾ तॠà¤� वà¥à¤¯à¤µà¤šà¥à¤›à¤¿à¤¦à¥à¤¯à¤¤à¥� सà¥à¤®à¥ƒà¤¤à¤¿à¤� à¥� १४à¥� à¥�anÄdimavyavacchinnÄá¹� Å›rutimÄhura kartá¹›kÄm |
Å›iá¹£á¹airnibadhyamÄnÄ tu na vyavacchidyate smá¹›tiá¸� || 144 ||144. Scripture (Åš°ù³Ü³Ù¾±) has been declared to be beginningless, continuous and without an author. Written tradition (³§³¾á¹›t¾±) is composed by cultured Ancients and has continuity.
Commentary
There are those who accept the authority of Scripture only and consider only the sacred books as trustworthy in regard to matters having invisible fruit and the views of men as doubtful and, therefore, not authority. According to them, even though there is no difference between Scripture and written Tradition as far as continuity of what is taught is concerned, yet Scripture has no deviations in the rules relating to accent, phoneme, sequence, place and time of study nor has it been established differently by any other person and it has always been established in all the countries in divisions according to branches. Written Tradition, on the other hand, has continuity of meaning, but is composed by the cultured differently at different times in prose, verses, sentences etc.
Some teachers think as follows: No act has, in itself, a visible or invisible fruit. It is only by acting according to Scripture that merit is manifested and by going against Scripture that one is tainted with sin. Scripture itself ordains that an act like the killing of a BrÄhmana which is a sin in some contexts becomes the cause of divine happiness if done in another context.1
Others, on the other hand, think that Scripture only makes known the specific power of objects. What would be the interest of Scripture to be a playful cause (of merit and demerit) and favour or harass men? It is seen to be better to assume that it (the causing of merit or demerit) is the nature of substances rather than that it is the nature of Scripture. In such written traditions as that of the Science of treatment, it is things like poison or herbs which have the capacity to fulfil a purpose and not the traditional texts. Therefore, it is nature of substances which is followed by Scripture, as it is the nature of Scripture in the other view. Just as, in the world, causes of benefit or harm are clearly distinguished, in the same way, there is uninterrupted establishment of the means of knowing them.[1]
Notes
[1. Vṣṛabha points out that in Puruá¹£amedha and SautrÄmaṇÄ�, ²ú°ùÄå³ó³¾²¹á¹‡a±¹²¹»å³ó²¹ leads to heaven. As he puts itâ€�Puruá¹£amedhe sautrÄmaṇyÄá¹� ca svargÄá¹…gatvam,]
What is meant is that the power to produce their effects, good or bad, belongs naturally to substances, but, by uninterrupted tradition, it is Scripture that makes it known. Similarly, the power of correct words to produce merit and that of incorrect words to produce demerit are inherent in them. Grammar only makes them known]