What did Kumārila have in view when he spoke of a “linguistic force” and of an “objective force”?

What did Kumārila mean when he spoke of śabda– and arthabhāvanā? While the first compound can be interpreted as a tatpuruṣa (the force of language) or as a karmadhāraya (the force consisting of language), the latter remains less clear… You can read about three interpretative proposals here.

Comments and discussions are welcome. Be sure you are making a point and contributing to the discussion.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *