Burrow Sanskrit Language
Burrow Sanskrit Language
Burrow Sanskrit Language
j
theobsolescenceofwordsledtothebeginningsoflexicography.
Theearliest work of thiskind, theNighaI)tu consists oflistsof
difficult Vedic words, ofdivinities,etc.,drawnupfortheuse of
teachers. Thecommentaryontheseby whois probably
not far removed from Pal}ini in.time, contains the earliest
systematicdiscussions on questionsof grammar. Here we find
the parts of speech already distinguished as 1Ulman {noun't
sarvaniiman- r pronoun., iikhyiita- {verbI, upasarga- preposi-
tion> andnipata- i particle'. Thederivationofnounsbymeans
ofkrt andtaddhita affixeshasbecome a wellestablishedtheory>
and an interesting argument between Sakatayanaand Gargya
is reported as to whether all nounscanbe derivedin thisway
from verbalroots. Theformermaintainedthattheycould,and
inspiteofthecogentargumentsontheotherside advancedby
Gargya, this was the theory that generally held the field in
Sanskritgrammaticaltheory. Itis a fact thata largerpropor-
tionoftheSanskritvocabularyiscapableofsuchanalysisthan
isthecase inmost languages.
".The date of Pal}ini is most commonly fixed in the fourth
century B.C. which is in accordance with the native tradition
whichconnectshimwiththeNandakingofMagadha. Nothing
is known of his life except the fact that he was born in the
extreme North-West of India at Salatura. His A$fiidhyayi
which fixed the form of Sanskrit grammar once and for all,
consists ofsome4.000aphorisms ofthegreatestbrevity. This
49 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF SANSKRIT
brevity is achieved by the invention of an algebraical system of
notation of a kind not found outside the grammatical schools.
The system is so idiosyncratic that it could not possibly have
been invented there and then by one man and imposed immed-
iately on all his colleagues. It is clearly the growth of many
centuries and PaQini is to be regarded as the final redactor of a
traditional who superseded all others on account of
his superior comprehensiveness and accuracy. Many of the pre-
decessors of PaQmi are in fact cited in the text, but the merits
of his own work condemned theirs to early oblivion.
The brevity which the Siitra style aimed at and achieved was
due to the fact that all instruction was still oral and dependent
on memory. It implies also from the very beginning the exist-
ence of a commentary (vrtti) , also oral, in which the examples
were contained. When this was first written down is not known,
but the earliest existing commentary on PaQini, the Kiisikii,
dates from a thousand years after his time (c. A.D. 700). A
ga1Japiitha containing lists of words referred to in the Siitra by
citation of the first word in them followed by -iidi, and a
dhiitupii!ha, containing a list of verbal roots, formed essential
parts of his system.
The Siitras of PaQini were supplemented and to some extent
corrected by Katyayana at adate not long after the composi-
tion of the itself. These notes (Viirttika-) are of the
same brevity as the original work, but were fortunately soon
made the subject of an extensive commentary (M by
Patanjali. His date is fortunately known through contemporary
references, notably to the Suilga king and to an
invasion of the Bactrian Greeks, which fix him definitely in the
second century B.C.
Later grammatical works exist in abundance, and many
diverse schools arose, but none of them have any independent
authority, being completely derivative from PaQini. The
earliest is the Kiitantra which arose about the Christian era, and
whose author Sarvavarman is said by tradition to have been
connected with the Satavahana dynasty of the Deccan. The
work aimed at introducing the study of correct Sanskrit to a
wider public than the educated Brahmins for whom PaQini and
his immediate successors had written. Of later works mention
may be made of the Grammar of Candra (A.D. sixth century)
which achieved great popularity among the Buddists, and the
50 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF SANSKRIT
jllinendra (Co 678) which was composed on behalf
of the Jains. Later the polymath Hemacandra produced
also for the Jains the liaima In addition, a
number of minor systems are known which were popular
in various localities, but which have nothing original to
contribute.
The object of all these later grammars was to present the
material contained in Pal}ini in a form comparatively easy to
assimilate, andin thisrespect theyperformeda servicetovery
manywhowere notequaltothearduous taskofmasteringthe
original text itself. How useful they were is shown by their
,
continuouspopularity. Theycontainlittlethatisoriginalsince
for thelll there existed no othersource from which they could
draw except the work of their illustrious predecessor. To
Pa1).ini the main source of his work was the living speech of
himself and his contemporaries. It is the merit of his gram-