<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>elisa freschiKumārila on sentence-meaning: Mahābhāṣya opponents? &#8211; elisa freschi</title>
	<atom:link href="https://elisafreschi.com/2015/11/16/kumarila-on-sentence-meaning-mahabha%E1%B9%A3ya-opponents/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://elisafreschi.com</link>
	<description>These pages are a sort of virtual desktop of Elisa Freschi. You can find here my cv and some random thoughts on Sanskrit (and) Philosophy. All criticism welcome! Contributions are also welcome!</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 Apr 2026 12:52:37 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
		<item>
		<title>Kumārila on sentence-meaning: Mahābhāṣya opponents?</title>
		<link>https://elisafreschi.com/2015/11/16/kumarila-on-sentence-meaning-mahabha%e1%b9%a3ya-opponents/</link>
		<comments>https://elisafreschi.com/2015/11/16/kumarila-on-sentence-meaning-mahabha%e1%b9%a3ya-opponents/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Nov 2015 16:04:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>elisa freschi</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[language and linguistics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mīmāṃsā]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Vyākaraṇa]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bhartṛhari]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Helārāja]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hideyo Ogawa]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kumārila Bhaṭṭa]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patañjali]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Saṃskṛta-sādhutā]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://elisafreschi.com/?p=2074</guid>

				<description><![CDATA[At the beginning of his chapter on sentence meaning, Kumārila sets the problem of what is the meaning-bearer in the case of a sentence (see this post). Later in the chapter, he will discuss sphoṭa, apoha and then present his abhihitānvayavāda, but first he discusses in general the possibility of a sentence-meaning. There can be [&#8230;]]]></description>
					<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>At the beginning of his chapter on sentence meaning, Kumārila sets the problem of what is the meaning-bearer in the case of a sentence (see this <a href="http://elisafreschi.com/2014/05/13/kumarila-on-sentence-meaning/" target="_blank">post</a>). Later in the chapter, he will discuss <em>sphoṭa</em>, <em>apoha</em> and then present his <em>abhihitānvayavāda</em>, but first he discusses in general the possibility of a sentence-meaning. There can be no sentence-meaning out of the sum of the word-meanings, since those are instantaneous and cannot connect (kā 6&#8211;8). The same applies to their cognitions (kā 9). Further, neither words (<em>pada</em>) nor the concepts evoked by them (<em>tadbuddhi</em>) can really connect, so that a sentence-meaning is <em>stricto sensu</em> impossible. <span id="more-2074"></span><br />
Now, it might seem obvious that words or that the concepts of them can connect, since they, e.g., expect each other through syntactical expectancy (<em>ākāṅkṣā</em>), but this is again impossible, given that they do not exist at the same time (kā 11&#8211;12). For the same reason, they cannot be connected insofar as they are part of a single cognition (kā 18). Nor can one accept that the sentence-meaning is unitary and part-less, as with the theory of sphoṭa (Pārthasārathi ad kā 18).</p>
<p>The next discussion (departing from kā 27) regards the possibility of connecting words into a sentence meaning insofar as the one affects the other. The typical example is that of <em>śuklaḥ gauḥ</em> `the white ox&#8217;. Isn&#8217;t it the case that <em>śukla</em> is the <em>viśeṣaṇa</em> &#8216;qualifier&#8217; of <em>gauḥ</em>, the <em>viśeṣya</em> &#8216;qualifiand&#8217;?</p>
<p>The problem seems akin to the one discussed also in the <em>Vākyapadīya</em> (see the discussion of Helārāja ad VP 3.14.97 in Ogawa in <em>Saṁskṛta-Sādhutā</em>) and, more importantly, in the Mahābhāṣya ad 2.1.1, where the topic under discussion is the relation between <em>rājan</em> and <em>puruṣa</em> in the sequence <em>rājñaḥ puruṣaḥ</em> (=<em>rājapuruṣa</em>) &#8216;the king&#8217;s servant&#8217;. Notwithstanding this difference, Patañjali, like Kumārila, employs the terms <em>bheda</em> &#8216;difference&#8217; and <em>saṃsarga</em> &#8216;connection&#8217; and speaks of terms that are <em>vyavacchinna</em> &#8216;determined&#8217;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			

		<wfw:commentRss>https://elisafreschi.com/2015/11/16/kumarila-on-sentence-meaning-mahabha%e1%b9%a3ya-opponents/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
				<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">2074</post-id>	</item>
	</channel>
</rss>