Changes

===Vedanta Darshana===

===Vedanta Darshana===

====Advaitavedanta====

====Advaita====

The Advaitins and others reject the doctrine of sphota (speechbuds or language potentials) and admit that the letters which are the objects of recollection that results from the latent impressions born out of the cognition of each letter is the word or the sentence. Prakāśātman in his Šābdanirnaya states so. Sankara in his commentary on the Vedāntasūtra 1.3.28 states:<blockquote>''Although all the letters in a word are cognised, still like the ants thanks to their sequential configuration generate in us the idea of a line in a definite order, the letters generate in us the notion of a word thanks to their definite sequence.''</blockquote>From this it is known that it is only letters in a specific order that constitute a word. And the letters or words in a due order constitute a sentence.<ref name=":0" />

The Advaitins and others reject the doctrine of sphota (speechbuds or language potentials) and admit that the letters which are the objects of recollection that results from the latent impressions born out of the cognition of each letter is the word or the sentence. Prakāśātman in his Šābdanirnaya states so. Sankara in his commentary on the Vedāntasūtra 1.3.28 states:<blockquote>''Although all the letters in a word are cognised, still like the ants thanks to their sequential configuration generate in us the idea of a line in a definite order, the letters generate in us the notion of a word thanks to their definite sequence.''</blockquote>From this it is known that it is only letters in a specific order that constitute a word. And the letters or words in a due order constitute a sentence.<ref name=":0" />

'''Visishitadvaita'''

==== Visishitadvaita ====

 

The Visistādvaitin-s too accept that the letters manifested in a single cognition constitute a word and the words manifested in a single cognition constitute a sentence. Vedāntadeśika in his Tattvamuktākalāpa and in his commentary Sarvārthasiddhi thereon sets forth this view.<ref name=":0" />

The Visistādvaitin-s too accept that the letters manifested in a single cognition constitute a word and the words manifested in a single cognition constitute a sentence. Vedāntadeśika in his Tattvamuktākalāpa and in his commentary Sarvārthasiddhi thereon sets forth this view.<ref name=":0" />

'''Dvaita'''

==== Dvaita ====

 

The Dvaitin-s too subscribe to the view that letters constitute a word and the words constitute a sentence. Vyāsatīrtha in his Tarkatāndava states that Jayatīrtha in his Pramānapaddhati has defined a word as letters having a termination of inflectional ending of a case or of the person of a tense or mood at their end, and a sentence as words having syntactic expectancy, congruity and proximity.<ref name=":0" />

The Dvaitin-s too subscribe to the view that letters constitute a word and the words constitute a sentence. Vyāsatīrtha in his Tarkatāndava states that Jayatīrtha in his Pramānapaddhati has defined a word as letters having a termination of inflectional ending of a case or of the person of a tense or mood at their end, and a sentence as words having syntactic expectancy, congruity and proximity.<ref name=":0" />

===Vyakarana Shastra===

===Vyakarana Shastra===

# Recollection of word-meanings (padartha)

# Recollection of word-meanings (padartha)

# Mutual relationship of word-meanings

# Mutual relationship of word-meanings

There are two main siddhantas explaining the import of a sentence meaning.  

There are two main siddhantas explaining the import of a sentence meaning expounded by Mimamsakas. However, we include the unique concept proposed by Bhartrhari regarding the cognition of vakyartha here

=== Abhihitanvayavada ===

=== Abhihitanvayavada ===

On a conclusive note, it can be said that from the point of analysing verbal cognition from a teaching perspective, the anvitābhidhānavāda of Prabhākara is a very consistent and convincing theory and from the of learner’s or listener’s perspective the ‘abhihitānvayavāda of Kumārila is equally convincing. Although both vehemently criticised each other yet they both have their importance according to the teaching and learning pattern respectively.<ref name=":4" />

On a conclusive note, it can be said that from the point of analysing verbal cognition from a teaching perspective, the anvitābhidhānavāda of Prabhākara is a very consistent and convincing theory and from the of learner’s or listener’s perspective the ‘abhihitānvayavāda of Kumārila is equally convincing. Although both vehemently criticised each other yet they both have their importance according to the teaching and learning pattern respectively.<ref name=":4" />

== References ==

== References ==