Part 1 of 5
INTRODUCTION [x]
1. The sacred literature of India, inferior to none in variety or extent, is superior to many in nobility of thought, in sanctity of spirit and in generality of comprehension. In beauty or prolixity, it can vie with any other literature ancient and modern. Despite the various impediments to the steady development of the language, despite the successive disturbances, internal and external, which India had to encounter ever since the dawn of history, she has successfully held up to the world her archaic literary map, which meagre outline itself favourably compares with the literature of any other nation of the globe. The beginnings of her civilization are yet in obscurity.
Relatively to any other language of the ancient world, the antiquity of Sanskrit has an unquestioned priority. "Yet such is the marvellous continuity" says Max Muller "between the past and the present of India, that in spite of repeated social convulsions, religious reforms and foreign invasions, Sanskrit may be said to be still the only language that is spoken over the whole extent of the vast country.1 [
India, 78-9.] So says M. Winternitz,
"Sanskrit is not a 'dead' language even to day. There are still at the present day a number of Sanskrit periodicals in India, and topics of the day are discussed in Sanskrit pamphlets. Also, the Mahabharata is still today read aloud publicly. To this very day poetry is still composed and works written in Sanskrit, and it is the language in which Indian scholars converse upon scientific questions. Sanskrit at the least plays the same part in India still, as Latin in the Middle Ages in Europe, or as Hebrew with the Jews."2 [History of Indian Literature, I. 45.]
"No country except India and no language except the Sanskrit can boast of a possession so ancient or venerable. No nation except the Hindus can stand before the world with such a sacred heirloom in its possession, unapproachable in grandeur and infinitely above all in glory. The Vedas stand alone in their solitary splendour, serving as beacon of divine light for the onward march of humanity."1 [Hindu superiority, 180.]
The sciences of Comparative Pathology and Mythology owe their origin to what has been termed the "Discovery of Sanskrit." "The Sanskrit, the antiquity and extent of its literary documents, the transparency of its grammatical structure, the comparatively primitive state of ancient system and thorough grammatical treatment it has early received at the hands of native scholars, must ever secure the foremost place in the comparative study of Indo Aryan researches."
2. A Weber in his Indian Literature thus summed up his reason for asserting the antiquity of the Vedic Literature:
In the more ancient parts of the Rigveda-Samhita, we find the Indian race settled on the north-western borders of India, in the Punjab, and even beyond the Panjab, on the Kubha, or Kwpna, the Kabul. The gradual spread of the race from these seats towards the east, beyond the Sarasvati and over Hindustan as far as the Ganges, can be traced in the later portions of the Vedic writings almost step by step. The writings of the following period, that of the epic, consist of accounts of the internal conflicts among the conquerors of Hindustan themselves, as, for instance, the Mahabharata, or of the further spread of Brahmanism towards the south, as, for instance, the Ramayana. If we connect with this the first fairly accurate information about India which we have from a Greek source, viz., from Megasthenes, it becomes clear that at the time of this writer the Brahmanising of Hindustan was already completed, while at the time of the Periplus (see Lassen, I AK, 11 150, n, I St 11 192) the very southernmost point of the Dekhan had already become a seat of the worship of the wife of Siva. What a series of years, of centuries, must necessarily have elapsed before this boundless tract of country, inhabited by wild and vigorous tribes, could have been brought over to Brahmanism? And while the claims of the written records of Indian literature to a high antiquity— its beginnings may perhaps be traced back even to the time when the Indo-Aryans still dwelt together with the Persa-Aryans —are thus indisputably proved by external, geographical testimony, the internal evidence in the same direction, which may be gathered from their contents, is no less conclusive. In the songs of Rik, the robust spirit of the people gives expression to the feeling of its relation to nature, with a spontaneous freshness and simplicity, the powers of nature are worshipped as superior beings, and their kindly aid besought within their several spheres. Beginning with this nature-worship, which everywhere recognises only the individual phenomena of nature, and these in the first instance superhuman, we trace in Indian literature the progress of the Hindu people through almost all the phases of religious development through which the human mind generally has passed. The individual phenomena of nature, which at first impress the imagination as being superhuman, are gradually classified within their different spheres, and a certain unity is discovered among them. Thus we arrive at a number of divine beings, each exercising supreme sway within its particular province, whose influence is in course of time further extended to the corresponding events of human life, while at the same time they are endowed with human attributes and organs. The number — already considerable — of these natural deities, these regents of the powers of nature, is further increased by the addition of abstractions, taken from ethical relations, and to these as to the other deities' divine powers, personal existence and activity are ascribed. Into this multitude of divine figures, the spirit of inquiry seeks at a later stage to introduce order, by classifying and co-ordinating them according to their principal bearings. The principle followed in this distribution is, like the conception of the deities themselves, entirely borrowed from the contemplation of nature. We have the gods who act in the heavens, in the air, upon the earth, and of these the sun, the wind, and fire are recognized as the main representatives and rulers respectively. These three gradually obtain precedence over all the other gods, who are only looked upon as their creatures and servants. Strengthened by these classifications, speculation presses on and seeks to establish the relative position of these three deities, and to arrive at unity for the supreme Being. This is accomplished either speculatively, by actually assuming such a supreme and purely absolute Being, viz, "Brahman" (neut), to whom these three in their turn stand in the relation of creatures, of creatures, of servants only, or arbitrarily, according as one or other of the three is worshipped as the supreme god. The sun-god seems in the first instance to have been promoted to this honour? the Persa- Aryans at all events retained this standpoint, of course extending it still further, and in the older parts of the Brahmanas also — to which rather than to the Samhitas the Avesta is related in respect of age and contents— we find the sun-god here and there exalted far above the other deities (prasavita devanam). We also find ample traces of this in the forms of worship, which so often preserve relics of antiquity. Nay, as "Brahman" (masc), he has in theory retained this position, down even to the latest times, although in a very colourless manner. His colleagues, the air and fire gods, in consequence of their much more direct and sensible influence, by degrees obtained complete possession of the supreme power, though constantly in conflict with each other. Their worship has passed through a long series of different phases, and it is evidently the same which Megasthenes found in Hindustan, and which at the time of the Periplus had penetrated, though in a form already very corrupt, as far as the southernmost point of the Dekhan."
3. The Gods created Devavani:
[x]. Rg VIII 100-11.
[x]. Rg VIII 59-6.
Patanjali says in his Mahabhasya:
[x]
Vidyaranya adopts Patanjali's views in his Introduction to his commentary on Rg Veda and there in speaking of the importance of the study of Grammar, he says:
[x]
Dvijendranath Guha collects some other references:
[x]
4. Samskrta, or as now written, Sanskrit, is the language of the Gods, Girvanavani. In this language stand the ancient scriptures of Vedic and Puranic religion. The Vedic literature is the most ancient record of any people of the world and forms the source of the earliest history of the Indo-Aryan race, nay, mankind as a whole.
"The Veda has two-fold interest. It belongs to the history of the world and to the history of India. In the history of the world the Veda fills a gap which no literary work in any other languages could fill. It carries us back to times of which we have no records anywhere, and gives us the very words of a generation of men, of whom otherwise we could form but the vaguest estimate by means of conjectures and inferences. As long as man continues to take an interest in the history of his race, and as long as we collect in libraries and museums the relics of former ages, the first place in that long row of books which contains the records of the Aryan branch of mankind, will belong for ever to the Rig-veda. The world of the Veda is a world by itself, and its relation to all the rest of Sanskrit literature is such, that the Veda ought not to receive, but to throw light over the whole historical development of the Indian mind."
The literature of the Vedas is termed Sruti, meaning what has been heard, that is, what is not the work of man.
5. Vedas are eternal (nitya), beginningless (anadi) and not made by man (apauruseya), (2) they were destroyed in the deluge at the end of the last Kalpa, and (3) that at the beginning of the present Kalpa commencing with the Krta-yuga of this present Mahayuga, the Rishis,1 [
Brhaddevata enumerates woman seers of the hymns: [x].] through tapas, re-produced in substance if not in form the ante-diluvian Vedas which they earned in their memory by the favour of God. This is another expression of the historical view of modern scholars, like Mr. Tilak. They state that the Vedic or Aryan religion can be proved to be interglacial, but its ultimate origin is still lost in geological antiquity, that the Aryan religion and culture were destroyed during the first glacial period that invaded the Arctic Aryan home, and that the Vedic hymns were sung in post-glacial times by poets, who had inherited the knowledge or contents therein of an unbroken tradition from their ante-diluvian fore-fathers.
On the commencement of Vedic era, opinions are at the opposite poles. Tradition takes it to a remote age of millions of years on the computation of yugas.
In his Arctic Home in the Vedas, B. G. Tilak divides the whole period from the commencement of the Postglacial era, corresponding to the beginning of our Krita Yuga of the present Mahayuga to the birth of Buddha in five parts —
"I: 10,000-8,000 B C —The destruction of the original Arctic home by the last Ice Age and the commencement of the post-glacial period.
II: 8,000-5,000 B C — The age of the migration from the original home. The survivors of the Aryan race roamed over the northern parts of Europe and Asia in search of lands suitable for new settlements. The Vernal Equinox was then in the constellation of Punarvasu, and as the Aditti is the presiding deity of Punarvasu, according to the terminology adopted by me in Orion, this may therefore, be called the Aditi or the Pre-Orion Period.
III: 5,000-3,000 B C— The Orion Period, when the Vernal Equinox was in Orion. Many Vedic Hymns can be traced to the early part of this period and the bards of the race seem to have not yet forgotten the real import or significance of the traditions of the Arctic Home inherited by them. It was at this time that the first attempts to reform the calendar and the sacrificial system appear to have been systematically made.
IV: 3,060-1,400 BC— The Ktittika Period, when the Vernal Equinox was in the Pleiddes. The Aitareya Samhita and the Brahmanas, which begin the series of Nakshatras with the Krittikas are evidently the productions of this period. The compilation of the hymns into Samhitas also appears to be a work of the early part of this period. The traditions about the Original Arctic home had grown dim by this time and very often misunderstood, making the Vedic hymns more unintelligible. The sacrificial system and the numerous details thereof found in the Brahmanas seem to have been developed during this time. It was at the end of this period that the Vedanga Jyotisha was originally composed or at any rate the position of the equinoxes mentioned therein observed and ascertained.
V: 1,400-500 BC— The Pre-Buddhistic Period, when the Sutras and the Philosophical system made their appearance."
6.
"The atmosphere of England and Germany seems decidedly unpropitious to the recognition of this great Indian antiquity so stubbornly opposed to the Mosaic revelation and its Chronology dearly and piously cherished by these Western Orientalists. Strongly permeated with the Chronology of the Bible which places the creation of the Earth itself about 4,004 BC, European scholars cannot place the great separation of the Original Aryan races themselves earlier than 2,000 BC, and the first historical entry of the Hindu Aryas into the continent of India before 1,500 BC." Arthur A. Macdonell may be said to summarise the opinions of these Western Orientalists, when he says: ---"History is the one weak spot in Indian literature. It is, in fact, non-existent. The total lack of the historical sense is so characteristic, that the whole course of Sanskrit literature is darkened by the shadow of this defect, suffering as it does from the entire absence of exact chronology ....Two causes seem to have combined to bring about this remarkable result. In the first place, early India wrote no history, because it never made any. The ancient Indians never went through a struggle for life, like Greeks in the Persian and the Romans in the Punic wars, such as would have welded their tribes into a nation, and developed political greatness. Secondly, the Brahmans, whose task it would naturally have been to record great deeds, had early embraced the doctrine that all action and existence are a positive evil, and could therefore have felt but little inclination to chronicle historical events. Such being the case, definite dates do not begin to appear in Indian literary history till about 500 AD. The chronology of the Vedic period is altogether conjectural, being based entirely on internal evidence. Three main literary strata can be clearly distinguished in it by differences in language and style, as well as in religious and social views. For the development of each of these strata a reasonable length of time must be allowed, but all we can here hope to do is to approximate to the truth by centuries. The lower limit of the second Vedic stratum cannot however be fixed later than 500 BC, because its latest doctrines are presupposed by Buddhism, and the date of the death of Buddha has been with a high degree of probability calculated, from the recorded dates of the various Buddhist councils, to be 480 BC. With regard to the commencement of the Vedic Age, there seems to have been a decided tendency amongst Sanskrit scholars to place it too high. 2,000 B C. is commonly represented as its starting point. Supposing this to be correct, the truly vast period of 1,500 years is required to account for a development of language and thought hardly greater than that between Homeric and the Attic age of Greece. Professor Max Muller's earlier estimate of 1,200 BC, forty years ago, appears to be much nearer the mark. A lapse of three centuries, say from 1,300-1,000 BC, would amply account for the difference between what is oldest and newest in Vedic hymn poetry. Considering that the affinity of the oldest from of the Avestan language with the dialect of the Vedas is already so great that, by mere application of phonetic laws, whole Avestan stanzas may be translated word for word into Vedic, so as to produce verses correct not only in form but in poetic spirit, considering further, that if we know the Avestan language, at as early a stage as we know the Vedic, the former would necessarily be almost identical with the latter, it is impossible to avoid the conclusion that the Indian branch must have separated from the Iranian only a very short time before the beginnings of Vedic literature, and can therefore have hardly entered the North-West of India even as early as early as 1,500 BC. All previous estimates of the antiquity of the Vedic period have been outdone by the recent theory of Professor Jacobi of Bonn, who supposes that period goes back to at least 4,000 BC. This theory is based on astronomical calculations connected with a change in the beginning of the seasons, which Professor Jacobi thinks has taken place since the time of the Rigveda. The whole estimate is, however, invalidated by the assumption of a doubtful, and even improbable, meaning in a Vedic word, which forms the very starting point of the theory."
7. "The history of the Sanskrit literature divides itself into two great ages, Vaidika and Laukika — Sacred and Profane, — Scriptural and Classical. The Mahabharata War is the dividing line between the two. The Vedic Age may again be divided into several distinct periods, each of which for length of years may well compare with that of the entire history of many an ancient nation, (1) Chandas Period, (2) Samhita Period, (3) Brahmana Period, (4) Aranyaka Period and (5) Upanisad Period. Each of these periods has a distinct literature of its own, vast in its extent, and varied in its civilisation, each giving rise to the subsequent period under the operation of great social, political and religious causes, and the philosophical historian of human civilisation need not be a Hindu to think that the Ancient Aryas of India, have preserved the fullest, the clearest and the truest materials for his work."
8. "There are four Vedas, Rik ([x]), Yajur ([x]), Sama (a[x]) and Atharvana ([x]) and each Veda has Samhita (mantra) Brahmana, Sutra and Upanisad. The first three Vedas are called together as Trayi and they are called in Brahmanas also by the name ricas, Samani and Yajumsi, or Bhahvrcas, Chandogas and Adhvaryus. The Sutras apply the term chandas to the Samhitas. Panini uses the terms chandas and Bhasa to distinguish Vedic and non-Vedic literature. Yajurveda has two Samhitas called Sukla and Krsna, or Vajasaneya and Taittiriya."
"The Samhita of the Rk is purely a lyrical collection, forming the immediate source of the other three. The next two are made up of verses and ritual formulae, meant to be recited at sacrifices. The Atharva Samhita resembles the Rik in that it forms a store of songs, devoted to sacrifices mostly in connection with incantations and magical charms."
9. The Brahmanic period comprehends "the first establishment of the three-fold ceremonial, the composition of the individual Brahmanas and the formation of the Charanas. They connect the sacrificial songs and formulas with the sacrificial rite by pointing out on the one hand their direct relation, and on the other their symbolical connection with each other. Their general nature is marked by masterly grandiloquence, and antiquarian sincerity.
Though in the words of Prof. Eggeling, these works deserve to be studied as a physician studies the twaddle of idiots or the raving of mad men, they lack not striking thoughts, bold expression and logical reasoning. The Brahmanas of the Rik generally refer to the duties of the Hotr, of the Saman to those of Udgatr, of the Yajus, to the actual performance of the sacrifice. They are valuable to us as the earliest records of Sanskrit prose."
10. "The Sutra literature forms a connecting link between the Vedic and the classical Sanskrit. 'Sutra' means a 'string' and compatibly with this sense, all works of this style are nothing but one uninterrupted chain of short sentences linked together in a most concise form.
Sutras represented a scientific expression of the tradition and discussion recounted in Brahmanas. They systematised the source of the rituals and so far as Kalpasutras or Srautasutras go, they relate strictly to sruti or the Vedas .To these sutras have been added Grhyasutras or those that regulate domestic rites. They are partly based on srutis and partly on smrtis (unrevealed literature). Sutras have been the consequence of a national need for concise guide-books for ceremonial, and represented a 'codification of case-law' in the sphere of sacrifices and ceremonials.1 [
It might be seen that the usefulness of this species of composition was so much appreciated that in every branch of learning sutras came to be composed and indeed are said to be the most ancient form of the sciences.]
11. Upanisads2 [
The authority of compositions like Upanishads has come to be respected to such an extent that in later times, several of that name were brought into being very often sectarian in their tenor. We have '108 Upanishads' and if not more on various topics, for instance, Garbhopanisad on embryology and Manmathopanisad on erotics.] are expressions of philosophical concepts. They embody the beginnings and progress of esoteric ideas, which had to a large extent been mentioned in Aranyakas, writings supplementary to Brahmanas.
12. A. Weber sums up the direct data attesting the posteriority of the Classical Period thus: —
(i) Its opening phases everywhere presuppose the Vedic period as entirely closed, its oldest portions are regularly based on the Vedic literature, the relations of life have now all arrived at a stage of development of which in the first period we can only trace the germs and the beginning.
The distinction between the periods is also by changes in language and subject-matter.
First, as regards language: —
1. The special characteristics in the second period are so significant, that it appropriately furnishes the name for the period, whereas the Vedic period receives its designation from the works composing it.
2. Among the various dialects of the different Indo-Aryan tribes, a greater unity had been established after their emigration into India, as the natural result of their intermingling in their new home. The grammatical study of the Vedas fixed the frame of the language so that the generally recognised Bhasha had arisen. The estrangement of the civic language from that of the mass accelerated by the assimilation of the aboriginal races resulted in the formation of the popular dialects, the prakrits — proceeding from the original Bhasha by the assimilation of consonants and by the curtailment or loss of termination.
3. The phonetic condition of Sanskrit remains almost exactly the same as that of the earliest Vedic. In the matter of grammatical forms, the language shows itself almost stationary. Hardly any new formations or inflexions make their appearance yet. The most notable of these grammatical changes were the disappearance of the subjunctive mood and the reduction of a dozen infinitives to a single one. In declension the change consisted chiefly in the dropping of a number of synonymous forms.
4. The vocabulary of the language has undergone the greatest modifications. It has been extended by derivation and composition according to recognised types. Numerous words though old seem to be new, because they happen by accident not to occur in the Vedic literature. Many new words have come in through continental borrowings from a lower stratum of language, while already existing words have undergone great changes of meaning.
Secondly, as regards the subject-matter: —
1. The Vedic literature handles its various subjects only in their details and almost solely in their relation to sacrifice, whereas the classical discusses them in their general relations.
2. In the former a simple and compact prose had gradually been developed, but in the latter this form is abandoned and a rhythmic one adopted in its stead, which was employed exclusively even for strictly scientific exposition.
"That difference of metre should form a broad line of demarcation between the periods of literature is not at all without analogy in the literary history of other nations, particularly in other times. If once a new form of metre begins to grow popular by the influence of a poet who succeeds in collecting a school of other poets around him, this new mode of utterance is very apt to supersede the other more ancient forms altogether. People become accustomed to the new rhythm sometimes to such a degree, that they lost entirely the taste for their old poetry on account of its obsolete measure. No poet, therefore, who writes for the people, would think of employing those old fashioned metres, and we find that early popular poems have had to be transfused into modern verse in order to make them generally readable once more.
Now it seems that the regular and continuous Anushtubh sloka is a metre unknown during the Vedic age, and every work written in it may at once be put down as post-Vedic. It is no valid objection that this epic sloka occurs also in Vedic hymns, that Anushtubh verses are frequently quoted in the Brahmanas, and that in some of the Sutras the Anushtubh-sloka occurs intermixed with Tnshtubhs, and is used for the purpose of recapitulating what had been explained before in prose. For it is only the uniform employment of that metre which constitutes the characteristic mark of a new period of literature.1 [
Muir's Critical History, III., c. 1.]
13. "The languages of the world have been divided into three families, the Aryan or Indo-European, the Semitic and the Turanian. The first comprises the Indian branch, consisting of Sanskrit, Pali and the Prakrits, and the modern vernaculars of Northern India and Ceylon, the Iranic branch consisting of Zend, the sacred language of the Parsis, the Pehlevi and the other cognate dialects, the Hellenic or the Greek branch, comprising the languages of Ancient Greece and its modern representatives, the Italic branch, consisting of the Latin and cognate ancient languages of Italy and the dialects derived from Latin, the Italian, the French and the old Provencal, the Spanish, the Portuguese, and the Wallachian, the Keltic or the language of those Kelts or Gauls that so often figure in Roman History, and distinguished into two varieties, the Kymric, now spoken in Wales and in the Province of Brittany in France, and the Gaelic, spoken in the Isle of Man, the Highlands of Scotland, and Ireland, the Lithunian and Slavonic, comprising the languages of Lithunia, Russia, Bulgaria, and of the Slavonic races generally, and the Teutonic branch, consisting of the Scandinavian group, i.e., the languages of Sweden, Norway, Iceland, and Denmark, of the High German i.e., the old and the present language of Germany, and of the Low German, which comprised the old Anglo-Saxon and the other languages spoken on the coasts of Germany, the modern representatives of which are the English, and the dialects spoken in Holland, Friesland, and the North of Germany. The second family comprises the Hebrew, the Arabic, the Chaldee, the Syriac, the Carthaginian, and the cognate and derived languages, and the third, the Turkish and the languages of the Mongolian tribes. To this last family the dialects spoken in Southern India are also to be inferred. The Zend approaches Sanskrit the most, but the affinities of this latter with Greek and Latin are also very striking, and such as to convince even a determined sceptic Sanskrit has preserved a greater number of ancient forms than any of these languages, hence it is indispensable for purposes of comparative philology."
14. "India may justly claim to be the original home of scientific philology. In one of the most ancient Sanskrit books, the Samhita of of the Black Yajurveda, there are distinct indications of the dawn of linguistic study.1 [
[x]. Speech was once inarticulate and undistinguished (into its parts). Then the gods said to Indra, 'Distinguish our speech into parts.' He said, I will ask a gift of you, let Soma be poured into one cup for me and Vayu together.' Hence Soma is poured into one cup for Indra and Vayu together. Then Indra going into its midst distinguished it. Hence distinct speech is now spoken. Tait Smh, VI 4, 7.] The Brahmanas of the Vedas which rank next to the Samhitas, and even the Taittiriya Samhita itself, the composition of which differs in no particular from its Brahmana, are all full of etymological explanations of words, though often they are fanciful.2 [
The Ait Brahm gives the etymology of [x] (III 9), of [x] (III 28), of [x] (VII 13), the Tait Samh., of [x] (I 5,1), of [x] (II 4, 12 and II 5, 2 tha Tait. Brahm. of [x] (I. 1,5), of [x] (II 7, 18), &c. &c.] One Acharya followed another, and they all carefully observed the facts of their language, and laid down the laws they could discover. They studied and compared the significations and forms of words, observed what was common to them, separated the constant element from that which was variable, noticed the several changes that words undergo in different circumstances, and by such a process of philological analysis completed a system of grammar and etymology In the Nirukta, Yaska, whose exact, date we do not know, but who must have flourished several centuries before Christ, lays down correct principles of the derivation of words. The last of the grammarian Acharyas were Panini, Katyayana, and Patanjali. The Prakrit dialects which sprang from Sanskrit were next made the subject of observation and analysis. The laws of phonetic change or decay in accordance with which Sanskrit words became Prakrit were discovered and laid down. The Sanskrit and non-Sanskrit elements in those languages were distinguished from each other. This branch of philology also was worked up by a number of men, though the writings of one or two only have come down to us.
In this condition Sanskrit philology passed into the hands of Europeans. The discovery of Sanskrit and the Indian grammatical system at the close of the last century led to a total revolution in the philological ideas of Europeans. But several circumstances had about this time prepared Europe for independent thought in philology, and Sanskrit supplied the principles upon which it should be conducted, and determined the current in which it should run. The languages of Europe, ancient and modern, were compared with Sanskrit and with each other. This led to comparative philology and the classification of languages, and a comparison of the words and forms in the different languages led scholars into the secrets of the growth of human speech, and the science of language was added to the test of existing branches of knowledge."1 [
R. G. Bhandarkar, Lectures on Development of Language of Sanskrit, Bombay.]
It has been said by eminent writers that at one time sanskrit was the one language spoken all over the world. "Sanskrit is the mother of Greek, Latin and German languages and it has no other relation to them," that "sanskrit is the original source of all the European languages of the present days," and that "in point of fact the Zend is derived from the sanskrit."2 [
Hindu Superiority, 172 3, A Dubois' Bible in India, Max Muller's Science of Language, I 225-6 note, Dvijendranath Guha's, Devabhasha, JSSP, XVIII. 150.]
15. Tradition traces the beginnings of the sanskrit language to the fourteen aphorisms or Mahesvara sutras. They are [x] onwards to [x]. These sounds, vowel and consonant, emanated from the sound of Siva's damaru (drum) at the time of his dance. To these letters and sounds is attached a mystic significance and Nandikesvara has explained their import with all solemnity. As the Kankas of Nandikesvara are rare, they are printed here.3 [
They are printed with, the commentary of Upamanyu, in the Nirnayasagara Edn, of Mahabbasya, p 132.]
1. [x]
2. [x]
3. [x]
4. [x]
5. [x]
6. [x]
7. [x]
8. [x]
9. [x]
10. [x]
11. [x]
12. [x]
13. [x]
14. [x]
15. [x]
16. [x]
17. [x]
18. [x]
19. [x]
20. [x]
21. [x]
22. [x]
23. [x]
24. [x]
25. [x]
26. [x]
27. [x]
16. "The literature of Sanskrit presents, as ordinarily considered, two varieties of the language, but a third may also, as I shall presently endeavour to show, be clearly distinguished. Of these the most ancient is that found in the hymns of the Rigveda Samhita. These were composed at different times and by different Rishis, and were transmitted from father to son in certain families. Thus the third of the ten collections, which make up the Samhita, bears the name of Visvamitra, and the hymns contained in it were composed by the great patriarch and his descendants. The seventh is ascribed to Vasishtha and his family. The composition of these hymns therefore extended over a long period, the language is not the same throughout, and while sometimes they present a variety so close to the later Sanskrit that there is little difficulty in understanding them, the style of others is so antiquated that they defy all efforts at interpretation, and their sense was not understood even by the Rishis who flourished in the very next literary period, that of the Brahmanas. Still for our purposes we may neglect these differences and consider the Vedic variety of Sanskrit as one."
17. The history of Sanskrit affords considerable scope for a study of the growth of language. It presents distinct varieties of speech which are linked together exactly as Modern English is with the Anglo-Saxon. The most ancient form is that composing the text of the Rig Veda Samhita. Consisting of ten books, it was the work of different rishis, preserved by oral tradition in their families. Despite the minute distinctions in the language of the Rik Samhita, we may for all practical purposes treat the Vedic variety of Sanskrit as a compact dialect. Prominently, this dialect presents some peculiarities of form and usage, which may thus be summed up:
(i) The nominative plural of noun ending in [x] is [x] as well as [x] as [x] or [x], the instrumental being [x] or [x]/
(ii) The nominative and the vocative dual and plural of nouns in [x] not rarely end in [x] as [x].
(iii) The instrumental singular of feminine nouns in [x] is occassionally formed by lengthening the vowel as [x] and [x].
(iv) The locative singular termination is often elided as [x].
(v) The accusative of nouns in [[x] are formed by ordinary rules of euphonic combination as [x] or [x], and the instrumental by affixing [x] or [x] or [x] as [x] or [x].
(vi) The dative of the personal pronouns ends in [x] as [x] or [x].
(vii) The parasmaipada first person plural termination is [x] as [x], and of the third person plural is [x] or [x] as [x] or [x].
(viii) The [x] of the atmanepada termination is often dropped as [x], and instead of [x] there is [x], as [x].
(ix) In the place of the imperative second person plural, there are [x], [x], [x] and [x] as [x], [x], [x] and [x].
(x) Eight different forms of the mood [x], signifying condition, are everywhere abundant as [x].
(xi) Roots are not restricted to particular conjugations and at the caprice of the Rishi the same comes to more than one class.
(xii) The infinitive suffixes are [x], [x], [x], [x] and [x] as [x], [x], [x], [x] and [x], the accusatives of some nouns are treated as infinitives governed by [x], as [x], the terminations [x] and [x] occur when combined with [x] as [x], or [x], the potential participles are denoted by the suffixes [x], [x], [x] and [x] as [x], [x], [x] and [x], the indeclinable past ends in [x] as [x], some forms as [x] are also met with.
(xiii) A variety of verbal derivatives as [x] (hanasome), [x] (life) and [x] (product) are frequent.
(xiv) A large number of words which have become obsolete or lost their significance in later Sanskrit are everywhere abundant as [x], [x] and [x].
These peculiarities have been noted as the most frequent and the most salient, but many others are mentioned by Panini. T he Vedic dialect is the first record of the Sanskrit tongue, from which by processes of phonetic decay and natural elision the later language has been perfected.
Here is a specimen of Vedic Sanskrit: —
[x]
"These eight verses contain 72 different padas or grammatical forms, not counting the prepositions as separate padas. Of these, 19 have become altogether obsolete in classical Sanskrit, and 12 have changed their significations."
18. The Brahmanas of the Rk and the Yajus present the second stage in the development. Many of the peculiar words have become obsolete, and the declensions have mostly approached the classical grammar. The roots have no indiscriminate conjugation. The subjunctive is almost gone out of use. The indeclinable past and the gerundial infinitive end in [x] and [x], verbal forms of all moods and tenses are seen in abundance. Still there are the touches of the vedic relationship and archaisms are not rare: —
(i) Some feminine nouns have common forms for the dative and the genitive, as [x],
(ii) The [x] of the third person is often dropped as before, as [x],
(iii) Some of the aorist forms do not follow the rules of Panini, as [x],
(iv) Some antiquated words occur as [x] (a shaft) [x] (reference, [x] (prosperous).
The Aitereya Brahmana quotes some gathas which are obviously more archaic than the rest of the work. Notwithstanding these irregularities, the Brahmanas are "the best representatives extant of the verbal portion of that language of which Panini writes the grammar, though he did not mean these when he spoke of the bhasha." The gradual and perhaps rapid progress in the symmetry and simplicity of the language had still to be accelerated by the work of later authors, and their writings furnish an ample illustration of the next stage of linguistic development.
19. Yaska's Nirukta forms the intermediate link between the Vedic and the non-Vedic literature. It is not devoid of archaic expression, for we meet with such phrases as '[x]' (unable to teach) and '[x]' (invested with sovereignty).
But we have no clue to the dawn of a change of style from simplicity to complexity. To the same period in the history of Sanskrit belongs Panini. His Astadhyayi is based on the grammar of the bhasa. No language has survived to us that literally represents Panini's standard of dialect. Perhaps the later Brahmanas are the only best representatives. At any rate there is no portion of the existing Sanskrit literature that accurately represents Panini's Sanskrit, as regards the verbs and the nominal derivatives. Probably his grammar had for its basis the vernacular language of his day. Yaska and Panini stand to us the authorities on record of that form of the language which immediately followed the purely Vedic stage. 20. Times had advanced, and with it the language Panini's bhasa could no longer stand stationary. The operation of the concurrent causes of linguistic progress had by the days of Katyayana and Patanjali modified Panini's denotation and introduced new changes in the grammar of the language or in the scope of the aphorisms. Katyayana's Vartikas and Patanjali's Mahabhasya are devoted to the proper interpretation of the surtas and to the apt introduction of the missing links. If to Katyayana's eyes 10,000 inaccuracies are discernible in Panini, the only explanation must be that to Panini they were not inaccuracies, but by Katyayana's time the language had progressed and necessitated a fresh appendix or erratum in Panini's grammatical treatise. The period of intervention must have been sufficiently long to allow old grammatical forms to become obsolete and even incorrect and words and their meanings to become antiquated and even ununderstandable.
21. Patanjali discusses the change and progress of the language, in the sastraic form of a dialogue between an objector and a mover thus:
[x] [Mahabhasya, (Nirnayasagara Edition), Vol. I, pages 62-65.]
Purv [x]: There exist (some) words which are not used, for instance, [x], [x], [x], [x]. (These are forms of the second person plural of the Perfect.)
The Siddhatin, or the principal teacher, who advocates the doctrine that is finally laid down asks: —
Sid: What if they are not used?
Purv: You determine the grammatical correctness of words from their being used. Those then that are not now used are not grammatically correct.
Sid: What you say is, in the first place, inconsistent, viz, that words exist which are not used. If they exist they cannot be not used, if not used, they cannot exist. To say that they exist and are not used is inconsistent. You yourself use them (utter them) and say (in the very breath) there are words which are not used. What other worthy like yourself would you have to use them in order that they might be considered correct? (lit. What other person like yourself is correct or is an authority in the use of words).
Purv: This is not inconsistent. I say they exist, since those who know the Sastra teach their formation by [laying down] rules, and I say they are not used, because they are not used by people. Now with regard to [your remark]. What other worthy, &c" [when I say they are not used] I do not mean that they are not used by me.
Sid: What then?
Purv: Not used by people.
Sid: Verily, you also are one amongst the people.
Purv: Yes, I am one, but am not
the people.
Sid (Vart [x]). If you object that they are not used, it will not do (the objection is not valid).
Purv: Why no?
Sid: Because words are used to designate things. The things do exist which these words are used to designate. (Therefore the words must be used by somebody. If the things exist, the words that denote them must exist).
Purv: (Vart [x]. (It does not follow). Their non-use is what one can reasonably infer.
Sid: Why?
Purv: Because they (people) use other words to designate the things expressed by these words, for instance, [x] in the sense of [x], [x] the sense of [x], [x] in the sense of [x], [x] in the sense of [x].(We here see participles had come to be used for verbs of the Perfect Tense).
Sid (Vart [x]). Even if these words are not used, they should be essentially taught by rules (just as long sacrificial sessions are. It is in this way. Long sacrificial sessions are such as last for a hundred years and for a thousand years. In modern times none whatever holds them, but the writers on sacrifices teach them by rules, simply because [to learn] what has been handed down by tradition from the Rishis is religiously meritorious. And moreover (Vart [x]), all these words are used in other places.
Purv: They are not found used.
Sid: An endeavour should be made to find them. Wide indeed is the range over which words are used, the earth with its seven continents, the three worlds, the four Vedas with their angas or dependent treatises and the mystic portions, in their various recensions, the one hundred branches of the Adhvaryu (Yajur-Veda), the Sama-Veda with its thousand modes, the Bahvuchya with its twenty-one varieties, and the Atharvana Veda with nine, Vakovakya, Epics, the Puranas, and Medicine. This is the extent over which words are used. Without searching this extent of the use of words, to say that words are not used is simple rashness. In this wide extent of the use of words, certain words appear restricted to certain senses in certain places. Thus, [x] is used in the sense of motion among the Kambojas, the Aryas use it in the derived from of [x], [x] is used among the Surashtras, [x] among the eastern and central people, but the Aryas use only [x], [x] is used in the sense of 'cutting' among the easterns [x] among the northerners. And those words which you think are not used are also seen used.
Purv: Where?
Sid: In the Veda. Thus, [x].
["We here see that the objector says that certain words or forms are not used by people, and therefore they should not be taught or learnt. The instances that he gives are forms of the perfect to some roots and observes that the sense of these forms is expressed by using other words which are perfect participles of these roots. These statements are not denied by the Siddhanti, but he does not allow that the forms should not be taught on that account. Though not used, they should be taught and learnt for the sake of the religious merit consequent thereon, just as the ceremonial of long sacrificial sessions, which are never held, is. Then the objector is told that though not used by people, the words may be current in some other country, continent, or word, or they must have been used somewhere in the vast literature of the language. As regards the particular instances, two of them are shown to be used in the Vedas. It thus follows that in the time of Katyayana and Patanjali, such verbal forms had become obsolete, and participles were used in their place. But it must have been far otherwise in the time of Panini. He gives minute rules for constructing the innumerable forms of the Sanskrit verb."]
22. A few of those prominent changes are given below —
(i) Panini in a special rule says that [x] has [x] for its neuter in the Vedas. Obviously he intended to exhaust the list. Katyayana has to add [x] to it.
(ii) Panini, when he says [x]. [x] would imply that each form has no other sense than that of a bird, but Katyayana adds that both the forms are optional in the sense of 'birds,' while in any other sense they represent separate words.
(iii) The vocative singular of neuter nouns ending in [x] such as [x] is according to Panini [x], but Katyayana would add an optional [x].
(iv) Some feminine formations are not noticed by Panini, which Katyayana Is forced to allow, as [x] and [x].
(v) The word [x] is rendered as [x] by Panini; Katyayana substitutes for it [x].
(vi) The words and meanings of words employed by Katyayana are such as we meet with in the classical period and his expressions would not invite any special attention. This cannot be said of Panini. Many of his words are antiquated in the later language as [x] (desire) [x] (bargain), [x] (priest).
