バットージディークシタの祭事哲学 : 文法学派ダルマ論のヴェーダ思想による裏づけと権威づけ

Bhaṭṭoji Dīkṣita on Scriptural Statements: The Confirmation and Authorization of Grammarians’ Theory of dharma by Vedic Thought

Kawamura Yūto

比較論理学研究

The Annals of the Research Project Center for the Comparative Study of Logic

[PISSN] 1880-6376

[NCID] AA12025285

The aim of this paper is to consider the arguments about the grammarians’ theory of dharma which are presented in Bhaṭṭoji Dīkṣita’s (ca. 16th–17th c. CE) Śabdakaustubha. This is a sequel to Kawamura 2017b, which dealt with the theory at issue developed by early grammarians such as Kātyāyana (ca. 3rd c. BCE) and Patañjali (ca. 2nd c. BCE). In vārttika 9 of the Paspaśā: śāstrapūrvake prayoge ’bhyudayas tat tulyaṃ　vedaśabdena, Kātyāyana sets forth that the use of correct speech forms, preceded by a knowledge of Pāṇ inian grammar, results in (merit [dharma] and) prosperity (śāstrapūrvake prayoge ’bhyudayas) and that this is in agreement with what the Veda says or with Vedic words (tat tulyaṃ vedaśabdena). In the course of discussing his first interpretation of this phrase, tat tulyaṃ vedaśabdena, Patañjali demonstrates, by alluding to two scriptural teachings, that the Veda speaks in support of the position declared in the first half of the vārttika cited above: any action (the use of correct words) can bring about a desired result (merit and prosperity) only when preceded by the knowledge that is required to perform the action in question.
Knowledge with respect to the correctness of speech forms (sādhutvajñāna), a necessity for carrying out the action of using speech correctly, is to be based on Pāṇinian grammar and not on anything else, as Kātyāyana states (śātrapūrvake). However, neither Kātyāyana nor Patañjali introduced any Vedic evidence to show that this view is actually confirmed by the Vedas. Bhaṭṭoji Dīkṣita accomplishes this remaining task by putting a certain interpretation on the Vedic statement vyākrtā vāg udyate appearing in Taittirīya-Saṁ hitā 6.4.7.3, which runs as follows:

TS 6.4.7.3 (204.3–8): vāg vaí párācy ávyākrtāvadat, té devā índram abruvanmnn. imāṃ no vācaṃ vyākurv íti . . . tām índro madhyatò ’vakrámya vyākarot. tásmād iyáṃ vyākrtā vāg udyate.
“Human speech used to speak being turned away (ununderstandably), being unformed (unarticulated). Then the heavenly said to Indra: Do form us this speech . . . Then Indra formed it (gave it different forms, made it articulate), having stepped in the middle of it. Therefore this human speech is spoken being formed (having different forms, being articulate).” (Thieme 1982–1983: 23.34–24.4)

This mythological story is told to explain why the speech human beings use is uttered being formed (vyākrtā vāg udyate). Bhaṭṭoji Dīkṣita glosses the expression vyākr tā with vyākaraṇasaṁskrtā. Under this interpretation, the scriptural statement vyākrtā vāg udyate comes to mean ‘[This] speech is uttered being properly constructed through [a knowledge of] Pāṇinian grammar’ (vyākrtā=vyākaraṇasaṁskrtā). As such this statement can be seen as clear evidence that the Vedas accept that it is Pāṇinian grammar which imparts knowledge as to the correctness of speech forms. For, that a word is properly constructed through a knowledge of Pāṇinian grammar means that the correctness of the word is verified through this knowledge. Bhaṭṭoji Dīkṣita thus succeeds in having the grammarians’ theory of dharma fully supported and thereby authorized by Vedic lore.
One may add that Bhaṭṭoji Dīkṣita’s discourse on dharma can be said to be a successful adaptation of Kumārila’s elaborate arguments advanced in the Vyākaraṇādhikaraṇa of his Tantravārttika.

Oriental thought [ 120 ]

jpn

広島大学比較論理学プロジェクト研究センター

[ISSN] 1880-6376

[NCID] AA12025285