Journal of Indian Philosophy

, Volume 39, Issue 4–5, pp 571–587

How to Refer to a Thing by a Word: Another Difference Between Dignāga’s and Kumārila’s Theories of Denotation



In studies of Indian theories of meaning it has been standard procedure to examine their relevance to the ontological issues between Brahmin realism about universals and Buddhist nominalism (or conceptualism). It is true that Kumārila makes efforts to secure the real existence of a generic property (jāti) denoted by a word by criticizing Dignāga, who declares that the real world consists of absolutely unique individuals (svalakṣaṇa). The present paper, however, concentrates on the linguistic approaches Dignāga and Kumārila adopt to deny or to prove the existence of universals. It turns out that in spite of adopting contrasting approaches they equally distinguish between the semantic denotation of a word and its pragmatic reference to a thing in the physical world. From a purely semantic viewpoint, Dignāga considers the exclusion (apoha) of others by a word as the result of a conceptual accumulation of the sense-components accepted in the totality of worldly discourse. Among the three characteristics Dignāga held must be met by universals, Kumārila attaches special importance to their entire inherence in each individual (pratyekaparisamāpti / pratyekasamavāya). This is because he pragmatically pays attention to the use of a word in the discourse given in a particular context (prakaraṇa) by analyzing a sentence into a topic and a comment.


Dignāga apoha Sense-component Kumārila pratyekasamavāya Topic and Comment Context 



Tantravārttika, in: Mīmāṃsādarśanam, 6 parts, ed. Subbāśāstrī, Ānandāśrama Sanskrit Series 97, 1st ed., Poona 1929–53


Tantravārttika, in: Mīmāṃsādarśanam, 2nd ed., 7 pts, Ānandāśrama Sanskrit Series 97, Poona 1971–1981


Tattvasaṅgrahapañjikā, in: Tattvasaṃgraha, vol. 1, ed. D. Sastri, Bauddha Bharati Series 1, Varanasi 1968


Nyāyabhāṣya, ed. A. Thakur, in: Nyāyacaturgranthikā, New Delhi 1997


Nyāyavārttika, ed. A. Thakur, in: Nyāyacaturgranthikā, New Delhi 1997


Nyāyasūtra, see NBh


Nyāyasudhā, ed. Mukunda Sastri, Chowkhamba Sanskrit Series 45 & 56, Benares 1901–1902


Padārthadharmasaṃgraha, in: J. Bronkhorst and Y. Ramseier, Word Index to the Praśastapādabhāṣya, Delhi, Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, 1994


Pramāṇavārttika, the first chapter, in: Pramāṇavārttikasvavṛtti, ed. R. Gnoli, Serie Orientale Roma 23, Rome 1960


Pramāṇasamuccaya, the fifth chapter, tr. Kanakavarman, in: Hattori 1982


Viśālāmalavatī Ṭīkā on PSV, tr. Blo gros brtan pa, in: Hattori 1982


Pramāṇasamuccayavṛtti, the fifth chapter, tr. Kanakavarman, in: Hattori 1982


Tibetan translation of the PS & PSV by Kanakavarman, in: Hattori 1982


Tibetan translation of the PS & PSV by Vasudharakṣita, in: Hattori 1982


Mahābhāṣya, 3 vols., ed. F. Kielhorn, 3d ed., Poona, Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, 1972 (1st ed., 1880)


Mīmāṃsāsūtra, in: Mīmāṃsādarśanam, see TV


Kātyāyana’s vārttika on Aṣṭādhyāyī 1.2.64


Vaiśeṣikasūtra, ed. Jambuvijaya with the commentry of Candrānanda, Gaekwad’s Oriental Series 136, Baroda 1961

ŚBh & ŚBhʹ

Śābarabhāṣya, in: Mīmāṃsādarśanam, see TV & TVʹ


Śābarabhāṣya ad MmS 1.1.1-5, in: Frauwallner, E., Materialien zur ältesten Erkenntnislehre der Karmamīmāṃsā, Wien, Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1968


Ślokavārttika, ed. D. Sastri, Prāchyabhārati Series 10, Varanasi 1978


Ślokavārttikaṭīkā (Śarkarikā), ed. C. Kunhan Raja, Madras University Sanskrit Series 17, Madras 1946


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Brown, G., & Yule, G. (2003). Discourse analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (1st edition: 1983).Google Scholar
  2. Caland, W., & RaghuVira. (Eds.). (1971). Vārāha-śrauta-sūtra. Delhi: Meherchand Lachhmandas (1st edition: Lahore 1933).Google Scholar
  3. Hattori, M. (1973/1975). Mīmāṃsāślokavārttika, Apohavāda sho no kenkyu [A study of the chapter on ‘apoha’ of the Mīmāṃsāślokavārttika I & II]. Memoirs of the Department of Literature, Kyoto University, 14, 1–44; 15, 1–63.Google Scholar
  4. Hattori M. (1977) The Sautrāntika background of the Apoha theory. In: Kawamura L.S., Scott K. (eds) Buddhist thought and Asian civilization. Essays in honor of Herbert V. Guenther on his sixtieth birthday. Dharma Press, Emeryville, CA, pp 47–58Google Scholar
  5. Hattori, M. (1980). Nyāyavārttika, II. 2. 66 ni okeru apoha setsu hihan [Uddyotakara’s criticism on the Apoha-theory in the Nyāyavārttika, II. 2. 66]. In Esoteric Buddhism and Indian thought: A Festschrift for Prof. Gikai Matsuo (pp. 15–30). Kyoto: Shuchiin University.Google Scholar
  6. Hattori M. (ed) (1982). Pramāṇasamuccayavṛtti of Dignāga with Jinendrabuddhi’s commentary: Chapter five: Anyāpoha-parīkṣā. Memoirs of the Faculty of Letters, Kyoto University, 21, 103–224Google Scholar
  7. Hayes R.P. (1988) Dignāga on the interpretation of signs. Studies of classical India. Kluwer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  8. Herzberger R. (1986) Bhartṛhari and the Buddhists. Studies of classical India. Kluwer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  9. Katsura S. (1979) The apoha theory of Dignāga. Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies 28(1): 489–493Google Scholar
  10. Katsura S. (1991) Dignāga and Dharmakīrti on Apoha. In: Steinkellner E. (ed) Studies in the Buddhist epistemological tradition, proceedings of the second international Dharmakirti conference. Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Vienna, pp 129–146Google Scholar
  11. Kitagawa, H. (1965). Indo koten ronrigaku no kenkyū. Jinna no taikei [A study on classical Indian logic. Dignāga’s system]. Tokyo: Suzuki Gakujutsu Shuppan.Google Scholar
  12. Lyons, J. (2002). Linguistic semantics. An introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (first edition: 1995).Google Scholar
  13. Much M.T. (1994) Uddyotakaras Kritik der Apoha-Lehre. Wiener Zeitschrift für Kunde Südasiens, 38: 351–366Google Scholar
  14. Olivelle P. (2002) Food for thought. Dietary rules and social organization in ancient India. Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  15. Pind, O. H. (1999). Dharmakīrti’s interpretation of Pramāṇāsamuccayavṛtti V 36: śabdo ’rthāntaranivṛttiviśiṣṭān eva bhāvān āha. In S. Katsura (Ed.), Dharmakīrti’s thought and its impact on Indian and Tibetan philosophy. Proceedings of the third international Dharmakīrti conference (pp. 317–332). Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.Google Scholar
  16. Pind, O. H. (2009). Dignāga’s philosophy of language—Dignāga on anyāpoha. Pramāṇasamuccaya V. Texts, translation, and annotation. Dissertation, Universität Wien, Philologisch-Kulturwissenschaftliche Fakultät. Hochschulschriften-Service, Universitäts Bibliothek, E-Theses.
  17. Scharf P.M. (1996) The denotation of generic terms in ancient Indian philosophy: Grammar, Nyāya, and Mīmāṃsā. American Philosophical Society, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  18. Takenaka T. (1972) Sāsnādiviśiṣṭākṛtiḥ (Śābarabhāṣya ad MS I-I-5) no kaishaku ni tsuite [A note on the Sāsnādiviśiṣṭākṛtiḥ]. Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies, 21(1): 420–428Google Scholar
  19. Takenaka T. (1974) Indo jitsuzai-ron gakuha no huhen-ron [The theory of the universal in Indian realism]. Tōhōgaku (Eastern Studies), 48: 82–97Google Scholar
  20. Yoshimizu, K. (2006). The theorem of the singleness of a goblet (graha-ekatva-nyāya): A Mīmāṃsā analysis of meaning and context. In M. Hattori (Ed.), Word and meaning in Indian philosophy, Acta Asiatica (Bulletin of the Institute of Eastern Culture) (Vol. 90, pp. 15–38).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Indology and History of Indian Buddhism, Faculty of Arts and LettersTohoku UniversitySendaiJapan

Personalised recommendations