RAFFAELE TORELLA

HOW IS VERBAL SIGNIFICATION POSSIBLE: UNDERSTANDING ABHINAVAGUPTAS REPLY1

We can nd, scattered in Abhinavaguptas works, a number of penetrating remarks on the nature of language. An overall assessment of his position in the Indian speculation on s abda has not yet been attempted, and certainly this is not an easy task due to the many components and the various sources of his eclectic teaching. Another reason for his absence from the general surveys of Indian linguistic studies may have been the implicit assumption that owing to his being a tantric master, and therefore above all a mystic, his philosophy is not to be taken seriously, an exception being made only for his well-known contribution to aesthetics. Be this as it may, the available studies on Abhinava as a philosopher of language end up by being either a chapter attached to specic tantric studies or just a paragraph when dealing with the doctrine of Bhartr . hari, to which Abhinavaguptas doctrine is considered an esoteric appendix.2 Now that it is becoming more and more apparent that Abhinavagupta is one of the great philosophers of traditional India, time has come for us to make an attempt to reconsider his ideas in broader perspective. The starting point of my enquiry was, in a sense, a negative one. At a certain point of my study of Abhinavaguptas work I was struck by the fact that he hardly ever mentions sphot . a. Acceptance of sphot . a would seem the natural outcome of the central place that Abhinavagupta assigns to the whole of Bhartr . harian teaching in the Trika philosophy, since in Bhartr . haris conception the sphot . a theory plays an essential role. On the contrary, the rare occurrences of the term sphot . a in Abhinavaguptas works all show that he considers this doctrine as belonging to others,3 that is, the Vaiy akaran . as towards whom he never fails to exhibit a certain cold1 Extended version of a paper presented at the XII World Sanskrit Conference,

Helsinki (July, 2003). Earlier drafts were read at La Sorbonne (May, 2002) and Berkeley (September, 2002). 2 Among the studies on linguistic speculation in Abhinavagupta, or more in general, in the so-called Kashmir Shaivism, see Gaurinath Shastri, 1959; Seyfort Ruegg, 1959: 101116; Padoux, 1990; Filliozat, 1994; Torella, 1998, 1999b, 2000. 3 E.g., IPVV vol. II, p. 188 ll.1213 tath a ca vaiy akaran akyasphot aya so . air api v . asya pr buddhinirgr ahyataiva dar sit a. Journal of Indian Philosophy 32: 173188, 2004. 2004 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands.

174

RAFFAELE TORELLA

ness.4 And, incidentally, this fact, too, deserves a closer investigation: how is it that Abhinavagupta is so often disparaging of the Vaiy akaran . as and at the same time so respectful and appreciative of their recognized leader. The next step in my enquiry has been to see what is, then, the meaning-bearer for Abhinavagupta, once he has decided not to take the Bhartr . harian sphot . a into account. An answer to this question is to be sought, rst of all, in the Par atrim ik atattvavivaran .s . a (PTV), one of his Useful most personal and fascinating works, and in the Tantr aloka (TA). hints are also to be found in I svarapratyabhij avivr sin ( IPVV) . tivimar and M alin vijayav arttika. The picture which can be gathered from the full range of his texts is, if rather complex, nonetheless highly consistent. To this old problem what is the v acaka? quite unexpectedly Abhinavagupta furnishes the oldest of the solutions, that of the M m am a:5 . s Ultimately, the power of verbal signication, consisting in the identication with meaning, only pertains to phonemes.6 The phonemes have as their essential nature sonority (s ruti; PTV p. 249 l.20), which presupposes difference (without difference in sonority no articulation of phonemes is possible). For the difference to be possible an inner unity is necessary; however, this unity, represented by supreme Consciousness or Par a V ac, does not cancel difference, but acts as the inner background on which more and more interiorized forms of difference rest. For, as we shall see later, difference, multiplicity, are the very heart of phonemes. The fact that it is possible to speak inwardly implies that all the sources of differentiation of phonemes (place and organs of articulation, aspiration and so on) must also have some, so-to-speak, internal version (PTV p. 249 ll.24 antas tath asamucitasvabh avah ad eva). The status of the . sy phonemes in Abhinavaguptas view seems to be very different from any other classical conception, including the M m am as. A telling evidence . s may be represented by Abhinavaguptas paradoxical answer to the objection that not only the phonemes of language but many other sounds can express meanings, for example the sound of a drum or that of a bird (PTV p. 251 ll.1011). Only phonemes, Abhinavagupta says, have by themselves the power to express meanings (PTV p. 251 l.9 varn am eva ca n .a
4 PTV (Gnoli edition) p. 236 ll.2124 anyai s caitat prayatnas adhitam iha ca et avadupade sadh ar adhi sayana sa lin am aprayatna eva siddhyat ty n asm abhir atra vr a . th vaiy akaran uta sar rat avis am atraphale nirbandho vihitah IPVV . hagamane p . agurugr . kriy .. vol. II, p. 194 ll.1721, p. 195 ll.1722, etc. 5 The rst to maintain the identication of the word with the phonemes that compose it abarabh is held to be the M m am as m am as utra I.1.5, atha . saka Upavars . a (S . ya p. 54, ad M . s gaur ity atra kah abdah aravisarjan y a iti bhagav an upavars . s . | gakarok . ah .) 6 PTV p. 251 l.9 varna am eva ca param arthato rthat ad atmyalaks acakatvam; . n . an . am . v p. 241 ll.1314 evam ekaikasyaiva varn astavam acakatvam. . asya v . v

HOW IS VERBAL SIGNIFICATION POSSIBLE

175

param arthato rthat ad atmyalaks acakatvam), so, if all sounds are . an . am . v seen potentially to have this power, this simply means that all sounds, without distinction, must have phonemes as their ultimate stuff. Even when they are indistinct or not fully manifested or articulated, the various sounds cannot exceed the corpus of the phonemes (m atr a).7 Nor can one say that, . k though being acknowledged as not going over the range of the m atr a, the . k indistinct/unmanifest sounds are not to be taken into account because they lack any efciency or practical application.8 In fact, they can for example generate pleasure and pain, as is the case with the sound of the ocean or the drum. Further, for the Saiva schools it is the avyaktadhvani unmanifest sonority itself to be described as being the very stuff of the mantra (PTV p. 250 ll.1920 mukhyatayaiva pr aya so mantratvam), the powerful sound par excellence. An additional evidence for the ultimately phonemic nature of all sounds is to be found in the somewhat cryptic statement made by Patajali in the Yogas utra (III.17): There is an overlapping of word, object and concept due to their being superimposed on each other. Thanks to directing [yogic] exercise on their differentiation one can obtain the knowledge of the sounds of all beings. If, as seems obvious, the knowledge of the sounds is to be understood as the knowledge of the meaning of the sounds, this means that all sounds are given the qualication of not exceeding the nature of unperceived phonemes,9 since only phonemes can indeed signify. Before attempting to nd a rationale for bold statements like these, let us broaden our perspective and see what is the place of phonemes in the theology of the Saiva advaita tradition which Abhinavagupta stems from. It is very high, indeed. The whole of reality, in Saiva ritual, can be traversed by six paths (adhvan). The guru has to resort to one of them, according to the circumstances and the leanings of the adept, particularly during the initiatory ceremony. These paths are divided by Abhinavagupta and his followers into two groups of three, called v acaka (padas, mantras, phonemes) and v acya (words, kal as, principles), respectively. In the Saiva advaita outlook, the linguistic paths hold an undiscussed ontological supremacy with respect to the realistic ones, while the opposite holds true in the dualist Saivasiddh anta.10
7 PTV p. 250 ll.1516 avyaktatve pi ta eva t avantah abdatv at s abdasya ca . s m atr atirekin av at. . k . o bh 8 PTV p. 250 ll.1617 m atr anatireky (my emendation for m atr atireky in the edited . k . k text) api avyaktah s abdo nupayog a n na sam gr h ta ity apy ayuktam . . . . 9 PTV p. 251 ll.78 sa katham, asphutavarnar atirekivihag adik ujitaj an aya . . . upatv paryavasyet. 10 See Torella, 2001: 854855.

176

RAFFAELE TORELLA

The pada-adhvan (here pada refers to the parts of a long and composite mantra) corresponds to the level of ordinary language, with its putting together the various phonemes to form words and sentences, and constitutes the body itself of discursive thought. Within the v acaka group the phonemes stand rst as representing the essential components both of the padas and the mantras: phonemes do not depend on anything else, they are svanis tha.11 But the very special, unique, rank of the phonemes .. can be well understood from a signicant detail found in the complicated picture of universal reality given by Abhinavagupta in the PTV. Here the phonemes and the ontological principles (tattva) are viewed according to the different planes of being, represented by the four levels of the Word. Par a and Pa syant (or the goddesses Par a and Par apar a) are seen as bimba and pratibimba, that is, as the reecting image and the reected image, respectively (PTV p. 234 ll.14 ff.). What is very revealing is that while in the mirror of Pa syant the tattvas of the manifested world appear in reverse order (from bh umi to s akti instead of from s akti to bh umi; see table 5.1 in Padoux, 1990: 318319), just like any reected image, the consonantal phonemes (from K to Ks . ), which are their quintessential nature, remain unchanged. Abhinavaguptas explanation is that the nature of phonemes does not tolerate alteration (PTV pp. 234 l.29235 l.1 svar up anyath atv asahis adipar amar sa abh avenaiva). They nanyath .n . uk are the par amar sas of the tattvas, i.e., the way in which consciousness becomes aware of them. At the level of Par a V ac, the nature of the phonemes is beyond convention, eternal, spontaneous, made of consciousness.12 The above remarks clarify another signicant feature of Abhinavaguptas linguistic ideas: the division of the word into three or four levels, upheld by Bhartr . hari and his followers and, among them, the Saiva philosophers themselves , does not conict with the Saiva emphasis on the role of phonemes. Abhinavagupta is not willing to see any gap between consciousness and phonemes (this after all cannot be a matter of too much surprise as his ontology and gnoseology typically do not like gaps). Were it not premature with respect to the development of our presentation of his ideas, we could introduce right now the enigmatic expression found (XI.67b), in which the answer to the question we are dealing in the TA with here is implicitly fully contained: varn . asam . vit, probably a hapax in

11 pad ani mantr arabdh ani mantr a varn ah h a ity es m . aikavigrah . / varn .a . svanis . .th .a . sth ulas uks mapar a tmat a // . Source unknown, quoted in Tantr a loka-viveka (T AV) vol. IV, . p. 34. 12 PTV p. 220 ll.2627 am s m n am av agbh umir iyam iha nirn yate .a . varn .a . par . yatraives m as amayikam upam. . trimam .a . nityam akr . samvinmayam eva r

HOW IS VERBAL SIGNIFICATION POSSIBLE

177

learned Sanskrit vocabulary, in front of which Jayaratha himself (the TAs commentator) remains silent. But let us apparently abandon the main track and allow ourselves a short digression, which, however, will prove to be not devoid of interest. The more distinction dims, says Abhinavagupta at a certain point of his magnum opus, the more aesthetic pleasure, relishing, rejoicing, come to the fore: everybody enjoys intense satisfaction at hearing a music made , Madhyam a, and Pa syant are to be seen of unmanifest sounds.13 Vaikhar as ontologically higher and higher planes precisely due to differentiation progressively diminishing in them (also within each of them there is an inner gradation towards non-difference, each of them showing a gross, subtle, and supreme level). From the linguistic point of view, this can be seen as the v acya component losing prominence in favour of the v acaka component. The tantric Abhinavagupta comes here to the foreground: the presence of the v acya is always a sign of non-fullness,14 at the mantra level it is precisely due to the lack of a v acya and to the total absence of conventionality that the b japin d a s agglomerates of seed-mantras, i.e., .. of mantras consisting of a single syllable can cause consciousness to vibrate (spandayanti).15 Starting from everyday reality, in which we have the proliferation of the multiplicity of discursive thought and of the
13 TA III.243cd244ab avibh ago hi nirvr yat am alap a.thatah avyak. tyai dr .s . t . // kil

tadhvanau tasmin v adane paritus . yati /. 14 This may be connected with the old question, rst mentioned as early as at the times of Y askas Nirukta (I.15), whether the vedic mantras are to be assumed as having a meaning or not. The meaninglessness of the mantras was upheld by Kautsa, whose position is recorded and criticised by Y aska (I.16). The question is taken up again by the M m am as utra (I.2.3139) and its commentators, who all endorse the meaningful. s ness option (for obvious reasons; the s utras 3139 give voice to a p urvapaks . a); cf. Staal, 1967: 2426, 4547. A Buddhist Mah ay ana text raises the question from a different perspective (cf. Dasgupta, 19693 [1946]: 2022; see also Gonda, 1975 [1963]: 299 300, totally depending on the latter without clearly acknowledging it). There are four kinds of dh aran s according to the Bodhisattvabh umi: dharma , artha , mantra and . dh aran s serving for obtaining the forbearance (ks nti) of the bodhisattva. The latter, . .a considered to be the highest, is made of totally meaningless syllables. But it is precisely such meaninglessness that is said to constitute their meaning (Bodhisattvabh umi p. 185 l.25 ayam eva cais m artho yad uta nirarthat a). Through meditating on their meaningless .a meaning, one can attain by himself the realization of the ineffable nature of all dharmas (ibid., p. 186 ll.14 sa tes m an am artham anus aren .a . mantrapad . samyak pratividhya tenaiv .a sarvadharm an a m apy artham samyak pratividhyati svayam ev a s rutv a [ . . . ] sarv a bhil a paih . . . sarvadharm an m av arth aparinis a punar es m apyasvabh avat a .a . svabh . pattih . | y .a . nirabhil ayam evais m av arthah .a . svabh .. 15 TA V.140141 kim punah apeks m a ye b japin ah . . samay .a . vin .d . ak . / sam . vidam . spandayanty ete neyuh sam vidup a yat a m // v a cy a bh a v a d ud a s nasam vitspand at . . . svadh amatah an asanirodh abhy am japin urn a //. Cf. also ibid., VII.2cd . / pr . oll . b .d . es . u p . at 3ab b japin tmakam atmat am // vidadhat parasam av .d .a . sarvam . sam . vidah . spandan . vitt

178

RAFFAELE TORELLA

language which makes it possible a language made of fully developed words and sentences endowed with fully dened objects , we arrive, at end of a long journey, close to the very roof of being (however, it is always to be borne in mind that in the Saiva advaita outlook there is no real vertical division and the highest plane is already present in the very heart of the lowest). This top reality is constituted by the plane of Sakti, or, from a linguistic viewpoint, by the M atr a, whose body is articu. k lated in nine and fty forms. The former are the alphabetic classes of the Sanskrit language, while the latter are the single phonemes. But M atr a, . k in which a shadow of objectivity (a ya) is still present,16 is not the last mr .s i step, which is instead represented by Bhairava, in the form of Sabdar as mass of sounds. In it, all objectivity and multiplicity are totally absent, it is only a single and unitary a sa.17 At this point we are legitimately mar curious to see what happened to the fty phonemes in what is the very core of non-differentiated universal consciousness. Will they too be reduced to an undifferentiated unity, just like a sa? Not at all. Even in Bhairava mar i the phonemes keep their multiplicity, only they are so-to-speak Sabdar as i.18 compressed (sam as . kal-), hence the denomination itself of Sabdar Now it is high time that we put all the pieces together and attempt an explanation. The phonemes are the only reality which is not swallowed by supreme consciousness; they never lose their own essential identity and nature regardless of the ontological level in which they act; they freely run through Vaikhar , Madhyam a, Pa syant and Par a. Why is this? Simply because they are not a content of consciousness but consciousness itself, amounting to its energetic, cognitive aspect. Thanks to this germ of multiplicity alone, which they constitute, consciousness can be alive, can
up ayah acya in itself that is altogether . iti varn . itam /. As Jayaratha claries, it is not the v absent, but the v acya as distinct from the v acaka, since they shine in perfect unity vol. III, p. 455 sam with consciousness (TAV atmyena sphuran t vyatiriktasya . vidaik .a v acyasy abh av at . . .). In the case of mantras (and their varieties, like mantre svaras, mantramahe svaras etc.), the Saiva theology distinguishes a v acaka component (the mantra proper in its linguistic nature) and the v acya, i.e., the devat a signied by it (Brunner, 2001: 184). 16 TA III.198cd a mr yacch ayay a yog at saiva s akti s ca m atr a //. .s . k 17 TA III.198ab ek amar sasvabh avatve s abdar as ih . sa bhairavah . /. From the union of i with M Bhairava-Sabdar as atr a arises another alphabet goddess, M alin the Garland. k bearing One, characterized by an apparently chaotic mixture of the phonemes (from N to Ph) and specially connected with power. 18 Jayaratha thereon (vol. II, p. 191) ekah a ya su nyatv an nih ayah mar sanam .s . mr . sah ., a a mar sah amar sakah at a, tatsvabh avatve pac as ato pi varn n am a . par . pram .a . sam . kalanay sabdar as ir iti, bhairava iti vyapade sah . In other traditions s abdar a s i may also be simply . a synonim of m atr a (e.g., Par akhya VI.34; apparently also in Siddhayoge svar pat . k .ala XVI).

HOW IS VERBAL SIGNIFICATION POSSIBLE

179

elude the impasse of the ved antin sat-cid- ananda, and perform its cosmic function, or, to use Abhinavaguptas words, it can allow the successive to enter into itself and transform it into the non-successive.19 Language is precisely the device by means of which succession (krama) is introduced into consciousness so that consciousness can dissolve it into pure reective awareness, in an eternal pay.20 The phonemes support, feed authentic XI.65cd varn consciousness (TA as te pram ar up am am . augh . saty . bibhrati sam vidam // ; Jayaratha thereon, bibhrati pus n anti ), enable it to approach . .. objects in terms of this. While remaining at same time in the plane of overowing consciousness, they can designate, know everything.21 Signication by words and sentences, on which the articulation of thought and ultimately knowledge itself depend, is made possible by the fact that they are made of phonemes, constituting the very cognitive and active structure of consciousness. All words and objects (and their knowledge) rest on this language-principle, which Abhinavagupta calls the supreme mantra, but its supremely undifferentiated nature, its greatness has in any case to contain within itself the differentiation of the various phonemes; for without this inner distinction it would be impossible to distinguish the various avikalpa experiences from which the various discursive articulations will then arise, and everything would be the same.22 Human language is, of course, based on conventions.23 But conventions in order
19 Only the successive can enter into consciousness, then to be transformed into non-

successive (PTV p. 243 ll.1920 akramasya tat [i.e., krama] p urvakatvena samvidy eva bh av at). 20 PTV p. 243 ll.2123 tath a ca sarva evayam agr upah amar sah . v . par . kramika eva, antah a . samvinmayas tv akrama eveti sadaiveyam evam . vidhaiva evam eva vicitr p arame svar par abhat rik a. . .ta 21 TA XI.63cd65 ucchalatsam am atravi sr anty asv adayoginah abhidh ana. vid . // sarv s amarthy ad aniyantrita saktayah h atmasahotthe rthe dhar aparyantabh agini // .s . / sr . .ta . sv a mr antah umau t avato rth an abhedatah ar up am am .s . svacidbh . / varn . aughas te pram . saty . bibhrati sam . vidam //. 22 PTV p. 251 ll.2629 tac ca paramantramahah prthivy adau s uddhavy ami sr adi. . p aram arthikab japin upak adivarn tmakam eva, anyath a merubadarajalajvalanab.d . ar .a h av abh avaghat an an ty ekam at. . asukhanirvikalpaj . sarvam . sy 23 Signicantly different from the status of ordinary language is that of mantras as they keep a more direct contact with consciousness. Ordinary words have come down to us through the usage of the elders from which they are to be learnt. Their ultimate rooting in par amar sa takes place through intermediate steps and gradual renements, whereas the mantras are transmitted through a chain of gurus, starting with Siva himself, just as they are, that is, with their innate and unlimited nature as consciousness absolutely intact: TAV vol. X, p. 107 (on XVI.265cd267ab), mantr an a m punar an a diguroh prabhr ty ady a pi . . . . anavacchinnasahajapar amar sa tmakatvam avi sis t am eveti . It is precisely due to this pecu.. liarity of the mantras that the supreme Lord is so highly careful about them (ibid., p. 106 yena tatra parame svarasy adarah . ).

180

RAFFAELE TORELLA

to be effective and not simply depend in turn on other conventions with a regressus ad innitum must have their roots in the universal consciousness in its phonemical nature, the varnasam . vit we mentioned above (akr trim a nantavarn asam vidi r u d hat a m sam ket a y anti; see below note 24). . . . . . . The status of v acaka is nothing but this: the becoming a-conventional of conventions through their having an ultimate resting place in varn . asam . vit or mah amantra.24 All levels of verbal usage must have as their basis the limitless body of non-mayic phonemes which are intrinsically associated with the cognitive power of consciousness (sam sasacivah . vidvimar . ; see below note 25) and make it possible.25 The non-mayic phonemes give rise to the phonemes of worldy language and are described in the revealed texts as being their strength (v rya).26 If their strength is covered, they are like impotent written letters with respect to the mantra.27 At this point we are in a position fully to understand what a passage of the M alin vijayottara28 meant to say: Once fully awakened by her, the Lord,
24 TA XI.67cd69 (vv.67cd69ab asy am akr ananta-varn ud am // . trim . c . asam . vidi r . hat sam ket a y anti cet te pi y anty asam am / anay a tu vin a sarve sam a bahu sah . . ketavr . ttit . ket . kr t a h // avi s r a ntatay a kuryur anavasth a m duruttar a m / ). See also PTV p. 252 ll.36. . . . 25 TA XI.71 ten ananto hy am ay yo yo varn ama dr ah sasacivah .s . agr . / sam . vidvimar . sadaiva sa hi jr . mbhate //. Jayaratha adds a further elucidation: sadaiveti, kr ay yavarn aran vasare p ty arthah a k acana pram a samullasati . trimam . avyavah .a . | iha hi y tatr ava syam idam iti varn avyam iti bh avah . asam . bhedena bh .. 26 TA XI.72 ata eva ca m ay y a varn h utim ay yavarn ryatvena .a . s . vitenire / ye ca m . es . u v nir upit ah rya is what makes mantras effective (cf. the passage from the . //. The same v vol. VII (part II), p. 65 [. . .] sarves Siddhayoge svar , quoted in TAV m eva mantr an m .a .a ato v ryam pragopitam / tena guptena te gupt ah es varn s tu keval ah . . s .a .a . // [. . .] (almost identical passage from the Tantrasadbh ava quoted by Ks aja in Sivas utravimar sin . emar p. 25, Torella, 1999a: 8889). The passage comes from Siddhayoge svar I.13, according to J. Trzsks edition, who also refers to another parallel passage in the Kubjik amata (Trzsk, 1999: 1). An interesting passage of the Siddhayoge svar (XXXI.211) presents the matter in a very peculiar way. While Dev is asking him a further question, Bhairava bursts into a wild laughter which makes her tremble and shakes the whole universe; this laughter, Bhairava then explains to his frightened consort, has as result the awakening of mantras (10a mantr avabodham . tu kr . tam). 27 TAV vol. VII (part II), p. 64 anyath a hi te lipyaks sakalp a na k am . arasam . nive . cana XXVI.22 lipisthitas tu yo mantro nirv siddhim ryah . vidadhyuh . ; cf. also TA . so tra kalpitah asya pustak at prathate mahah . / sam . ketabalato n . //. However, Abhinavagupta adds that in some cases, due to a very special grace of the Lord, a fully effective apprehension of mantras from books is also possible (ibid., 23cd24ab). 28 III.2728. The full passage reads: sa tay a sam . prabuddhah . san yonim . viks . obhya s aktibhih ana srut n varn m an asr . jat prabhuh . / tatsam .a . s tatsam . khy . // te [var.tair] tair a li ngit ah amaphalaprad ah adhakendr an m anyath a . santah . sarvak . / bhavanti s .a . n v ravandite //. Interestingly, the M alin vijayottara sees a sound nature also in the divine counterparts of human phonemes, while Abhinavagupta, for his part, speaks of the former as a srauta (PTV p. 235 l.13).

HOW IS VERBAL SIGNIFICATION POSSIBLE

181

after perturbing the matrix with the powers, has created [in the phenomenic world] the phonemes having the same sound and the same number as those [phonemes: i.e., those forming the body itself of the Sakti]. It is only when they are embraced (a ngita) by the latter that they can fulll all li wishes. Without this embrace by the archetypical phonemes, the human phonemes cannot have access to their special powers (rst of all, that of signifying), and knowledge (pram a) could not arise; as a consequence, the world would be dumb, as it were.29 It is because of their effectiveness in bringing the power of v ac to perfection Abhinavagupta notes in having in mind another passage of the M the TA, alin vijayottara that phonemes are to be worshipped.30 The par amar sa of the word cow, which is in itself the result of convention and has been established and used by people before us from whom we have learnt it, and the par amar sa of the corresponding idea cow associated with it at the time of convention, fall (nipatati) into the plane of a par amar sa beyond m ay a and convention (PTV p. 252 ll.6 9). The power of denotation pertains, strictly speaking (v astavam), to the single phonemes, that is why certain specially gifted persons are able to understand the meaning of a word from a single phoneme of it (cf. PTV p. 268 ll.1114).31 Moreover, we can point out the example of particles made of a single syllable, like a- or ca, which possess a power of signication less dependent on m ay a: their meanings are, so-to-speak, not reied (asattvabh utam), naturally oriented towards the knowing subject and away from objectivity (ibid., ll.1720). The phonemes, for their part, do not all share exactly the same status, the status of the vowels, for example, being higher than consonants. The vowels in fact are viewed as being closer to consciousness and, consequently, as being able to manifest the various movements of the soul more directly and independently from conventions; in fact, they are the rst to be pronounced by newly born babies and are also spontaneously present in animals. Following the lead of the tantric scriptures, here particularly the M alin vijayottara, it becomes even possible to introduce a further v acya-v acaka differentiation between the phonemes: v acaka proper are the vowels, linked to Siva as pure knowing
29 TAV vol. VII (part II), p. 58 anyath a hi pr aguktavad anavasthopanip at at pramotp ada eva na sy at, ity anena m ukapr ayam vi s vam bhaved iti bh a vah . . . . 30 TA XI.80cd ata eva hi v aksiddhau varn n am asyat a //. .a . samup 31 Abhinavagupta is reminiscent here of Bhartrhari, for whom the rst dhvani (here . phoneme) is sufcient to manifest the indivisible sphot . tti; Paddhati . a (cf. VP I.82 and vr thereon, p. 148 l.22 ekaiko dhvanih . tsnam . kr . sphot . am abhivyanakti); Sphotasiddhi v. 18 pratyekam api te vikalam tm anam . sphot .a . abhivyajanti. Cf. also VP II.2ab, quoted by Abhinavagupta in PTV p. 268 l.22, where Bhartr . hari mentions the thesis, upheld by some, that the rst word contains in itself the meaning of the entire sentence.

182

RAFFAELE TORELLA

subject, while v acya are the consonants, linked to Sakti as disclosing herself to the world of objectivity; the M alin vijayottara calls them b ja are not afraid of all these diversiseed and yoni matrix.32 But the Saivas cations including the very diversication of phonemes, whose standard number is fty but which can be seen as sixty-four33 or even as potentially innite.34 For them, differentiation does not affect the essential unity of the language principle (the word-consciousness), which, on the contrary, manifests itself precisely through this multiplicity, also at the level of the fully differentiated linguistic usage of ordinary reality.35 How may we dene Abhinavaguptas position in the context of Indian linguistic speculation? His reference point is clearly Bhartr . haris teaching, particularly in recognizing the interpenetration of reective awareness and language, or, in other words, the inner linguistic nature of the process of knowledge. From Utpaladeva onwards, this constitutes the very hinge of the Pratyabhij a philosophy.36 But there is something that keeps Abhinavagupta away from a whole-hearted acceptance of the whole of Bhartr . haris conception: rst of all, Bhartr . haris dismissal of the phonemes and his considering them as pure abstractions. This must have seemed unacceptable to Abhinavagupta, in his position as a tantric master. He cannot ignore that practically any tantra belonging to the Saiva tradition deals with the phonemes, assigning them a central place both in ritual and speculation. What he says in the IPVV, precisely addressing the Vaiy akaran . as, sounds like a proud vindication: For us, the totality of sounds is the supreme Lord himself, the goddess M atr a [or the alphabet . k in the usual sequence] both distinct and not distinct [from Him] is His Power, the eight alphabetic classes are the eight Powers of the Rudras, the fty phonemes are the fty Powers of the Rudras.37 If Abhinavagupta intends to give space to the role of phonemes, this cannot but take place at
32 PTV p. 236 ll.411. 33 PTV p. 251 ll.1420. 34 I svarapratyabhij ak arik a-vr ar adi sat anantagan a. On the other . tti p. 77 l.8 tattatkak . an hand, the Saivas also conceive of a single phoneme, undividedly present in all the others: TA VI.217 eko n ad atmako varn vibh agav an / so nastamitar upatv ad an ahata . ah . sarvavarn .a ihoditah . //. 35 PTV p. 236 ll.18 n asm an a kulayet ye vayam ek am avad anantacitrat a. t garbhin m t a m sam vid a tmik a m giram sam gir a mahe | m a y ye pi vyavah a rapade . . . . . . laukikakramikavarn amay ekapar amar sasvabh avaiva pratyavamar sak arin . apadasphut . at . prak as ar up a v ac. 36 I need not repeat here what I have already treated in detail in former studies (Torella, 2001: 857; Torella, 2002: XXVXXVII). 37 Vol. II, pp. 195 l.24196 l.3 iha t avat parame svarah abdar as ih aktir . s ., s asya bhinn abhinnar up a m atr adev , varg as saktyas takam as ad varn h . k . .takam . rudra .. . pac .a . pac as ad rudra saktayah ..

HOW IS VERBAL SIGNIFICATION POSSIBLE

183

the expense of the sphot . a doctrine, which in fact he totally ignores. Will this result in going closer and closer to the M m am a? Why not? After all, . s both the M m am sakas and the Saivas feel as their primary duty the defence . and exegesis of the Sruti, as embodied in the Vedas for the former, in the Tantras for the latter. This is, however, only a prima-facie answer. On a closer examination, it becomes clear that Abhinavaguptas position is the result of cooking, as it were, M m am a elements in a Bhartr . s . harian sauce. He can easily do without the sphot a because a strong unity characterizes . his conception of language, which makes the linking/unifying role of the sphot adins . a unnecessary. Also the usual argument used by the sphot . av against the varn av a din s (the varn a s, discrete as they are, are unt to . . account for the unity of the word, hence the necessity of the sphot a . ) loses force in front of the intrinsic unity of the phonemes-structure. The phonemes, says Abhinavagupta (PTV p. 253 ll.2023), imply each other, otherwise they could not aggregate in a word. Precisely because they imply each other, the phonemes must exist inside the speaker as an internal nondiscursive structure. Likewise, all the devat as are present in each cognitive act simultaneously and by aggregating themselves they bring about the wonderfully variegated activity of consciousness. We have the phonemes at both ends of the language and knowledge process. The phonemes as acting in ordinary language already possess, besides a sound nature (which meets the rst general requirement of a word, that is, of being something to be heard38 ), a cognitive and grasping nature, which can be seen at its height in their archetypes, the divine phonemes, which constitute the very core of Consciousness, a germ of quintessential multiplicity inside the absolute unity of Consciousness. If Consciousness is an active power and not a lifeless mirror this is due rst of all to its phonemic nature, which alone enables it to have access to, and assimilate to itself, the (apparently) other. To the many merits of this extraordinary thinker we can add also this: to have created a bridge between the two main schools of Indian linguistics, nding an apparently impossible madhyam a pratipad between M m am sakas and Vaiy a karan as. . .

s abdasabdah h rotragrahan h arttika, Sphot ada . prasiddhah . | te [i.e., varn .a . ] ca s .a . ; Slokav . av v. 5 tasm ac chrotraparicchinno yady artham a / sarvath a tasya . gamayen na v s abdatvam yate; Ny ayamajar vol. II, p. 144 ta [i.e., varn h . lokasiddham . na h .a .] eva ca s ravan akaran ak a vagamagocaratay a s abdavyapade s abh a jah N a ge s a ( Uddyota . . . ad Mah abh as arthabodhakatvena prasiddhah .s . ya I.l.1, pp. 1415, loke vyavahartr . u pad . s rotrendriyagr ahyatv ad varn upadhvanisam uha eva s abda ity arthah . ar ..

38 Cf. S abarabh as m am as utra I.l.5, s rotragrahan . ya p. 54, ad M . s . e hy arthe loke

184

RAFFAELE TORELLA

Appendix: The position of the dualistic Saivasiddh anta. A detailed treatment of the linguistic doctrines elaborated in the Saiddh antika tantras and in the works of the Saiddh antika authors would require a separate study. I will limit myself here to some observations on particular aspects that can contribute, by contrast, to a better under standing of the Saiva advaita position as elaborated by Abhinavagupta. To begin with, it should be pointed out that the Saiddh antikas too reject sphot a , the only exception known to me being the south-Indian . Paus . karatantra, which is, however, undoubtedly a very late and eclectic text. The implicit rejection of the sphot . a doctrine has a signicant place in a well-known treatise of R amakan .t .ha (approximately contemporary to Abhinavagupta), the N adak arik a, originally included in his commentary on the S ardhatri sati-K alottara (pp. 912, on I.5ab). Unlike Abhinavagupta, R amakan ha does not subscribe to the phoneme option .t . either, but presents yet another solution to the question at issue. The v acaka is the n ada, a subtle entity made of inner discourse (antah sam jalpa ), . . by virtue of which the objects such as forms/colours, tastes, smells, sounds etc. are made into objects of reective awareness (v. 11ac r uparasagandha sabd adyarth a yen amr yat am t ah atm a .s . n . / so ntah . sam . jalp n adah ). This n a da is in turn the product of Mah a m a y a , the so-called . Pure Matter, also called Bindu. As R amakan .t .ha immediately points out, n ada, though representing the highest manifestation of the language principle, and the ultimate source and background of all human linguistic activities, belongs to a totally different sphere from Consciousness, is akti (as some knowers of the words maintain) not a form of Kriy as and is not integrally connected with the conscious soul (v. 18 seyam avasth a kai scit padavidbhir varn as akteh a . yate kriy . / iha punar anyaivokt purus a samav a yin ca v a g yasm a t ). If we examine his short treatise in . some detail, we see that he has in mind two main opponents: overtly, the M m am akaran . sakas, against whom he uses the standard Vaiy . a (or better, sphot av a din , like Mandana Mi s ras) arguments, and, implicitly, the . Vaiy akaran as, whose sphot a he does not mention but for which he tacitly . . amakan attempts to nd a s aiva substitute.39 In front of R .t .has straightforward dismissal of the phoneme option the commentator Aghora siva
39 One may suppose that R amakan .t .ha might have felt embarrassed at mentioning and then attacking a thesis, which is not so distant from his own: the reasons that he could have brought forward against the sphot ada as well. It . a might have been easily used against the n is the commentator Aghora siva who, in the only long excursus of his succinct commentary (pp. 240241, on v. 7), feels the need to make up for the puzzling silence of R amakan .t .ha

HOW IS VERBAL SIGNIFICATION POSSIBLE

185

feels compelled to explain away an apparent contradiction with regard to a Saiddh antika scripture, the Par akhya, which instead endorses it (p. 242, on v. 12, katham punah s r matpar akhye p urvavarn arayukto . . . ajasam . sk ntyo r n o bhidh a yakah ity uktam ). Aghora s ivas explanation is far from .. . convincing (n ad abhivyajakatvenopac ar ad ity ados . a), but has the merit to focus our attention on this relatively early and important a gama. The Par akhya, which until recently was deemed to be completely lost, is currently being edited by D. Goodall, who has discovered the only extant manuscript. The above quotation, which looked a bit suspicious owing to its repeating almost verbatim the well-known passage abarabh of the S as . ya a fact quite unexpected in a revealed text , does indeed occur in the VI chapter of the Par akhya (v. 14ab), a portion of which (128) has been edited and translated in a very recent article (Goodall, 2001). Interestingly, the Par akhya starts with a bold afrmation about the status of abhidh ayaka (i.e., v acaka) having to be assigned rst of all to the phonemes (secondly, to the words and sentences made out of them). While doing so, the text also presents and easily dismisses a sphot adin opponent. However, in the latter part of the chapter the . av original M m am a-like thesis gradually makes way for a Naiy ayika-like . s one, with an increasing emphasis on the role of convention (sam . keta). In the attempt to make sense of these scattered remarks, we may say that both R amakan akhya ultimately view the phonemes, as .t .ha and the Par presented in the Saivasiddh anta tradition, as too weak candidates for the role of v acaka. Being made of a material stuff, however rened,40 their nature is not so intrinsically dynamic and creative as to enable them to perform this high task. Particularly interesting, if a bit enigmatic, is the solution proposed by R amakan .t .ha. After taking into account and rejecting several alternative possibilities, he arrives at a solution which, if nominally inspired by a famous passage of S ardhatri sati-K alottara,41 verily has much in common with that of his concealed adversaries, the Vaiy akaran . as (cf. for example the concluding verse 25: sth ulaih s abdair vyakt a h uks a . . s . m n ad atmak as tato dhvanayah / v a cyavibhinnam buddhim kurvanto var. . .
and takes on himself the task of openly criticizing the sphot . a theory. He does so by using the standard M m am saka and Naiy a yika arguments. . 40 The Par akhya (VI.26) refers to their having bindu as material cause and I svara as efcient cause. In sum, the phonemes are only secondary realities; they are products and, as such, devoid of consciousness. 41 Vidy ap ada I.58 n ad akhyam jam utes ulam . yat param . b . sarvabh . v avasthitam [. . .] sth . s abda itit proktam s u ks mam cint a mayam bhavet / cintay a rahitam yat tu tat param . . . . . . parik rtitam //. We can say that this scriptural passage is read by R amakan .t .ha at the light of the sphot . a doctrine.

186

RAFFAELE TORELLA

dhayanty janay atr am //).42 More exible than the stiff phonemes of the Saivasiddh anta tradition and also authorized by the sacred scriptures is in fact the n ada. In keeping his distance from the sphot . a, which in the Vaiy akaran as conception ranks very high in the ontological-spiritual . hierarchy, R amakan .t .ha seems driven by the aim to stress the ultimately instrumental nature of language, which does condition human knowledge but is cut off from the very core of divine, and also human, consciousness (cit). As we have seen, Abhinavaguptas position is precisely diametrically opposed to this.

REFERENCES
Texts As , Yogatantra-Grantham al a 12, Varanasi, . .taprakaran . am, edited by Vrajavallabha Dvived 1988. svarapratyabhij Abhinavagupta, I avivr sin , edited by Madhusudan Kaul Shastri, . tivimar vols. IIII, KSTS LX LXII LXV, Bombay, 19381943. Abhinavagupta, Par atim ik atattvavivaran .s . a (see Gnoli, 1985). Abhinavagupta, Tantr aloka with Commentary by R aj anaka Jayaratha, edited with notes by Madhusudan Kaul Shastri, vols. IXII, KSTS XXIII, XXVIII, XXX, XXXVI, XXXV, XXIX, XLI, XLVII, LIX, LII, LVII, LVIII, Allahbad-Srinagar-Bombay, 19181938. Bhartr akyapad ya (m ulak arik as), Bhartr akyapad ya, edited by W. Rau, . hari, V . haris V Abhandlungen fr die Kunde des Morgenlandes, 42, Wiesbaden, 1977. Bhartr akyapad ya with the Commentaries Vr . tti and Paddhati of Vr .s . hari, V . abhadeva, K an .d . a I, edited by K.A.S. Iyer, Deccan College, Poona, 1966. Bodhisattvabh umi [being the XVth Section of Asa ngap adas Yog ac arabh umi], edited by Nalinaksha Dutt, Tibetan Sanskrit Works Series Vol. VII, Patna, 1966. Jayanta Bhat ayamajar [. . .], edited by K.S. Varadacharya, 2 vols., Oriental .t .a, Ny Research Institute Series No. 139, Mysore, 1983. Ks aja, Sivas utravimar sin , edited by J.C. Chatterji, KSTS I, Srinagar, 1911. . emar P Kum arila, Slokav arttikam with the commentary Ny ayaratn akara of Sr arthas aratimi sra, edited and revised by Swami Dwarikadas Shastri, Pr acyabh arati Series-10, Varanasi, 1978. M alin vijayottaratantram, edited by Pt. Madhus udan Kaul Shastri, KSTS No. 37, Bombay, 1922. Mandana Mi sra, Sphot a commentary, edited by S.K. R aman atha . asiddhi with Gopalik Sastri, Madras University Sanskrit Series No. 6, Madras, 1931. Par akhyatantra (see Goodall, 2001).
42 See also Aghora sivas remarks p. 242 (on v. 11) katham . gato . punar vaktr n adah acyabuddhim ula sabd abhivyaktah . pratipattur v . janayati iti cet, taduccaritasth . pratipattr adas tasy api v acyabuddhim . gato n . janayati. At Goodall notes (2001: 344 n.84), a and Um later Saiddh antika authors like J anaprak as apati siv ac arya will tend to consider n ada and sphot . a as interchangeable terms.

HOW IS VERBAL SIGNIFICATION POSSIBLE

187

Patajali, Vy akaran abh as toji D ks . a-Mah . ya with the commentaries Bhat .. . itas Sabdakaustubha, N agojibhat t as Uddyota and Kaiyat as Prad pa [ . . . ] , edited with footnotes [. . .] .. . by Bal Shastri, vol. I, Varanasi, 1988. R amakan adak arik a with Aghora sivas commentary (see As .t .ha, N . .taprakaran . am, also Filliozat, 1984). Siddhayoge svar matatantra (see Trzsk, 1999). S ardhatri satik alottar agama, avec le commentaire de Bhat ta R amakan tha, dition critique .. .. par N.R. Bhatt, Publications de lInstitut Franais dIndologie No. 61, Pondichry, 1979. abarabh S as m am adar sana [. . .], vols. I-7, Anandashram Sanskrit Series No. 97, . ya. In: M . s repr. Pune, 1994 (I Ed. 19291943). svarapratyabhij Utpaladeva, I ak arik a with vr . tti (see Torella, 2002). Y aska, Niruktam nighan thup a.thasamupetam durg ach aryakr akhyavr a . ta-r . jvarth . tty .. . samavetam, edited by R.G. Bhadkamkar, vols. III, Bombay Sanskrit and Prakrit Series Nos. LXXIII, LXXXV, Bombay, 19181942.

Translations and studies ivates. In R. Torella (ed.), Le Brunner, H. (2001). Mantras et mantras dans le tantras s Parole e i Marmi, Studi in onore di Raniero Gnoli nel suo 70 compleanno (pp. 183 212), 2 vols. IsIAO, Roma: Serie Orientale Roma. Dasgupta, Sh. (19693 ). Obscure Religious Cults. Calcutta (I Ed. 1946). Filliozat, P.-S. (1984). Les N adak arik a de R amakan .t .ha. Bulletin de lcole Franaise dExtrme Orient LXXIII, 223255. Filliozat, P.-S. (1994). Bhartr . hari and tantra. In P-S. Filliozat, C.P. Bhatta and S.P. Narang (eds), Pandit N.R. Bhatt Felicitation Volume (pp. 463480). Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. Gaurinath, Sastri (1959). The Philosophy of Word and Meaning. Calcutta Sanskrit College Research Series 5, Calcutta. Gonda, J. (1975). The Indian mantra. In Selected Studies [. . .] (pp. 248301), vol. IV. Leiden (originally published: Oriens, 16, pp. 244297). Goodall, D. (2001). The Saiddh antika Par akhyatantra, its account of language, and the interpolation of the eighth chapter of the published Paus agama. In R. Torella (ed.), . kar Le Parole e i Marmi, Studi in onore di Raniero Gnoli nel suo 70 compleanno (pp. 327 350), 2 vols. IsIAO, Roma: Serie Orientale Roma. Padoux, A. (1990). V ac. The Concept of the Word in Selected Hindu Tantras. Albany. Seyfort Ruegg, D. (1959). Contributions lhistoire de la philosophie linguistique indienne. Paris. Staal, F. (1967). Word Order in Sanskrit and Universal Grammar. Foundations of Language, Supplementary Series 5, Dordrecht. Torella, R. (1998). The kacukas in the Shaiva and Vaishnava tantric tradition: A few considerations between theology and grammar. In G. Oberhammer (ed.), Studies in Hinduism, II, Miscellanea to the Phenomenon of Tantras (pp. 5586). sterreichisce Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-Historische Klasse, Sitzungsberichte, 662. Band, Wien. Torella, R. (1999a). Gli Aforismi di Shiva con il commento di Ks aja (Sivas utravi. emar mar sin ). Milano. Torella, R. (1999b). Dev uv aca, or the theology of the prefect tense. Journal of Indian Philosophy (Special Issue in Honor of Prof. Kamaleshvar Bhattacharya) 16, 129138.

188

RAFFAELE TORELLA

Torella, R. (2001). The Word in Abhinavaguptas Br sin . In R. Torella (ed.), Le . hadvimar Parole e i Marmi, Studi in onore di Raniero Gnoli nel suo 70 compleanno, 2 vols. IsIAO, Roma: Serie Orientale Roma. Torella, R. (2002). The I svarapratyabhij ak arik a of Utpaladeva with the Authors Vr . tti. Critical Edition and Annotated Translation, Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi (I Ed. Serie Orientale Roma LXXI, IsMEO, Roma, 1994). Trzsk, J. (1999). The Doctrine of Magic Female Spirits: A Critical Edition of Selected Chapters of the Siddhayoge svar mata(tantra) with Annotated Translation and Analysis, D. Phil. Thesis, Merton College, Oxford.

Facolt di Studi Orientali Universit di Roma La Sapienza