Topic started by Shyamrao (@ 203.90.83.84) on Sun Sep 2 11:23:59 .
All times in EST +10:30 for IST.
The Anti-Sanskrit Scripture
by
Shyam Rao
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------
1.1 Sanskrit is Dead
Sanskrit is for all intents and purposes, a dead language. The
Brahmans are in the habit of glorifying the era of Anglo-Brahman
colonialism; yet even during this `golden age' of Sanskritology when
the likes of Max Mueller helped propagate the study of Sanskrit
throughout the world, a mere handful of people spoke it. Nor was it,
even during the hypothesised `Gupta Golden Age' spoken outside the
closely knit circle of Brahmins, who jealously hid all knowledge,
including that of Sanskrit, to themselves. As will be shown later on,
nor did it exist during the Vedic Dark Age; Sanskrit arose as a
mongrel language much later on.
As per the 1951 Census, out of a total population of 362 million
Indians, only 555 spoke Sanskrit ! Even languages like Italian and
Hebrew, spoken by a handful of travellers, were more widely spoken
than `Mother Sanskrit' ! This is evident from the following table :
Language No. of Speakers
Sanskrit 555
Portuguese 6652
Arabic 7914
French 1929
Italian 685
Hebrew 1209
German 1665
English 171742
Number of Speakers as per 1951 Census ( Chat.73-74 )
The 1921 Census of India reveals that a whole 356 people spoke the
language in the entire Indian subcontinent, during what is considered
a `Golden Age' for Sanskrit revival, the era of Anglo-Brahmin
colonialism. Several obscure languages had many more speakers than
`Mother Sanskrit' :
Language No. of Speakers Reference
Sanskrit 356
Grierson, I, p.400
Andamanese 580
Grierson, I, p.390
Nicobarese 8662
Grierson, I, p.390
Khasi 204103
Grierson, I, p.390
Bhotia 231885
Grierson, I, p.391
Naga 338634
Grierson, I, p.394
Number of Speakers as per 1921 Census
During the same 1921 Census, the number of speakers of Indo-Aryan
Languages was 229.561 million.
1.2 Brahmin Fantasies
When European scholars developed an interest in India, their main
focus was to understand Indian religion. Thus, their primary source
in all fields of Indology were the Brahmins. These fundamentalists
hence became the main source of `knowledge' about first Indian
religion, and later all of Indology in general. Hence the entire
field of Indology dating from the colonial era has been highly
biased, being essentially a regurgitated version of Vedic-Puranic
versions of history as seen through the eyes of the Brahmins. As this
section of the population forms a mere 5 % of the Indian population,
these histories have been very unrepresentative of the truth. Thus,
Indian linguistics in its infancy adopted the mythological
Brahmanical notion that all languages were degraded forms of
Sanskrit. Sanskrit, a language which was merely liturgical and hardly
played any role in Indian history, all of a sudden became the focus
of attention. Indeed, this Brahminist fraud, now referred to as `The
Mother Sanskrit Theory', is one of the greatest hoaxes of the 20th
century.
Tall claims were made about this language. Sanskrit became the
`mother of all languages in India', and it soon came to be believed
that all literatures in the world, including Greek, Latin, etc. were
derived frm Sanskrit ! All these Brahmin fantasies were eagerly
copied down by their European collaborators, who placed these
absurdities in academic garb. Max Mueller and William Jones were only
the pioneers in this movement, which, whilst displaying a superficial
novelty in Europe, were in fact based on Puranic notions. Virtually
all efforts of the European colonialists towards studying India were
devoted towards studying Brahmanism; non-Sanskrit civilizations were
given scarcely any attention. This was, in a sense, a reward granted
by the Europeans for services rendered by the Brahmins, who had
actively collaborated with the colonialists. This hangover continues
today, and even now `Indology' virtually means the study of Sanskrit
and Brahmanic civilization; Dravidian, Indo-Muslim and Prakritic
civilizations are blissfully ignored. It is all the more shocking
that some European scholars still actively collaborate in propagating
plainly false Puranic theories. Thus recently, certain deluded
Europeans have made the following statements :
David Frawley said, " It [ Sanskrit ] has been regarded as the best
language for computers because of its clarity." [ Myth, Ch.24 ].
Those familiar with David Frawley know him as an avid propagator of
Brahmin Vedic and Puranic fallacies, such as the Puranic `Out of
India' hypothesis.
According to the Forbes magazine (July,1987), "Sanskrit is the most
convenient language for somputer software programming". The import is
to somehow build a halo around Brahmanic Sanskrit. However, why
Sanskrit has not then replaced established computer languages such as
Basic, C, Pascal or Fortran are not answered. Computers still utilise
binary code and no Sanskrit-based counting system. Nor have humans
adopted the binary system in which computers can calculate so well;
we are all quite satisfied with the decimal system, which is of
Harappan-Sumerian origin.
This Mother Sanskrit Theory (MST) then, arose during the Anglo-
Brahmin colonial era when the Europeans adopted Brahmanic Vedic and
Puranic theories of Indian history and civilization. As per this now
discredited theory, Sanskrit is the `Mother of all World Langauges'.
This model has now been discredited, but a variant of the MST still
pervades Indian linguistics, namely the claim that `Sanskrit is the
Mother of all Indian languages'. Unfortunately, the MST is still
being taught in Indian universities as a hangover from the Colonial
era. Elaborate family trees are still drawn up; of which a simplified
version for Indian languages generally taught today in the North can
be drawn up :
MOTHER SANSKRIT THEORY (MST)
----------------------------
Sanskrit
/ \
Prakrit Pali
/
Apabrahmsa
/ / \
Bengali Hindi Marathi
Thus, as per this theory, Sanskrit somehow developed into Prakrit,
simultaneously developing into Pali. Prakrit then somehow developed
into Apabrahmsa, which then developed into the modern Indo-Aryan
languages. Sanskrit was supposedly the spoken language during the
much-hyped `Golden Age of Indian Culture', the Gupta Empire, and was
supposedly the vernacular during the Vedic Age. Thus, all Indo-Aryan
languages are seen as being mere derivatives of Sanskrit.
Unfortunately, this wrong and highly biased view still persists in
many encyclopedias. This MST is refuted below.
1.3 Non-Existsnce of Sanskrit Before 500 BC
The prime fact which has been suppressed by the Anglo-Brahmin elite
is that Sanskrit did not exist prior to the 6th century BC. This
circumstance is evident from the following points :
Vedas - The word `Sanskrit' does not occur anywhere in the Vedas. Not
a single verse mentions this word as denoting a language.
Chandasa - The Vedic language was referred to as Chandasa even by
Panini himself [ Chatt., p.63 ], and not as `Sanskrit'.
Buddha - The Buddha was advised to translate his teachings into the
learned man's tongue - the `Chandasa' standard [ Chatt., p.64 ],
there is no mention of any `Sanskrit'. The Buddha refused, preferring
the Prakrits. There is not even a single reference in any
contemporary Buddhist texts to the word `Sanskrit'. This shows that
Sanskrit did not even exist at the time of the Buddha and that the
people at that period, even the Brahmins themselves, were not aware
of themselves as speaking `Sanskrit'; they referred to their language
as `Chandasa'.
Ramayana - The word `Sanskrit' occurs for the first time as referring
to a language in the Ramayana :
"In the latter [Ramayana] the term `samskrta' "formal, polished", is
encountered, probably for the first time with reference to the
language"
-- [ EB 22 `Langs', p.616 ]
It is to be noted that extant versions of the Ramayana date only to
the centuries AD.
Asokan Script - The first inscriptions in Indian history are in
Prakrit and not in Sanskrit. These are by the Mauryan King Ashoka
(c.273 BC - 232 BC ), and number over 30. They date to the 4th
century BC. The script utilised is not `sacred' Devanagari, and the
language is not `Mother' Sanskrit. They are mostly in the Brahmi
script, while 2 inscriptions are in Kharoshtri. They are in various
Prakrits and some in Afghanistan are in Greek and Aramaic [ Bas,.
p.390-1 ]. In fact all inscriptions in India were in Prakrit till the
early centuries AD :
"[T]he earlier inscriptions up to the 1st century AD, were all in
Prakrit"
-- [ Up., p.164 ]
Satavahana Inscriptions - The Satavahanas, the first historical
dynasty of the Deccan, also used a Prakrit language. There is no
usage of Sanskrit. The Nagarjunikonda insrciptions are by the
Satvahana king Vijaya Satakarni in the early 3rd cetnruy AD & end
with the Ikshvaku Rudrapurusadatta who ruled for 11 years in the
second quarter of the 4th century. Most of the large number of
inscriptions are in Prakrit and only a few belonging to Ehuvulu
Santamula are in Sanskrit (he ruled during the last 24 years of the
3rd to the early 4th century AD ) but even most of his inscriptions
are in Prakrit and those which are in Sasnkrit are heavily influenced
by Prakrit [ Bhatt., p.408 ftn.46 ].
The Nanaghat cave inscriptions in Poona distt. are in Prakrit and are
the work of the Satavahana Satakarni I. They have been dated to the
first half of the 1st century BC. The contemporary relgiion of this
region was Vedic. Indra and Vasudev are mentioned as the Vedic gods
then worshipped [ Bas, p.395 ]. The later cave inscriptions of Nasik
in the 1st and 2nd centuries AD are in the local Prakrit [ Bas,
p.395 ]. Thus, although the Vedic religion was followed in the
Satavahana regions, Sanksrit was not in use.
Gandhari - Even Gandhari existed prior to Sanskrit. The Pali
Dhammapada in Gandhari was discovered at Khotan in Kharoshtri script.
It dates to the 1st or 2nd century AD. A Gandhari insrcription was
discovered on a copper casket containing relics of the Lord Sakyamuni
[ Bas, p.393 ].
Kharavela's Kalinga Inscription - Kharavela's Kalingan inscription of
the 1st century BC were in a Prakrit of the east indian type.
Interseting is the first mention of the word Bharatavarsha in an
inscription. Kharavela is described as invading Bharatavarsha, which
then evidently denoted only North India [ Bas, p.393 ].
First Sanskrit Inscription : 150 AD - The earliest inscription in
Sanskrit is by the Saka Mahakshatrapa Rudradaman at Junagarh in
Gujarat dated to AD 150. However, even here several of the words are
wrong according to Sanskrit grammatical rules, some words show
Prakrit influence and a few are un-Paninian [ Bas 397-8 ]. This
inscription is several centuries later than the earliest Prakrit
inscriptions, and are the creation of Sakas, not Arya kings.
1.4 Refutation of the Mother Sanskrit Theory (MST)
As usual, the load of Sanskrit-centric theories were a heap of
nonsense. The following developments have been instrumental in
overturning the old colonial reverence for the language :
Brajbuli dates to 1000 BC - A central assumption of the MST is that
all Prakrit vernaculars must be of a very late date. With the first
mention of `Sanskrit' in a Ramayana dating to the ealy centuries AD,
any Prakrit existing prior to this necessarily contradicts the Mother
Sanskrit Theory. Indeed, even the Brahmanic myths themselves present
evidence of this with the Prakrit Brajbuli. Brajabuli, the precursor
to the modern Braj Bhasa, is said to have been used by Krishna and
the gopis of Vraja (Vrindavan, whence Braj) and it was thus popular
amongst Vaishnava poets [ Assam, p.422.n3 ]. Krishna is dated to ca.
1000 BC, and this internal evidence would imply that Braj Bhasa dated
to 1000 BC. Recently, Krishna's city, Dvaraka, has been excavated,
showing that he probably was a historical person. The stories are
hence based on fact, and this evidence cannot be dismissed as a
`myth'.
`Prakrit' = Vernacular - The term `Prakrta' or Prakrit means
`common', `natural', while the term `Samskrta' or Sanskrit natural
means `polsihed, refined' [ Up.164 ]. Thus Prakrit refers to any of
the natural languages, while Sanskrit refers to the `purified'
language. This etymology itself indicates that Sanskrit is derived
from Prakrit rather than the other way around. This necessarily
implies that Sanskrit is, like Old Church Slavonic, a polished
version of various vernaculars.
Apabrahmsa is a Prakrit - Apabrahmsa, which in the MST is seen as a
derivative of Prakrit, is in fact itself a Prakrit known as Abhiri.
It was actually comtemporary with all the other Prakrits, and the
view that it succeeded Prakrit is wrong. Several dramas have
characters speaking Apabrahmsa and Prakrits side by side. This shows
that Apabrahmsa is not the second stage in the development from
Sanskrit, but was merely another Prakrit language.
Different Prakrit Languages - Prakrit is not a single language. Since
the beginning there were several different Prakrit languages, which
had different grammars and dictionaries.
Modern Prakrits - As per the MST, the Prakrits are all dead
languages, having `degraded' into the modern Indo-Aryan tongues.
However, Prakrits never disappeared. All the modern Indo-Aryan (IA)
languages are Prakrits (Bengali, Marathi etc.). The ancient Prakrits
are the direct precursors of the modern languages, thus Vangi ->
Bengali, Odri -> Oriya, and Maharastri -> Marathi. All these so-
called `Prakrits' such as Vangi, Odri and Maharastri, can all be
understood by the speakers of their respective IA languages with the
same ease with which a modern speaker of English can understand Anglo-
Saxon. This fact alone is sufficient to refute the MST. Far from
being dead, Prakrit is still spoken in all parts of India just as it
has been for thousands of years. The word Prakrit itself merely means
`natural' and refers to all the Indo-Iranian languages as spoken by
the common man in India. Thus, even the literal meaning of the word
`Prakrit' implies that it is far from dead.
Prakrit Older than Sanskrit - The MST claims that Sanskrit is older
than Prakrit. However, it is Prakrit which is older than Sanskrit,
since several features of Prakrit can be traced to the Rig Veda,
which are not found in Sanskrit. This is because Chandasa, when
invented by the Brahmins ca. 5th century BC, was a refined form of
vernacular IA langueages, thereby losing certain features which were
preserved in Prakrit.
Other features -
Pali poses another problem for the MST. As per the MST, it is an
independant derivation from Sanskrit, and is not a Prakrit. However,
Pali is in fact a dialect of Magadhi Prakrit and not a separate
language as evidenced by the mutual comprehensibility between these
two tongues.
The Prakrits can be understood by the respective speakers of modern
Indo-Aryan languages, ie.
Vangi can be understood by modern Bengali speakers,
Odri Prakrit can be understood by modern Oriyas,
Maharashtri Prakrit can be understood by modern Marathis
yet in the Sanskritic viewpoint Prakrits are dead.
1.5 Brahman Invention of Sanskrit, The Liturgical Language
The lack of a standard liturgical language was a grave defect for the
6 orthodox (`astika') schools of Brahmanism (comprising Aryan
Vaishnavism, Vedanta, Yoga, Vedism, etc.). With the rise of `nastika'
heterodxies, ie. Jainism (`jainas'), Buddhism (`bauddhas'), etc.
(collectively referred to as `Sramanism') associated with East Indic
kingdoms, the Aryans of Aryavarta & Brahmavarta sought to counter
this novel threat to Vedic orthodoxy by introducing a standard
litugical language (perhaps in emulation of the Buddhist Pali and
Jain Ardhamagadhi). The state of Panchala played a central role in
this process. This nation arose in the 8-9th centuries BC and united
different groups speaking North Indic and Midland Indo-Aryan
languages. It is here that Panini created the `chandas' language.
Soon thereafter the label `samskrta' (polished, whence later
Sanskrit) was applied to this liturgical language. Thus Sanskrit is a
synthesis of several languages:
Vedic Languages :
Rigvedic
Samvedic
Atharvic and
Yajurvedic
Brahmanic, the language of the Brahmanas
Upanishadic, the language of the Upanishads
North Indo-Aryan languages, eg. Bal Sarasvati (the precursor of
Konkani), Gandharvi (the precursor of Gandhari), etc.
Midland Indo-Aryan languages, eg. Braj buli (the language of Krishna
and Matsyi (the precursor of Sauraseni).
In this regard the origin of Sanskrit is exactly analogous to that of
Old Church Slavonic.
1.6 Mother of None
The Mother Sanskrit Theory (MST) has been now discarded. A new tree
diagram can now be drawn.
___________ Indo - Iranian _____________
/ / \ \ \
Indo-Aryan East Indic Dardic Scythic Iranic
/ \ \ \ (East Iranic) \
Vedic Madhyi Udicyi Pracyi \ \
/ Bibhasas Bibhasa \ Rajastani
Sanskrit / | | |\ Lahnda, Languages
/ | | | \ Old Sindhi
/ | | | \
Kanauji Sauraseni Gandhari Magadhi Vangi
/ (extinct) | | \
Braj Bhasa Magahi Bengali Kamrupi
/ \ \
Braj Bhakhta Khari Boli Assamese
[ P R A K R I T S ]
The dialect of Pracya was the one current is what is now Oudh and
Eastern U.P. and probably also Bihar. This language was prevalent
among the vratyas who were wandering Aryan-speaking tribes who did
not owe allegiance to the Vedic fire-cult and the social and
religious organisation of Brahmanism [ Chatt., p.61 ].
Encyclopedia Britannica now acknowledge that the old MST is
discarded:
" As Classical Sanskrit is not directly derivable from any single
Vedic dialect, so the Prakrits cannot be said to derive directly from
Classical Sanskrit"
-- [ EB 22 `lang ', p.618 ]
1.7 Comparison with Old Church Slavonic
Thus, Classical Sanskrit is exactly analogous to the Old Church
Slavonic language [ EB 22.696 ], which was created in 863 AD by
Orthodox Slavs to counteract the effect of the Latin Catholic Church.
Old Church Slavonic was a synthesis of West Slavic languages and
Byzantine Greek. This occurred in the Moravian kingdom, which united
West Slavs in the 9th century AD. Thus, both Sanskrit and Old Church
Slavonic arose as syntheses of various languages and both arose as
standard liturgical languages to counter heterodoxies.
1.8 Consequences of the MST & Sanskritisation
The MST and the Brahminist policy of Sanskritisation had several
disastrous consequences for pre-Brahmanic civlizations :
Undermining of Pre-Brahmanic Langauges - The MST had the debilitating
effect of undermining pre-brahmanic languages and caused great harm
to these vernaculars. The modern Indo-Aryan languages were viewed as
`degraded', since they were merely distorted forms of Sanskrit. This
led to most Indians developing a dislike for their own mother tongue.
Destruction of Non-Brahmin History - The Indo-Aryan languages were
viewed as being recent in origin, since each vernacular and its
respective Prakrit were seen as separate languages. Thus, instead of
accepting the fact of these languages originating in 1000 BC, the MST
held that Bengali, Marathi, Oriya etc. were born between 1400-1500
AD ! Thus, instead of being respected for having histories of 3000
years, these languages with a rich history were denigrated as recent
innovations.
Cultural Genocide - Since these languages (Marathi, Gujarati,
Bengali, etc.) were viewed as being merely degraded forms of
Sanskrit, the MST naturally led to the idea of abolishing these
languages and replacing them with Sanskrit. Since these languages
were supposedly of recent origin, having been spoken only for the
last 300-500 years, whereas Sanskrit had been purportedly spoken for
3500 years, this seemed a natural conclusion. Such concepts have been
adopted by the Sangh Parivar, which seeks to abolish all Prakritic
languages and replace them with Sanskrit.
Hampering of Development - Sanskritisation hampered the free
development of these languages, since they had to depend on Sankrit
vocabulaery and literary models. The vernaculars were deliberately
corrupted with excessive Sanskritisation. In many cases, the
indigenous languages have been undermined and are nearing extinction.
The native Marathi script has been replaced by Devanagari during the
Anglo-Brahmin Empire; Bhojpuri, Magahi, Mithili and Koshali have all
been replaced by Khari Boli Hindi, Bengali was Sanskritised and
undermined in the early part of the 20th century, being saved only by
Tagore; and Rajasthani is nearing extinction, with the Brahmins
having obliterated the Mahajani script. Everywhere, the advance of
Brahmanic Khari Boli Hindi is evident, which in the MST is considered
`purer' as being closer to Sanskrit than the `degraded' vernaculars
it is replacing.
1.9 Sanskrit is 30 % Dravidian
Many authors have made the fallacious claim that Sanskrit is the
purest of languages. In fact, Sanskrit has many Dravidian loanwords,
and many Prakritisms. Thus,
" Classical Sanskrit was profoundly influenced by Middle Indo-Aryan [
ie. Prakrits ]. Not only were a large number of Middle Indo-Ayan
words adopted into Sanskrit, but a whole host of Prakrit root and
verbal bases of both Aryan and non-Aryan or uncertain origin were
slightly altered to look like Sanskrit and bodily adopted... This was
realised by the ancient scholars with whom Sanskrit represented just
a variant, an earlier or fuller form (patha) of Prakrit. "
-- [ Chatt., p.95 ]
Some scholars hold that more than 50 % of the vocabulary of Sanskrit
is of Dravidian and foreign origin; thus Lahovery writes that the
vocabulary of Sanskrit "is largely formed of Dravidian and other
loanwords" [ Lah., p.407 on Wool ]. The composition of Sanskrit
vocabulary can be approximately given by :
70 % Non-Vedic
40 % Dravidian
30 % Prakrits and Others
30 % Vedic (Old Indo-Aryan)
Tell your friend about this topic