Even more so than before, Dr. Debroy needs no introduction, especially to readers of this blog. His column Dharma, Artha, Kama, Moksha was a runaway success, and can be easily accessed in the archives of this blog. Today, Bibek has been kind enough to share with us, a talk he gave at UNESCO on Sanskrit. Normally, he speaks extempore, but the gods have been kind in that he scripted this one. As it turned out, he didn't need to speak directly from it anyway! To the good fortune of all Sanskrit lovers, here is the full text of the talk.
The Wonder that is Sanskrit
Bibek
Debroy
I stand before you as a
representative of an old civilization, to speak about an old language. This is a celebration of International Mother
Language Day. Acknowledging Bangladesh’s
role in getting the UN system to give 21st February that
recognition, let me refer to it as আন্তর্জাতিক মাতৃভাষা
দিবস. I wish
to speak to you about संस्कृत (Sanskrit). I cannot say that Sanskrit is my mother
language, my mother tongue, my মাতৃভাষা. It is much more than
that. Indians are multi-lingual. Because of the fuzzy border been language and
dialect, I can’t even tell you how many languages are spoken in India. Around 125 are major languages, but another
1500 minor languages are spoken. In a
way, each of these is a mother language.
22 languages are listed in a Schedule to the Constitution. This gives them an official kind of
status. Sanskrit is one of these and
Sanskrit also has official language status in a State like Uttarakhand.
Once
every ten years, we have a Census. The
last Census was in 2011, but we still don’t have details from that Census on
India’s great linguistic diversity. For
the preceding Censuses, the number of people who reported Sanskrit as a mother
tongue was 2,212 in 1971, 6,106 in 1981, 49,736 in 1991 and 14,135 in
2001. That is no indicator of how many
people in India actually speak Sanskrit.
As I have said, India is multi-lingual.
Indians speak more than one language.
For Sanskrit to be the first language or mother tongue is rare. But it can be the 3rd or 4th. We don’t capture that. Hence, we don’t know
how many Indians speak Sanskrit. We
capture this imperfectly and inadequately.
That’s also probably the reason why those Census numbers show that kind
of fluctuation from one Census to another.
In
case, someone has told you Sanskrit is a dead language, please disabuse that
person. As I have said, there are 14,135
people who still declare it their mother tongue. A slightly dated 2005 study listed more than
3000 books written in Sanskrit, published after India’s Independence in
1947. We have something called the
Sahitya Akademi. It is like a National
Academy for Letters. Every year, it
gives awards to literary works. Since
1956, there has been an award for Sanskrit.
In the initial years of these Sahitya Akademi awards, works on Sanskrit,
not necessarily in Sanskrit, were also given awards. However, since 1967, those awards have been
restricted to works written in Sanskrit.
True, there hasn’t been an award every year. Bust since 167, 42 authors have been given
such awards on works straddling research, poetry, epic poetry, biography,
novels and short stories. In a separate
Sahitya Akademi category of literature written for children, compositions in
Sanskrit have been conferred awards. There are many Sanskrit academies which give
awards to works in Sanskrit. There are 15 Sanskrit universities. Schools teach Sanskrit. There are thousands of Sanskrit colleges and
traditional “toll”s which are
affiliated to the Sanskrit Universities. Since 1970, the Rashtrya Sanskrit
Sansthan, a deemed university, has existed to propagate and develop Sanskrit. Films have been made in Sanskrit, not
thousands of years ago, films didn’t exist then. Adi Shankaracharya, conventionally dated to
788-820 CE, was a great philosopher and religious teacher. In 1983, a film in Sanskrit was produced on
his life. Most of you have heard of the
Bhagavad Gita, Krishna’s teachings to Arjuna on the eve of the battle of
Kurukshetra and part of the great epic, Mahabharata. A film in Sanskrit, titled “Bhagavad Gita”
was produced in 1983. A Sanskrit poet
and playwright, Vishakhadatta wrote a play titled “Mudrarakshasa”. This was about the great emperor Chandragupta
Maurya, dated to the 4th and 3rd century BCE. We don’t know precisely when the play was
written, the range is between the 4th and 8th century
CE. The point is that in 2006, the play
was rendered into a Sanskrit film. In
2016, we will have an animated film in Sanskrit, crowd-funded and
crowd-sourced, titled “Punyakoti”. There
are more than 75 dailies, weeklies and monthlies in Sanskrit. There is television news in Sanskrit. There are people who tweet in Sanskrit,
including the Prime Minister. On
twitter, every day, there is something called Sanskrit Appreciation Hour, an
attempt to teach Sanskrit. In the state
of Karnataka, there are two famous villages known as Mattur and Hosahalli. In those villages, everyone speaks Sanskrit,
even today.
Unlike
an “extinct” language, there is no proper definition of a “dead” language. Whatever be the definition, I don’t see any
signs of it being “dead”. There is a
completely different point about knowledge of Sanskrit not perceived to possess
commercial value. But certainly at a
forum like UNESCO’s, we shouldn’t talk about objects that only have commercial
value, as determined in the market-place.
With
this preliminary, सर्वेभ्यो नमः which means नमस्ते. I bow
down before all of you. Namaste. You must have heard the expression “namaste”
several times, without necessarily knowing what it means. This is our way of saying “hello” in Sanskrit.
“Namaste” means “I bow down before you”
and it conveys a sense of humility. I am
sure most of you know that “I”, with a capital, is alien to all our languages,
Sanskrit included.
Most
Indian languages, in greater or lesser degree, trace their roots in
Sanskrit. In that sense, more than a
mother tongue, Sanskrit is a grandmother tongue. Indeed, that influence extends beyond the
boundaries of today’s India, to elsewhere in Asia. Nepal’s motto is जननी जन्मभूमिश्च स्वर्गादपी गरीयसी. This is taken from the Valmiki Ramayana and means, “The
mother and the mother-land are superior to heaven.” In Angor Wat, the word Angor comes from the
Sanskrit नगर, meaning “city”.
There are several such instances in South Asia and South East Asia.
The word संस्कृत means polished or refined. It is
allied to words like संस्कृति (samskriti), meaning culture or
civilization, and संस्कार (samskara), meaning purificatory ceremony or sacrament. However, don’t form the impression that the
language has all along been called Sanskrit.
For hundreds, perhaps thousands, of years, the language was simply
called भाषा (bhasha),
language. We don’t quite know when the
language actually came to be called Sanskrit, but it was almost certainly not
before the 6th century BCE.
If you know a little bit about Sanskrit, you may have been told Sanskrit
was spoken by the upper classes, typically males, the brahmanas and the kshatriyas,
the priests and the nobles. Such
propositions are advanced as definitive conclusions, beyond a shadow of doubt.
Let me relate three anecdotes about Swami
Vivekananda (1863-1902). Swami
Vivekananda had a disciple named Sharatchandra Chakravarty and he kept a
diary. This was in Bengali, but has
since been translated into English. Shri
Ramakrishna had a householder disciple named Nag Mahashaya (1846-99). On one
occasion, in 1897, when Sharatchandra Chakravarty was present, another disciple,
who frequently visited Nag Mahashaya, came to meet Swami Vivekananda and
mentioned Nag Mahashaya. Swami
Vivekananda addressed this disciple in Sanskrit and said वयं तत्वान्वेषान् मधुकर हत्वास् त्वं खलु कृती। This was a reference to Nag Mahashaya’s great
spiritual success. Translated, “We have
been destroyed in our pursuit of the truth.
O bee! You are the one who has indeed
been successful.” One of the greatest of
Sanskrit poets was Kalidasa. We don’t
know much about his biographical details, or about when he lived and wrote,
probably between the 2nd century BC and the 5th century
CE. Among Kalidasa’s works are Malavikagnimitram (the love story
between King Agnimitra and Malavika), Abhijnanashakuntalam
(the famous Shakuntala story), Vikramorvashiyam
(the story of King Pururava and Urvashi), Raghuvamsha (the story of King Prabhu’s dynasty), Kumarasambhava (the birth of Kumara or
Skanda), Ritusamhara (about the
seasons) and Meghadutam (when the
cloud was used as a messenger). What’s
remarkable is not that Swami Vivekananda spoke in Sanskrit, but that he used a
quote and a quote from literature. Those
Sanskrit words are part of a quote and they are a quote from Kalidasa’s Abhijnanashakuntalam. The Shakuntala story is about King Dushyanta
and Shakuntala and King Dushyanta said this when a bee was hovering around
Shakuntala’s lips. The second anecdote
is about Swami Vivekananda’s trip to Ernakulam, in 1892. Swami Vivekananda may have spoken in English
in Chicago in 1893, and written and lectured extensively in Sanskrit, but when
he travelled around the country, he conversed in Sanskrit. In Ernakulam in 1892, when someone pointed
out a grammatical error in Swami Vivekananda’s Sanskrit, he remarked, “I need
not follow grammar; grammar will follow me.”
Third, there is a famous text of Vedanta, attributed to the sage
Ashtavakra. As Narendranath Dutta, Swami Vivekananda
used to visit Ramakrishna. At that time,
Swami Vivekananda was still searching. However, Ramakrishna recognized his
potential. To awaken seeds of Vedanta in
Narendranath Dutta, Ramakrishna asked him to translate the Ashtavakra Gita for
him, from Sanskrit to Bengali. In this
respect, there was nothing unusual about Swami Vivekananda. In that day and age, many people spoke and
read Sanskrit. With many languages and
dialects, it was a language used for communicating among different parts of the
country.
There
was a famous Sanskrit poet named Sriharsha, circa 12th century
CE. He wrote a great epic (Mahakavya) named Naishada Charita. This was
about the famous King Nala. Nala married
Damayanti, through what is called a svayamvara,
a ceremony where a lady, typically a princess, chooses a husband from among
assembled prospective suitors. From
different parts of the country, many kings assembled for Damayanti’s svayamvara. Naishada
Charita tells us अन्योन्यभाषानवबोधभीतेः
संस्कृत्रिमार्भिव्यवहारवत्सु। दिग्भ्यः समेतेषु नृपेषु तेषु सौवर्गवर्गो न जनैरचिहिन॥ A free translation,
not an exact translation, is something like this. “There were kings who had assembled from
different parts of the country. They
were scared that they would not understand each other’s mother tongues. Therefore, they conversed with each other in
Sanskrit.” As a language to bridge
different parts of the country, the 12th century wasn’t that
different from the 19th.
But
what of the proposition that Sanskrit
was spoken by the upper classes, typically males, the brahmanas and the kshatriyas,
the priests and the nobles, the elite?
This is offered as a theorem, when it is no more than a hypothesis. We are talking about many thousands of
years. A hypothesis true at one point of
time may well be false at another point of time. Examples are cited from plays, where the
so-called elite speak in Sanskrit and the so-called hoi polloi speak in prakrita, the vernacular or colloquial
language. Who were these plays for? Did ordinary citizens witness their
performance? If they did, they must have
understood Sanskrit. Indeed, this
negates the proposition that ordinary people did not understand Sanskrit. I have already mentioned that संस्कृत means polished and it wasn’t used as an appellation for the language
until much later. It is perfectly
possible for the elite to speak a refined form of the language, while ordinary
people converse in a coarser variant. I
remember a book titled “The King’s English”, written by the Fowler brothers in
1906. That determined correct English
grammar and language. A lot of people
spoke and speak cockney and slang.
King’s English is refined and polished, so to speak, though few people
spoke it, or speak it. Am I therefore
write in proposing that English is dead?
There were great Sanskrit grammarians like Panini (before the 5th
century BCE) and Patanjali (also 2nd century BCE, though there may
have been more than one Patanjali). Too
much grammar tends to kill the living character of a language. One can cite from the works of Panini and
Patanjali to establish that Sanskrit was a thriving spoken language, with
regional variations, when these works were written.
Patanjali’s text on grammar is known as Mahabhashya. This is like a commentary on Panini’s grammar
text, known as Ashtadhyayi. There is a delightful between a grammarian (वैयाकरणः) and a
charioteer (सूतः), an inferior varna, in 2.4.56 of Mahabhashya. The grammarian asks the charioteer कः अस्य
रथस्य प्रवेता
इति। “Who is the charioteer of this chariot?”
The use of the word प्रवेता for driver
or charioteer was wrong. It should have
been प्राजिता. The charioteer corrects the
grammarian, आयुष्मन् अहम् प्राजिता इति। “O one with a long life! I am the driver.” Perhaps understandably, the grammarian
becomes angry and says ओहो खलु अनेन दुरुतेन बाध्यामहे इति। “Alas! This duruta is annoying me.” The
word duruta means badly-woven and was
wrongly used. The grammarian meant duhsuta, or bad charioteer. The charioteer corrects him again, दुःसूतेन इति
वक्तव्यम्। “One should say duhsuta.” This is
reminiscent of another conversation between a bard and a king. Playing on words, the bard tells the king अहं च
त्वं च
राजेन्द्र लोकनाथौ
उभावपि। बहुव्रीहिरहं राजन् षष्ठीतत्पुरूषो भवान्
।। Sanskrit is a language that flows freely, like
water. It does not like stops. It is essentially a spoken language and was
rendered into writing much later. Even
when it was rendered into writing, many different scripts were used. The use of Devanagari as a script is of very recent vintage. Most of the principles of Sanskrit grammar
are based on this principle of letters and words freely merging into one
another to form compound letters and compound words. Two of these principles are called sandhi and samasa. The bard used two
different kinds of samasa, bahuvirhi
and shashthi-tatpurusha, to change
the meaning entirely. The literal translation
is “O king! Both you and I are
Lokanathas. I am bahuvrihi and you are shashti-tatpurusha.” This translation doesn’t make any sense to
someone who doesn’t know samasa. Hence, “O king! Both you and I are Lokanathas. I am one whose master (नाथ) is the world (लोक) and you are one who is master (नाथ) of the world (लोक).”
So much for Sanskrit being restricted to kshatriyas and brahmanas. The Vedas are ancient Sanskrit texts. The word वेद (Veda) means knowledge. The word Vedas
is used both in a narrow and in a broad sense.
In a narrow sense, Vedas is
used for what is called the samhitas. These are mantras. There are four Vedas – Rig, Yajur, Sama and Atharva, associated with four kinds of priests who performed the
rituals. It is impossible to date the Vedas precisely. The earliest, the Rig Veda, probably goes back to at least 2000 BCE. एकं सत् विप्राः बहुधा वदन्ति। “Truth is one.
Learned men speak of it in various ways.” This is an expression you may have heard of. It comes from the Rig Veda, from I.CLXIV.46 to be precise. In a broad sense, the Vedas also include the Brahmanas,
commentaries on the mantras. They also include the Aranyakas (rituals and philosophical speculations) and the Upanishads (metaphysical speculations
and philosophy). However, the dividing
line between the Aranyakas and the Upanishads is thin. The Upanishads
are a treasure-house of wisdom. The word
Vedanta literally means the end of
the Vedas and is a term used for the Upanishads, as well as some subsequent
texts. If you have been to India, or are
familiar with India, you may have noticed the national motto, also embossed on
currency notes. If I write a letter to
you, this expression will be on my letter-head.
This states सत्यमेव जयते, satyameva jayate, truth alone
triumphs. This quote comes from the Mundaka Upanishad. Perhaps I should quote the shloka in its entirety. सत्यमेव
जयते नानृतं सत्येन पन्था विततो
देवयानः। येनाक्रमन्त्यृषयो ह्याप्तकामा यत्र तत् सत्यस्य
परमं निधानम्॥ “Truth alone triumphs, not falsehood. It is through truth that the path of the gods
is laid out. It is by following this
that the sages obtained their wishes and reached the supreme foundation of
truth.” How many Upanishads are there? This
isn’t a question that can be easily answered.
There are major Upanishads and
there are minor ones. Depending on which
ones you include, there major Upanishads
number 11 to 13. There are 100-200 minor
Upanishads.
This entire corpus, Vedas, Brahmanas, Aranyakas and Upanishads are part of what is called the shruti tradition. They are
revelation, they weren’t composed by any human agent, as per the Indian
tradition. There were rishis or sages who composed the mantras. However, strictly speaking,
they weren’t composers or authors. These
were revealed to them. The shruti tradition is distinct from the smriti tradition. Smriti texts
had human authors. The Bhagavad Gita forms part of the great
epic, the Mahabharata, and represents
Krishna’s teachings to Arjuna on the eve of the Kurukshetra War. It derives its essence from the Upanishads. Despite this, the Mahabharata and the Bhagavad
Gita were actually composed by the sage Krishna Dvaipayana Vedavyasa. As such, the Bhagavad Gita is a smriti
text, not a shruti text. I mentioned rishis. In the Rig Veda, one can count a total of 407 rishis.
21 of these were women. If one
propounds the hypothesis regardless of timelines, it is hence impossible to
prove that Sanskrit was spoken exclusively by males.
Since 2003, India has a National Mission for Manuscripts (Namami).
This has a gargantuan task of listing, digitizing, publishing and translating
manuscripts — a manuscript defined as a text more than 75 years old. This
manuscript wealth isn’t necessarily in public hands. Hence, surveys are used to
estimate what’s in private collections. As of now, Namami has a listing/
digitization of three million and the estimated stock of manuscripts in India
is 35 million. There are at least 60,000 manuscripts in Europe and another
1,50,000 elsewhere in South Asia. Ninety-five per cent of these manuscripts
have never been listed, collated and translated. To give some idea of how
large 35 million is, since the advent of printing, an estimated 130 million books
have been published in all languages of the world. Most people here will have heard of Kautilya
(350—275 BCE) and the text on political economy and governance that he
authored, titled Arthashastra. I don’t know how many of you know that the
manuscript of Arthashastra had been
lost. It was rediscovered by R.
Shamasastry in 1904, published in 1909 and translated into English in 1915. Who knows how many such treasures lie hidden
in the form of manuscripts? Let me
reiterate what I said earlier. Writing
is new in Sanskrit is new and writing in the Devanagari script came even later.
Even when the language was Sanskrit, the script may have been something
that few people know how to read today.
The sharada script, widely
used in Kashmir once, is an example. I
have asked several learned people – how many people can read sharada today? The invariable answer is, one or two, but no
one seems to know who these one or two individuals are. There was also something called Brihatkatha, a collection of stories
written by Gunadhya in 6th century CE. This was in a language called paishachi and both Brihatkatha and the paishachi
language have vanished. To compound the
problem, knowledge was transmitted verbally, not in written form, through a guru-shishya or preceptor-disciple mode. We have no idea of how much knowledge has
been lost in the process. Take the Rig Veda as an example. Originally, this was believed to have 21 shakhas, schools or recensions. The Yajur
Veda had 101 shakhas. The Sama
Veda had 1000 shakhas. The Atharva
Veda had 9 shakhas. Together, the four Vedas had 1131 shakas.
Now, there are onhly 13 left. What has been irretrievably lost is beyond
redemption. Let us at least save what
remains.
I have erred in two ways.
First, I have conveyed the impression that all the manuscripts are in
Sanskrit. They aren’t. Roughly two-thirds are in Sanskrit. However, there are other languages too,
Arabic and Pali are examples. I have
also conveyed the impression that all Sanskrit texts are connected to
Hinduism. They aren’t. Many Buddhist and Jain texts were written in
Sanskrit. There is a text known as Amara-Kosha, also known as Namalinganushasana. This was authored by a Sanskrit
grammarian and poet, named Amara Sinha (4th century CE). This text is a bit like a dictionary or
thesaurus and is probably one of the earliest in the world. Surprise of surprises, it is used by students
of Sanskrit even today, as something to refer to. I have it on my I-pad. Though we don’t know much about Amara Sinha’s
personal life, he clearly seems to have been a Buddhist. There is a book titled “A Companion to
Sanskrit Literature”, authored by Sures Chandra Banerji. This was originally published in 1971 and has
gone through several editions since.
This volume traverses 3000 years of Sanskrit literature and has an
entire chapter on the contribution of Muslims to Sanskrit. By the way, this isn’t the only such
documentation. Since 1971, other books
have also documented this contribution.
I used the word philosophy earlier. The Sanskrit word darshana is better, since it carries a nuance of insight. Traditionally, there were six schools of darshana – samkhya, yoga, nyaya, vaisheshika, purva mimasa and uttara mimasa (Vedanta). Add to that the
agama and tantra literature, both less orthodox and unconventional. To the extent they survive, they are
generally in Sanskrit. While these are
triggered by what can broadly be called the metaphysical and spiritual, they
also get into areas that are less obviously religious. This is true in greater measure when we get
into the Vedangas, meaning, limbs of
the Vedas. Traditionally, there are six of these – shiksha (phonetics), kalpa (rituals), vyakarana (grammar), nirukta (etymology),
Chhanda (metre) and jyotisha (astronomy). The rules formalized by Panini in his work on
grammar have influenced the development of formal language theory. The kalpa
branch led to the development of the shulba
sutras. Along this line, the work of
Apastamba (450-350 BCE) and Baudhayana (8th to 7th
century BCE) led to mathematical advances like the Pythagorean theorem,
Pythagorean triples and the square root of 2, the last leading to the notion of
irrational numbers. One should not
misunderstand. One should not look for
axiomatic step by step deductive proofs.
Instead, in 1.11 of Baudhayana’s shulba
sutra, one will have a statement like the following. दीर्घचतुरश्रस्याक्ष्णयारज्जु: पार्श्र्वमानी
तिर्यग्मानी च यत् पृथग्भूते कुरूतस्तदुभयं करोति॥ Translated, “When a
rope is stretched along the length of the diagonal, it produces an area which
is what the vertical and the horizontal sides make together.” Geometry was important because the shulba sutras were about constructions
of sacrificial altars. Jyotisha led to the work of Aryabhatta
(476-550 CE), Varahamihira (505-587 CE), Brahmagupta (598-665 CE) and Bhaskara
(600-680 CE). These works were in
Sanskrit and the contributions in geometry, trigonometry, algebra and combinatorics
have been sufficiently well documented.
Combinatorics reminds me of chhanda
shastra and the work of Pingala (probably 1st century CE). The structure of Sanskrit prosody was
different. Rhyming was unimportant. Instead, there was a very tight structure of
metres, into what can be light and heavy syllables. There were fewer metres in Vedic
Sanskrit. But as Vedic Sanskrit morphed
into classical Sanskrit, there were at least 1000 different metres. Pingala’s work took him to a binary number
system, combinatorics, the binomial theorem and Fibonacci numbers.
Lest I forget, I should mention Ayurveda, treatises on medicine.
Literally, Ayurveda is better
translated as knowledge of life. There
was the work of Charaka (2nd century CE), which was more about
medicine and anatomy, and there was the work of Sushruta (1st
century CE), which was about medicine and surgery. Note that the original texts of the Sushruta Samhita and the Charaka Samhita no longer survive. Note that works on dhanurveda (science of war and fighting) rarely survive too. The Dharmashastras
still determine much of ethics and good behavior.
The mention of prosody takes me to the realm of Sanskrit
literature and there is a huge corpus there.
The Sanskrit word for poet is kavi,
which actually means a wise person. The earliest
poet was Valmiki, composer of the Valmiki Ramayana. Valmiki was the first poet, adi kavi. I used the word shloka earlier. Shloka means a couplet. Have you wondered about the origin of the
word shloka? The story goes that the sage Valmiki went to
the banks of the river Tamasa to have a bath.
A couple of curlews (krouncha)
were making love. Along came a hunter
and shot down the male curlew. The
female curlew lamented at this. Valmiki
was stirred by compassion and wanted to curse the hunter. However, this curse got transformed into the
first couplet ever, in a metre known as anushtubh,
a favoured metre in both the Valmiki Ramayana and the Mahabharata. मा निषाद प्रतिष्ठां त्वमगमः शाश्वतीः समाः। यत्क्रौंचमिथुनादेकमवधीः काममोहितम्॥ “O hunter! Since you have
slain one of two curlews when they were engaged in an act of love, you will
obtain ill-fame for an eternity.” The
word shoka means sorrow. Since the couplet was composed against the
background of sorrowing, this couplet came to be known as shloka. So the Valmiki
Ramayana tells us. Just as Valimiki
composed the Ramayana, the sage Krishna Dvaipayana Vyasa composed the
Mahabharata. There were two great
dynasties in India, the solar dynasty and the lunar dynasty. The Ramayana is the story of the solar
dynasty, while the Mahabharata is the story of the lunar dynasty. The Ramayana and the Mahabharata are not
regarded as fiction. They are called itihasa, meaning, this is indeed what
happened. They are believed to represent
history. To give you some idea of the
size, the Valmiki Ramayana has 25,000 shlokas, while the Mahabharata has
100,000. After composing the
Mahabharata, Vyasa composed the eighteen major Puranas. The Puranas
are ancient accounts. There are major
Puranas and minor Puranas. The eighteen
major Puranas collectively amount to 400,000 shlokas.
Sanskrit literature started to flourish during what is called the
classical period, say 3rd century CE onwards. We had great playwrights like Shudraka,
Bhasa, Ashvaghosa and Kalidasa. There
was a famous text known as natya shastra
(2nd century CE), a treatise on stagecraft. There were collections of popular tales, like
Panchatantra and Hitopadesha. There was
poetry by Kalidasa, Bharavi, Maghaa and Sriharsha. There were authors like Banabhatta,
Vatsyayana and Bhartihari. The list goes
on and on. Volumes have been written on
this amazing corpus. How can I hope to
give you a flavor in the course of a brief talk? You should read it for yourself. But let me give you a few more examples.
शुष्कं काष्ठं तिष्ठति अग्रे। “A dry piece of wood is in
front.” I have just mentioned the great poet Banabhatta. One of his
sons, Bhushanabhatta, was also a great poet. There is a story that Banabhatta
wished to decide which of his sons was better, as a poet. The sentence above is
what the first son produced. When it came to Bhushanabhatta’s turn, he
produced नीरसः तरूवरः पुरतः भाति. The words have exactly the same meaning. Unlike शुष्कं, which only
means “dry”, नीरसः means “without
juice”. काष्ठं means “wood”, while तरूवरः means “great tree”. More
than the meaning, the sound has got completely transformed. शुष्कं काष्ठं तिष्ठति अग्रे। नीरसतरूवरः पुरतः भाति. One is poetry, the
other is not.
There is a story that once, King Bhoja and Kalidasa had a
disagreement and Kalidasa left Dhara and went to live somewhere else.
While he was there, a message was brought to him that King Bhoja had
died. Kalidasa was distraught and composed the following shloka.
Though they had quarreled, Kalidasa still retained a lot of affection for King
Bhoja. अद्य धारा निराधारा निरालम्बा सरस्वती। पण्डिताः खण्डिताः सर्वे भोजराजे दिवं गते॥ “Today, Dhara is without
a foundation. The goddess Sarasvati is without support. All the
learned men are disappointed or abandoned. King Bhoja has gone to heaven.”
A beautiful shloka, but there was a problem. King Bhoja hadn’t actually
died, that was wrong information. When Kalidasa realized that he had been
misled, he rejoiced. As for the shloka, did it have to be
abandoned? Not quite. Kalidasa changed it to the following. अद्य धारा सदाधारा सदालम्बा सरस्वती। पण्डिताः मण्डिताः सर्वे भोजराजे भुवं गते॥ A little bit of tweaking and the entire meaning changes. “With
King Bhoja having gone to earth, Dhara always has a support and the goddess
Sarasvati always has a support. All the learned men are adorned.” You
will say that it needed a Kalidasa to do this. That’s undoubtedly
true. But you also needed the Sanskrit language to do this. There
are very few languages in the world where you could have done this.
That’s the beauty of Sanskrit.
Since Kalidasa is one of my favourite Sanskrit poets, I can go
on and on about him. I have already mentioned मेघदूतम्. This
means “cloud-messenger”. It is impossible to capture the beauty in any
English translation. There is nothing in
the story. In fact, it is amazing that a poet should have composed a
poem with no story-line, so to speak. Kubera is the lord of riches
and the lord of the yakshas and he
lives in Alakapuri, on Mount Kailasha. One of these yakshas has been negligent in his duties
and Kubera banishes him from Alakapuri for one year. He is banished
to some place in the central parts of India. There, he pines for his
beloved wife, who is in Alakapuri. It is the monsoon season and the yaksha decides to send a message to his
beloved. He uses the cloud as a messenger. The Purvamegha part of the poem is about the
cloud’s journey to Alakapuri and has 66 shlokas. The
Uttaramegha part of the poem is about
the cloud’s return from Alakapuri and has 55 shlokas. The beauty of the poem is in the description of
nature. What is the Sanskrit for a mushroom? There are
several and one is शिलिन्ध्र. Have you
heard of any poet in the world bringing something like a mushroom into
poetry? I haven’t. Here is the first part of shloka 11. कर्तुं यच्च प्रभवति महीमुच्छिलीन्ध्रामवन्ध्यां. “You are
capable of making that ground fertile and make mushrooms sprout from it.” Let
us move on to shloka 18. छन्नोपान्तः परिणतफलद्य्योतिभिः काननाम्रैस्त्वय्यारूढे शिखरमचल: स्निग्धवेणीसवर्णे। नूनं यास्यत्यमरमिथूनप्रेक्षणीयामवस्थां मध्ये श्यामः स्तन इव भुवः शेषविस्तारपाण्डुः ॥ “You have climbed up
the peak of the mountain and the extremities are full of ripe mangos in the
orchards and their complexion is affecting the hue. As you have
climbed up the mountain, because of your complexion, it looks as if a lady’s
braided hair is lying atop the slope. From above, a couple of
immortals will certainly think that this is a sight worth looking
at. It is like a breast of the earth, dark in the centre and pale at
the ends.” What is left implicit is that this is the image of a
pregnant lady’s breast. This is the monsoon and soon, the earth will
also begin to yield crops. Meghadutam is nothing but stuff like
this. How can this be translated? Don’t even bother to
read a translation. Read the Sanskrit. Meghadutam
represents the young Kalidasa at work, with poetry churned out of nowhere, that
is, out of a cloud. His more mature
works came later.
I
am going to move on to Magha. He was from 7th century ACE, in what was then Gujarat, and is
now Rajasthan. Magha (Maagha) may have written several works, but
the only one that has survived is Shishupala
Vadha. Most people know the story of Krishna beheading Shishupala and
this mahakavya (great epic) is about
that incident. About Magha it has been said, उपमा कालिदासस्य भारवेरर्थगौरवं| दण्डिन: पदलालित्यं माघे सन्ति त्रयो गुणाः|| We have four
Sanskrit poets mentioned in that couplet – Kalidasa, Bharavi, Dandin and
Magha. “Kalidasa’s similes (metaphors), the deep purport of
Bharavi’s words, the beauty of Dandin’s words – all three qualities are to be
found in Magha.” Shishupala Vadha
has 20 sargas. Indeed, it
is a mahakavya and many connoisseurs of Sanskrit poetry have raved about
Magha. The ingenuity reaches a crescendo in the 19th sarga. Sanskrit
poetry had a concept of चित्रकाव्य. चित्र has many
meanings – picture, wonderful, excellent. So these are wonderful
decorative compositions. For example, how about composing a shloka
with the first pada (quatrain) entirely
in ज, the second pada entirely in त, the third pada entirely in भ and the fourth pada entirely in र? Magha
came up with जजौजोजाजिजिज्जाजी तं ततोऽतितताततुत्। भाभोऽभीभाभिभूभाभू- रारारिररिरीररः॥ Believe it or not, this means “Then the
warrior, winner of war, with his heroic valour, the subduer of the extremely
arrogant beings, he who has the brilliance of stars, he who has the brilliance
of the vanquisher of fearless elephants, the enemy seated on a chariot, began
to fight.” Here is another example, composed only with भ and र. भूरिभिर्भारिभिर्भीराभूभारैरभिरेभिरे। भेरीरेभिभिरभ्राभैरभीरुभिरिभैरिभाः॥ This means, “The
fearless elephant, who was like a burden to the earth because of its weight,
whose sound was like a kettle-drum, and who was like a dark cloud, attacked the
enemy elephant.” As a third example, composed only with द, दाददो दुद्ददुद्दादी दाददो
दूददीददोः। दुद्दादं दददे
दुद्दे दादाददददोऽददः॥ The meaning is, “Sri Krishna, the giver of every boon, the
scourge of the evil-minded, the purifier, the one whose arms can annihilate the
wicked who cause suffering to others, shot his pain-causing arrow at the
enemy.” Magha also specialized in palindromes. Here is
one. वारणागगभीरा सा साराभीगगणारवा। कारितारिवधा सेना नासेधा वारितारिका॥ The translation is,
“It is very difficult to face this army which is endowed with elephants as big
as mountains. This is a very great army and the shouting of frightened people
is heard. It has slain its enemies.” Notice that each line is a
palindrome, read right to left. Magha was partly trying to rival
Bharavi. Bharavi wrote a mahakavya
titled Kiratarjuniya and that was replete with palindromes too. This work was about the duel between Arjuna
and Shiva, the latter in the garb of a hunter. Ignoring the Bharavi
palindromes, here is another remarkable example from Bharavi. विकाशमीयुर्जगतीशमार्गणा विकाशमीयुर्जगतीशमार्गणाः। विकाशमीयुर्जगतीशमार्गणा विकाशमीयुर्जगतीशमार्गणाः॥ The words only seem to
repeat themselves. However, the meaning is quite different. “The
arrows (mārgaṇāḥ), of the king (jagatīśa) Arjuna spread out (vikāśam īyuḥ). The arrows (mārgaṇāḥ), of the
lord of the earth (jagatīśa), Lord Śiva, spread out (vikāśam īyuḥ).
The Gaṇas (gaṇāḥ) who are the slayers of demons (jagatīśamār) rejoiced (vikāśam īyuḥ). The
seekers (mārgaṇāḥ) of Lord Śiva (jagatīśa), i.e. the deities and sages, reached (īyuḥ) the sky (vikāśam) (to watch
the battle).”
One
last example and I am done. Bhaskaracharya was a famous Indian mathematician and astronomer
(1114-1185 CE). He is also known as Bhaskara-II. Leelavati is both
the name of a text (actually part of a text) that he wrote and Leelavati is
also believed to have been the name of his daughter. Many of the problems
are addressed to Leelavati and Leelavati also seems to have composed some of
them. इन्द्र: वायुर्यमश्चैव नैरृतो
मध्यमस्तथा । ईशानश्च
कुबेरश्च अग्निर्वरुण एव च ॥ The one given above is one such, composed by
Leelavati. Why was this important enough to be written down in the form
of a shloka? It is just the
names of various gods. Actually, not just any gods. This gives the
names of lokapalas. Lokapalas are protectors or guardians of
the world. There are 10 directions. If you leave out above and
below, there are 8. These are north, north-east, east, south-east, south,
south-west, west and north-west. North, south, east and west have
specific Sanskrit names as directions. Vayu is the guardian of the
north-west, Kubera of the north, Ishana of the north-east, Indra of the east,
Agni of the south-east, Yama of the south, Nairrita of the south-west and
Varuna of the west.
Vayu
|
Kubera
|
Ishana
|
Varuna
|
Indra
|
|
Nairrtta
|
Yama
|
Agni
|
But what’s the point
of the shloka? Why write out a shloka that only lists the names of the lokapalas? We know their
names. Follow the order listed by Leelavati, Indra is the first, Vayu is
the second, Yama is the third and so on. Madhyama means middle, there is
no guardian there. Fill in the matrix below in the order in which
Leelavati has listed the names.
2
|
7
|
6
|
9
|
5
|
1
|
4
|
3
|
8
|
It is a 3X3 magic
square, with the sums along all rows, all columns and all diagonals adding up
to 15. So that’s what she was doing. She wasn’t writing down any
odd shloka, she was actually
constructing a magic square. Interesting? Sanskrit is littered with
such nuggets. If we don’t learn and read Sanskrit, all this will be lost.
Sanskrit is a great wonder and it is
a great heritage. India’s Human Resource
Development Ministry set up a Committee to recommend a long-term vision and
road-map for the development of Sanskrit.
The Report was submitted recently and is available at http://mhrd.gov.in/report-committee-regarding-long-term-vision-and-road-map-development-sanskrit. It will be a great pity if Sanskrit ever
becomes a “dead” language.
10 comments:
Thanks for the post, what an enchanting read!
video please !!
Very interesting read, Video would be really nice.
Raghuvamsha (the story of King Prabhu’s dynasty)
is incorrect
Raghuvamsha is story of raghu vansh, a ancestors of shri RAM
Thank you so much for sharing this. I would second, video would be great.
Interesting read. I found many of the articles of Debroy on ancient India really interesting.
I am a student of this great language. It is an excellent talk about the richness of this language. Really great!!
I am a student of this great language. It is an excellent talk about the richness of this language. Really great!!
raj__gamer__ff.________
I'd password
Post a Comment