Brahmanism Controlled Masses Through Language

[Guest guest]

Brahmanism Controlled Masses Through Language

http://www.ambedkar.org/brahmanism/BRAHMANISM_CONTROLLED_MASSES_THROUG

H_LANGUAGE.htm

 

Also Read

Decline And Fall of Buddhism

http://www.ambedkar.org/books/dob.htm

 

Dr. K. Jamanadas,

 

National Language of India

 

A lecturer friend of mine, who was trying to convince me that

learning becomes easy in student's mother tongue, was taken aback to

hear from me that India does not have a mother tongue, it has mother

tongues. Does India have a national language? Presumably, it does,

and it is Hindi. How it came to become a national language is

described by Dr. Ambedkar who was present in the Congress Party

meeting as Chairman of the Drafting Committee when the Draft

Constitution of India was being considered, on the issue of adopting

Hindi as the National language:

 

"...There was no article which proved more controversial than Article

115 which deals with the question. No article produced more

opposition. No article more heat. After a prolonged discussion when

the question was put, the vote was 78 against 78. The tie could not

be resolved. After a long time when the question was put to the party

meeting the result was 77 against 78 for Hindi. Hindi won its place

as a national language by one vote. I am stating these facts from my

personal knowledge. ..." [Ambedkar B. R., Thoughts on Linguistic

States, Writings & Speeches, Maharashtra Govt., 1989, vol. 1, p. 148]

 

It is not known, whether the member had gone out in the mean time and

was absent during voting the second time, but surely it does not

speak highly of a language to have been declared as "National" under

such circumstances. This is specially so, when in practice, whole of

India thinks in English, may be it is Law, Medicine, Sports,

Commerce, Accounting, Cinema, Literature, Poetry or any other field

of life. In the homes of elites, English is not only spoken by

children and servants but also their pets like cats and dogs.

 

Language Problem of India

 

The question of language is a tricky problem in India. India is a

vast country. True. It was much vaster in ancient times. Now it has

been divided into three countries. In India itself, there are

numerous languages. Some of them are official languages and some are

struggling to become official. The country is divided into provinces

on the basis of language. Gandhiji had promised to do that before

independence. So it was done. The strangest thing is that the people

fight among themselves on the basis of language, as if the linguistic

provinces are two different nations. Dr. Ambedkar had warned that

there is a very thin line between linguistic provinces and linguistic

nations and he had suggested some safeguards and remedies to prevent

the calamity of converting the linguistic provinces into linguistic

nations. Unfortunately no heed was paid to his wise advice. We have

to consider whether India was always having multiple languages, and

why there are so many languages in India and why does the speech

differ every few miles.

 

Origin of language

 

Itihasacharya V. K. Rajwade explained that Language originated from

sound, script originated from pictures, expression from natural body

movements and utensils from the figures seen. All this was invented

by the wisdom of man himself by hard work of trial and error, and not

due to any imaginary gods or asuras in imaginary heaven or hell. That

voice originated from damaru of Shankara, Gandhaba-kanya taught the

art of drawing pictures, acting was taught by some kinnara, and

making of utensils was taught by some imaginary vishwakarma are all

myth, fantasy and a pack of lies, nothing is divine, all these arts

are acquired by man by efforts and by learning from trial and error.

[Rajwade V. K., bharatiya vivah sansthe cha itihas, marathi, p. 106]

 

Language of masses was different

 

Mr. Nair explains quoting authorities, that language of the masses is

different from that of the "classes". This difference is calculated

by the elites for establishing and maintaining their supremacy. As

Nair quotes Lapier:

 

"A language is a system of cultural definition whereby meanings are

assigned to a great variety of specific sound combinations thereof

and among a literate people, graphic representations thereof. But the

members of the society seldom speak or even write in terms of the

culturally designated definitions. They speak and write in some

special vernacular which differs both quantitatively and

qualitatively from the official language i.e. from the language as

embodied among a literate people in dictionaries, manuals of grammar

and the like". [`Theory of social control' p. 261, quoted by Nair B.

N., "The Dynamic Brahmin", p.68]

 

Was Sanskrit a spoken language?

 

Contrary to the recent hindutwavadi propaganda, it is a well

established fact that Sanskrit was never a spoken language:

 

"Let us remember that Sanskrit as its meaning indicates was never a

spoken language and that it was only a purified version of the

language that was in popular usage such as Prakrit, and that its

refinement and the codification of grammar in an unalterable form was

the work of grammarians like Panini." [Nair B. N., "The Dynamic

Brahmin", p.67]

 

Even strong protagonists like Pandit Mishra aver that it was a spoken

language but the "spoken" means, it was spoken by "shishtas" i.e.

elite (meaning Brahmins) alone. Rest of the masses were speaking

Prakrit. [Mishra, p.376] Even in late Sanskrit drammas, as is well

known, the charectors of higher castes speak Sanskrit, and the others

speak Prakrit. So speech depended on the caste.

 

Views of Prof. Rhys Davids

 

His opinion is perhaps the consensus opinion and based upon deep

study of scriptures, sculptures and epigraphs both Brahmanical as

well as Buddhistic. He observes:

 

"... Priests have preserved for us, not so much the opinions the

people actually held, as the opinions the priests wished them to

hold. ... What had happened with respect to religious belief is on a

par with what had happened with respect to language. From Takkasila

all the way down to Champa no one spoke Sanskrit. The living

language, everywhere, was a sort of Pali. Many of the old Vedic words

were retained in more easily pronounceable forms. Many new words had

been formed, on analogy, from the existing stock of roots. Many other

new word had been adopted from non- Aryan form of speech. Many Aryan

words, which do not happen to occur in the Vedic texts, had

nevertheless survived in popular use. And mean while, in the schools

of the priests, and there only, a knowledge of the Vedic language

(which we often call Sanskrit) was kept up. But even this Sanskrit of

the schools had progressed, as some would say, or had degenerated, as

others would say, from the Vedic standard. And the Sanskrit in actual

use in the as it is from the so- called classical Sanskrit of the

post Buddhistic poems and plays." [Rhys Davids, Buddhist India, p.

211 ff., emphasis ours]

 

He avers that, outside the schools of the priests, the curious and

interesting beliefs recorded in the Rig Veda had practically little

effect, and Vedic theosophy was never a popular faith. Vedic rituals

are not of simpler faith, and are advanced. The gods of the older

system - the dread Mother Earth, the dryads and the dragons, the dog-

star, even the moon the sun have been cast into the shade by the new

gods of the fire, the exciting drink, and the thunderstorm. The

mystery and the magic of the ritual of the sacrifice had

complications and expense. [Rhys Davids, Buddhist India, p. 211 ff.]

 

Max Muller, who believed that thoughts in Rigveda were primitive, as

these thoughts are so bizarre and absurd that they cannot be

considered as advanced, and one is so accustomed to consider the

priesthood as the great obstacle to any way of reform in India, he

averred, that it is difficult to believe that the Brahmins could

ever, as a class have championed the newer views. Rhys Davids,

disagreeing with Max Muller, believed that the beliefs recorded in

the Rig Veda are not primitive or original, as proved by comparison

with evolution of religious beliefs elsewhere. These beliefs were in

the view of the men who formulated them, a kind of advance on the

previous ideas. And when the Rig Veda was finally closed there were

many other beliefs, commonly held among the Aryans in India, but not

represented in that Veda. [Rhys Davids, Buddhist India, p. 211 ff.]

 

Social Control through language

 

The so called "purity" of Sanskrit makes it a dead language, may be

true, but that was the intention of the users, to safeguard their own

supremacy over the masses. Nair exclaims:

 

"... The maintenance of the purity of Sanskrit language since the

days of Panini until the present day is wonder of wonders that is

largely to be explained by the tenacity of the Brahmin to preserve it

as such, as the sacred language of status group even though their

spoken language was, by and large, the local languages or a mixture

of the two. This is not to admit that early Sanskrit before it

reification did not borrow words from Dravidian languages and made

them its own. As a matter of fact detailed research in the linguistic

prehistory India is bound to reveal many instances for such a fusion

of Tamil words into Sanskrit, especially that style of Sanskrit which

came to be used for limited secular purposes." [Nair B. N., "The

Dynamic Brahmin", p.68]

 

Sanskrit is static language

 

Ancient Tamil grammar Tolkapium, Nair says, was a "scientific

treatise on grammar" created to "safeguard the system of cultural

definitions". Brahmins maintained purity of their language because of

the fear of local language of masses. Why did the Brahmins try to

keep their language different than that of the masses? The reason is

that they wanted to maintain their supremacy through it. The process

is continuing even now. When elites speak of it a "pure" they

actually mean "static", and anything becomes static then it merits

the title of "dead". Mr. Nair explains the tendency:

 

"The purity of Sanskrit since the days it assumed its present

grammatical shape is to be explained by it static state, as the

restricted and sole vehicle of a sacerdotal class who jealously

preserved it from the corroding influence of non-Brahmin languages.

This they did out of fear as experience had already taught them that

in the mutual impact it was Sanskrit that stood the chance of loosing

its integrity and getting assimilated with the "Paisachi" language

which was widely prevalent in the subcontinent of India at the time

of their arrival. So then true to the spirit and apostolic motivation

of cultural conquerors they set about to conquer the speakers of the

language but also the latter's language itself. There is a hymn in

the Rig Veda which expresses this wish most solemnly and which may

have been recited by countless generations of Brahmins,"May we

conquer the ill-speaking man" [Nair B. N., "The Dynamic Brahmin",

p.69]

 

Panini was ignorant about history: Rajwade

 

Itihasacharya Rajwade had done a lot of work not only in history but

also in linguistic field. He explained the code language of

Mahanubhavas as well as he explained origin of Sanskrit. He declared

that Panini had no knowledge of amalgamation and mixture of primitive

societies. He explained how the use of neuter gender in Sanskrit

originated from the mixture of two societies, one having a nasal

twang and other without it. While explaining grammar, Rajwade

scientifically uses the sociological concepts, and clarifies what

Panini could not. He declares boldly that Panini had no historical

perspective and that Panini's belief, that Sanskrit is the language

of the devas and hence anaadi, (having no beginning), as "eccentric".

He avers that there is not a single word or a phrase in whole of

ashtadhyai of Panini, which could suggest that Sanskrit originated

from Vedic language. Panini could not ever think that Sanskrit is the

corrupt or hybrid form of Vedic language. Because of this disregard

of history, Panini thought there was no world before Vedas, and no

time before it. His thoughts are thus opposed to progress and because

of his ignorance, the society became dejected about the future. There

were many pre-vedic languages, then Vedic, then Panini's Sanskrit,

then Prakrit, and regional languages like Marathi etc. is the

progressive evolution, but because of Panini's thoughts this was

considered as degeneration. Panini's ashtadhyai is the well known

example of how the unhistorical attitude causes the gross damage, he

observes. [Rajwade V. K., bharatiya vivah 0sansthe cha itihas,

marathi, introduction by S.A.Dange p. 21]

 

Ancient language of whole of India was Tamil

 

Rajwade acknowledges the Aryans have come from outside India and the

original indigenous residents were the Naagas. They were expert in

drawing pictures, they later married Vedic Aryans and it is customary

to include Naaga vamsha into the Aryan fold. He also acknowledges the

presence of non-Aryan languages like Asur bhasha, Dravida bhasha,

Chinese and Red Indian and African languages. [Rajwade V. K.,

bharatiya vivah sansthe cha itihas, marathi, p. 100]

 

Paishachi language was Tamil is the experts' view. Having made it

clear that Paishachi language was a very rich language, and very

widely spoken, let us see the experts' views on what was this

language. Before Aryans could influence things here, the language of

India was "Paishachi", which meant Tamil, and it was spoken from

Kashmir to Kanyakumari. Nair observes:

 

"According to Mr. Oldham there are ample evidences to show that the

so-call "Paisachi" language was spoken throughout India. He says "It

is evident that the old Sanskrit Grammarians considered the language

of the Dravidian countries to be connected with the vernaculars of

Northern India; and that in their opinion it was especially related

to the speech of those who as we have seen, were apparently descended

from the Asura tribes. Thus in the Shahasha Chandrika Lakshmidhara

says that the Paisachi language is spoken in the Paisachi countries

of Pandya, Kekaya Vahlika, Sahya, Nepala, Kuntala, Sudarsha, Bota,

Gandhara, Haiva and Kangana and there are Paisachi countries. Of all

the vernaculars the Paisachi is said to have contained the smallest

infusion of Sanskrit". [Nair B. N., "The Dynamic Brahmin", p.70]

 

Dr. K. M. Panikar has something equally interesting to say; "The

distribution of the indigenous races even today in the uplands of

South Bihar and in the eastern areas of Madhya Pradesh and the

persistence of the Bhils in the Aravalli and Vindhya ranges show that

as a population momentum the Aryan invasion ceased to have any

momentum after it reached the Gangetic valley. The gradual spread of

Hinduism all over India and with it the Aryan speech should not blind

us to the fact that even in North India outside the Punjab the Aryans

contributed only a racial strain. In Gujrat and in Maharashtra the

neo-Aryans were able to improve their language but in the Deccan and

in the South the Dravidian speech not only held its own but was able

to drive out the Austric and other linguistic elements. The spread of

Aryanism and Sanskrit, originally associated with Agastiyas' crossing

of the Vindhyas became, an accomplished fact only in the first

centuries of the Christian era as may be seen from the earlier

Paisachi tradition of the Satavahana Emperors of Pratishtan" [K. M.

Panikker, Geographical Factors in Indian History, 1955, quoted by

Nair B. N., "The Dynamic 0Brahmin", p.70]

 

Paisachi was Tamil

 

Nair confirms that Paishachi was Tamil.

 

"Now we may ask: what could have been this Paisachi language other

than the Tamil of pre-Tholkappian epoch? Indeed, the author of

Tholkappiyam (who is considered to be a Brahmin himself) felt as much

nervous about the vigour of Sanskrit or more possibly Prakrit as the

Brahmin Aryans felt consternation about the richness of

this "Paishachi" language. In spite of this, it is evident that the

two languages could not continue side by side in certain regions

without influencing one another for their mutual benefit. Hence it is

that we find that rules have been laid down in Tholkappiyam for the

adoption of Sanskrit words under certain conditions and subject to

certain rules while Prakrit itself normally absorbed certain

Dravidian 0features." [Nair B. N., "The Dynamic Brahmin", p.70]

 

Ashokan India was speaking Prakrit and not Sanskrit Hindutwavadis

like to project that the main stream of Indian thought flows through

Sanskrit. This is totally false, as can be seen by historical

evidences of epigraphs. Original inscriptions were not Sanskrit.

Apart from Ashoka's edicts, the most ancient inscriptions of

Arekmedu, which talk of Buddha's teachings, were not in Sanskrit but

in Prakrit. Another European authority Dr. J. Filliozat is worth

quoting in this respect:

 

"Even much later, in the first half of the first century of Christian

era when appeared the first dated Tamil inscriptions, those of

Virapatnam - Arikamedu near Pondicherry, Sanskrit was not yet current

in Tamilanad as the inscriptions in an Indo-Aryan language found

along with the Tamil inscriptions are in Prakrit. These inscriptions

are no doubt very short and very few but we can at least be sure that

they are exactly comparable with those of Ceylon at the same epoch;

here also middle-Indian was employed and not Sanskrit. The characters

of these inscriptions around the beginning of the Christian era the

same and very similar in their shapes to the ancient Brahmi of

Ashoka, giving supplementary evidence of the importance of the

contribution of Ashoka's empire to the culture in the South. [Nair B.

N., "The Dynamic Brahmin", p.71]

 

As late as Pallava times, the earlier Pallava inscriptions were in

Prakrit and not Sanskrit.

 

Sangam literature

 

Not only the inscriptions, but even the classical Tamil literature of

second or third century was not Sanskrit, but Tamil. The same author

observes:

 

"If we now consider the ancient Tamil works, we find in almost all

some allusion to vedic or Brahmanic rites and the use of some

Sanskrit words though very few. When Indo Aryan words are adopted in

Tamil in Sangam literature they are more frequently borrowed form

Prakrit forms or with Prakritic features. Surely Sanskrit and Prakrit

cultures were known to some extent in Tamilanad but rather through

Prakrit than through Sanskrit. Massive influence of Sanskrit in Tamil

literature took place much later". [Dr. J. Filliozat on Tamil and

Sanskrit in South India, in Tamil Culture, vol. IV, No. 4, Oct. 1955

quoted by Nair B. N., "The Dynamic Brahmin", p.71]

 

Sanskrit gained ground because it was sonorous Nair explains why

Sanskrit could catch up:

 

"Now going back to the base of our theoretical structure viz. local

Hinduism we find that Sanskrit language spread through ritualistic

practices introduced by the Brahmins in the "Gramakshetra" or village

temple. Ritualistic Sanskrit was mostly poetry and it was poetry in

the form of Manthras and stotras that first caught the profane ears

of the non- Brahmin temple worshipper. These Manthras and Stotras

were resonant with sonorous words and phrases and so replete which

imagery that when recited aloud they seldom failed to evoke strong

feelings of devotion in the minds of the hearer who knew the

mythology behind this majestic poetry. Here lies the beginnings of

the social control of the Brahmin through a language which was

reified and strengthened to suit their purposes." [Nair B. N., "The

Dynamic Brahmin", p.72]

 

Nair further explains:

"As was pointed out earlier the spread of Sanskrit began with the

recital of Sanskrit poetry rich in resonant poetic forms and phrases,

e.g. Vedic hymns, strotras such as that by Shankaracharya. These

verses with their suggestive and powerful words were so much in

contrast with the soft and liquid sounds of the non-Aryan speeches

that as compared to the former, the equivalents in the latter failed

to evoke any feeling in the crowd. [Nair B. N., "The Dynamic

Brahmin", p.74]

 

Hindi was retaining Sanskrit Influence

 

At a time, when Brahmins decided to divide the country on the basis

of language at the time of fall of Buddhism, they were careful enough

to maintain superiority of Sanskrit influence. As Nair quotes:

 

"In fact historically also the growth of Hindi, despite its

variations, has taken place in the Gangetic valley in such a way as

to retain the purity of sense and meaning of Sanskrit words. This

will be further seen by a study of the semantic changes that have

taken places in Sanskrit words after their absorption in other

regional languages. Viewed in this way, it is also clear why many

orthodox Hindus are not willing to accept Hindustani as the national

language because it contains a large strata of words from Persian,

Arabic and Turkish which were spoken by former cultural conquerors.

The adoption of Hindustani as the official language in place of Hindi

would not be in keeping with the Brahmanical revival that is making

itself prominently felt in India during the post-Independence

period." [Nair B. N., "The Dynamic Brahmin", p.75]

 

Trick of trigger phrases

 

Nair explains how Sanskrit has been the effective vehicle for the

spread of trigger phrases in Indian thought. The average educated

Indian, especially a Hindu, cannot easily recognise these artificial

trigger phrases and words in his speech, as he is unconsciously

habituated for centuries to use these as a matter of second nature

for him. In fact without these trigger words and phrases, he cannot

find the correct word or a substitute word or phrase which is free

from Sanskritic influence." [Nair B. N., "The Dynamic Brahmin", p.76]

 

Spread of Sanskrit

 

Nair explains, in the initial period, how Sanskrit spread so rapidly

and influenced the thought processes of the masses while it started

only as the language of ritual.:

 

"...The answer is simple enough. With the growth in power of Brahmin

priests in their temples there was also the growth the growth in

their importance and influence in the courts of kings and chieftains.

The Dharma Shastras were incorporated in the puranas at a time (about

the middle of the 4th century A.D.) when the Brahmins acquired the

position of a status-group within the caste hierarchy. ... The

gradual stages by which Sanskrit became powerful in the South is best

described by Dr. Filliozat. [Nair B. N., "The Dynamic Brahmin", p.77]

 

Dr. Filliozat's views are summarized below. Sanskrit words were

borrowed but Tamil scholars continued the use their own grammar. Most

known Sanskrit texts were Ayurveda and Jotishya, apart from Gita.

Tamil saints, who were non-brahmins, used ordinary Tamil words

without technical meaning, though Sanskrit ideas are alluded to.

Their compositions were devotional and not philosophical. Tamil was

used more till Shankara wrote on upanishadas etc. in c. 800 A.D. Thus

Tamil received double dose of Sanskrit words from north and south.

Tamil works of religious import were reinterpreted as Vedantic, and

awarded status of Vedas. [Nair B. N., "The Dynamic Brahmin", p.78]

 

Non-brahmin dignitaries were coopted

 

Tamil saint poets attained great fame at a later stage, but though

men like Nammalwar were denied the status of Kulapati of Vaishnavas

only because he was a non-brahmin, these saints were made use of to

further the cause of chaturvana, by declaring them as their own. Nair

explains the tendency:

 

"However, every time a non-Brahmin attained remarkable stature in the

assimilation of Brahmanical culture and produced some work of

intrinsic merit in his own language for the use of his fellowmen, the

Brahmins lost no time in giving the work a Sanskritic interpretation

as to disallow it an independent existence of its own and continued

esteem in popular mind. It is clearly due to the insecurity in the

Brahmin mind that leads them to adopt this strategy as is evident

from many modern instances. In fact it is not quite a well-known fact

that the orthodox Brahmins had at one time offered to Mahatma Gandhi

the choice of the acceptance of Brahminhood which he

characteristically refused. The fact that he was finally assassinated

by a fanatic Chitpavan Brahmin of Poona is more than significant of

the suppressed hostility of those caste-conscious Brahmins all over

India who could not share the enlightened views of that great soul."

[Nair B. N., "The Dynamic Brahmin", p.78]

 

Brahmanism flourished due to British rule

 

Nair explains how the British helped spread of Brahmanism throughout

India, and exclaims that the Brahmin succeeded in utilising the

Britishers as an unconscious tool for the strengthening of his social

control over masses by four streams of activity by the British

administration which directly contributed to the strength of all-

India Hinduism under Brahmin leadership. Dr. M. N. Srinivas

classified them as follows.

(a)systematic reconstruction of Indian history

(b)development of mass communication media, films of mythological

themes and Brahmanical control over press. To this could now be added

electronic media and mythological serials.

©growth of movements against defects in Brahmanical religion like

untouchability, child marriage etc.

(d)study of Sanskrit literature and philosophy

 

 

Nair exclaims that, thus the Brahmin discovered his soul and saw with

clear eyes the beauty and ugliness of his own handiwork in India, and

the regrouping of social forces that took place under the British

regime. [Nair B. N., "The Dynamic Brahmin", p. 80]

 

Christians not influenced by the sanskritisation

 

Concluding, Nair mentions another weakness of Sanskrit: "And this

concerns its failure to leave the psychological impress on the

Christian community in India. Christianity of the real proselytising

variety came to India and drew it strength only during the British

occupation so that it must be considered intrinsically as the

religion of a cultural and political conqueror. The conversions of

Christianity were mostly from people who were outside the pale of

Brahmanical Hinduism so that the cultural influences of Sanskrit were

not felt by these people to any extent before conversion or after

it." [Nair B. N., "The Dynamic Brahmin", p.81]

 

Sanskrit has no relevance with daily life

 

With rapid Sanskritisation, Nair feels, it lost relevance in daily

life of people, specially the non-Brahmins:

 

"... The 'weltanschauung' [i.e. outlook of world] of the South Indian

(non-Brahmin) was rendered highly unreal and abstract infusion of

Sanskrit words created a disjunction between the symbol and the

phenomenon. It was not merely the haphazard spread of Sanskrit or its

deliberate and principal use for sacerdotal purposes that brought

about this mental situation but also to a large extent the

esotericism that was imported in the use of the language, the word-

meanings, etc. And above all it was a leisure class (only) that used

Sanskrit. As Prof. Kosambi so aptly puts it "The language suffered

from its long monopolistic association with a class that had no

direct interest in technique, manual operations, trade agreements,

contracts or surveys. The class did have leisure enough to write

their tenuous ideas in a tortuous manner above the reach of the

common herd and to unravel them from such writings. Prose virtually

disappeared from high literary Sanskrit. Words that survived in

literary usage took on so many supplementary meanings that a good

Sanskrit text cannot be interpreted without a commentary. The glosses

are often demonstrably wrong and succeed in only confusing the text

which has to be restored by critical methods first developed in

Europe. The older terms used in administration (e.g. in Arathashastra

and Copperplate charters) were forgotten. In some cases, where

obscurity was deliberately imposed (i.e. the Tantric mysticism) cult

and meaning of the text vanished together. There were astounding

mnenomic developments but they too contributed to the same end by

over-specialization and particular jargons for every discipline". (An

Introduction to the Study of Indian History pp.225-266) [Nair B.

N., "The Dynamic Brahmin", p.85]

 

Sanskrit has nothing to do with Computer

 

Some people, whose forefathers themselves were the sufferers of this

language, try to take pride and seek solace in believing that

Sanskrit is a good language for computer. The inventor of this myth

seems to be a person, not only with perverted sense of egotism about

his heritage and ignorance of his ancestral history, but also an urge

to befool the gullible masses of India. The minimum expectation from

such scholars would be to pause and think how a language which was

not allowed to be learned by a scholar like Dr. Ambedkar can ever be

considered a good language worth learning by masses. It is language

of control by a few over multitude. It is a language of oppression.

 

It has nothing to do with computer language, which is a binary

language, a language of 1s and 0s, a language of ON and OFF. After

all a computer is nothing but a collection of millions of fast acting

switches. It is by creating computer codes like EBCDIC and ASCII,

various alphabets can be assigned numbers, and these numbers

representing alphabets are converted into binary for computer

processing. Any language on the earth is equally good or equally bad

for the computer purpose. Those who claim that Sanskrit is a useful

language for computer have got a cruel and malevolent intention of

projecting the misdeeds of their forefathers. A scholar in them is

dead, only a caste superiority prejudice is seen in their such

statements.

 

Most unfortunate thing is that so called scholars from among the

sufferers of tyranny of this language, seem to have a liking of this

language through misconceived ideas about it. Their multiple degrees

are worth throwing away in a dust bin. Just by becoming learned in

Sanskrit does not qualify anybody to receive respect, you have to be

born. Read Dasbodh of Ramdas, if you have doubts. The language which

ruined this country, is respected by these so called scholars. It was

Ramdas himself, a Brahmanical social activist, who coined a phrase

for such people in Marathi- "padhat murkh", the nearest English

rendering of it should a learned fool.

 

What did the propagators of this language give to the people of this

country apart from disintegration and slavery of centuries. What kind

of society they have produced? A society full of discriminations

where more than half of people are unfit even for a touch, another

one third driven to forests and another group whose occupation is

crime, a society where prostitution is practiced in the name of God

and religion, a society where suicide is sacrosanct, a society where

uttering obscene abuses is a part of religion, a society where

daughters are murdered immediately after birth, a society where

widows are burnt on the funeral pyre of their husbands, a society

where a vast section of people are deprived from holding any

property, holding any arms, getting any education, a society where

taking a marriage procession on a public road brings atrocities,

murder, rape and arson, a society where nearly the whole country uses

the public roads as a toilet. And one expects these very people the

sufferers of this extreme exploitation to regard this language as

holy and sacrosanct. One only has to remember the words of

Theludesus: It may be your interest to be our masters, how can it be

ours to be your slaves. Still this is probably the only country in

the world where the slaves are enjoying their slavery and prisoners

guard the prison gates and display their fetters as ornaments.

 

There are people who try to propagate that the Sanskrit language is

the original language which was gifted by God (to Brahmins of India).

Despite all other languages in the world, to consider one particular

language as "god given" is the worst form of imprudence and

arrogance, to say the least; and is not only derogatory to the

inventor of the idea, but also marks the god with partiality to a

caste.

 

Importance of Pali

 

After obtaining Buddhahood, the Buddha preached orally for the rest

of His life of 45 years, and these preachings were learned by heart

by the disciples. They were compiled into Tripitakas in various

sangitis, the first being 3 months after Mahaparinirvana, second 100

years later, third in the reign of Ashoka, after which Bhikkus were

sent to various places. Mahinda and Sanghmitra went to Simhala. All

these years, all the preachings were preserved by oral tradition. It

was after this that they were reduced in writings, in Simhala during

the reign of Vattagamini (29 B.C.). This was fourth sangiti. The

Buddha did not insist for any particular language, and everybody

learned them in their own language. As a matter of fact, Tripitaka

was preserved in many languages. According to one famous Tibetan

tradition, the scriptures of Sarvasti-vadis' are in Sanskrit, those

of Mahasanghikas in Prakrit, those of Mahasammaitis in Apbhramsha and

those of Sthaviras in Paishachi. Today we know the word Pali as a

name of language. It contains whole of Tripitaka and Anupitaka of

Thervada. Originally, this word meant Original Teachings of the

Buddha or Tripitaka. Later it denoted the language of them. Thus the

use of term Pali as a name of language is rather new, and more in

vogue since 19th century. The language, we call today Pali is

actually known traditionally as Magadhi. It is well known that the

Buddha had refused permission to use Sanskrit as the vehicle of

teachings, and declared it as a minor crime. [Rahul

Sankrutyayana, "pali sahitya ka itihas", (hindi), 3rd ed., 1992,

Uttar Pradesh Hindi Sansthan, Lukhnow, p.5]

 

Dr. Bhagchandra Jain also mentions that, Pali literature is rendered

in writing in Srilanka in First Century B.C., in the reign of

Vattagamini. Before that it was prevalent by oral recitation. This is

the reason why we find the compilation of many references could not

be made in chronological order in Pali literature. Some references

are twisted to suit them, some are omitted and some are added. Even

then, the available material is historically and culturally

important. The valuation from this angle is still not done.

["Chatushatakam" Translator Editor : Dr. Bhagchandra Jain, Alok

Parakashan Nagpur 1971 (Hindi), p.4] The study of Aryan languages in

the middle age is complete only after scientific study of Pali

Language. Pali has affected not only the modern Indian Languages but

it has enough contribution in the development of modern languages in

countries like Sinhala, Burma, Thailand, China, Japan, Tibet,

Magnolia etc. and Pali literature has proved to be a greatest help in

fixing the dates of ancient history. [Jain, p.6] L. M. Joshi also

describes the influence of Buddhist language and script as follows:

 

"... Indian paleography and epigraphy owe a great deal to the

original and pioneer inspiration of Buddhism and its lithic records.

The earliest historical inscriptions of India are the Buddhist

inscriptions. The dhammalipi of Ashoka became the mother of all

subsequent varieties of Brahmi and its derivative Indian scripts."

[L. M. Joshi, Aspects of Buddhism in Indian History, p.32]

 

Study of Sanskrit

 

Rigveda is said to be the most ancient book. Study of language

started in west after William Jones translated Shakuntalam into

English. In India, modern study of languages started after Ramkrishna

Bhandarkar opined through "Wilson philological lectures" that

Sanskrit is the original language and all the Indian as well as

foreign languages originated from it. [Mishra, p.351] Greek Helenic

language also has some similarities with Sanskrit. ["Vangmay

Vimarsha" by Pundit Vishwanath Prasad Mishra, Hindi Sahitya Kutir,

Varanasi - 1, v.samvat 2023, p.358]

 

Some relate the Dravidian languages with Australian languages. After

Mohonjodaro excavation, now they are being related with Sumerian

languages. [Mishra, p.355] Word "mund" is used in Vayu Purana and in

Mahabharata it is used for a caste. The word "shabar" is still

ancient, which is found in Ateriya Brahman. Their language is called

Munda, Kol, or Shabar. There is a great influence of these languages

over several Indian languages, various examples are quoted by the

author of this influence on Bihari, Gujarathi and Madhyapradesh

language. [Mishra, p. 363]

 

Dravidian languages

 

Kumaril Bhatt made only two divisions Dravida and Andhra, But the

modern scholars have made following classification of Dravidian

languages:

 

1. Dravida- with (a) Tamil (b) Kannada © Tulu (d) Kodagu (e) Tod

2. Andhra- (a) Telugu

 

3. Central- with (a) Gondi (b) Kurukha © Kui (d) Kolami Tamil has

two forms. A poetic language called "shen", the other is

called "kodun", Malayalam is supposed to be elder daughter of Tamil.

Influence of Sanskrit is less on Tamil contrarily Malayalam has great

influence. [Mishra, p.365]

 

Languages of Indian Branch

 

There are two views. The scholars of ancient school believe that

original language is Sanskrit, form which all Aryan languages

originated, Prakrit from Sanskrit, Apbhransha from Prakrit and

regional languages from Apbhransha. New linguistic scholars believe

that Vedic Sanskrit itself originated from some original Aryan

language. On one side Vedic language, modified or Sanskrit was used

and on the other hand, unmodified or Prakrit was being used as a

language of common speech. Both these originated from some common

root. Sanskrit, the spoken language of elite (shistas - meaning

Brahmins), and Prakrit, the spoken language of the masses are sisters

of each other. That Prakrit is termed by them as "Aadim Prakrit"

meaning original Prakrit. From this evolved all other Prakrit

languages. Some people believe that, from original Prakrit the

classical Sanskrit, i.e Sanskrit of literature, evolved. But some

believe that classical Sanskrit evolved from Vedic Sanskrit through

stages of Brahmanas, Upanishadas, Kavyas, and Gathas. The divisions

of Indian languages made in "pratisakhyas" are considered by them as

regional forms of the original Prakrit - "Oudichya"

(Northern), "Pratichya" (western), "Dakshinatya" (southern) "Madhya

Deshiya" (bichali) and "Prachya" (eastern). Late Dr. Bhandarkar

believed in Evolution of Prakrit from Sanskrit. He thought Classical

and Vedic Sanskrit together as the original source of Prakrits. But

scholars have discarded this old view and they now believe Original

Prakrit as the source. [Pandit Vishanath Prasad Mishra, "Vangamay

Vimarsha", (hindi), published by Hindi Sahitya Kutir, Varanasi - 1,

5th edition, Vikram Samat 2023, p.371]

 

Prakrit

 

Prakrit can be divided into three stages if we consider Apbhransha as

a late Prakrit. There were three periods in its evolution. They are

ancient, middle are late Prakrit. [Mishra, p.376] Why it is called

Prakrit? 1. Prakriti means nature, so Prakrit a language of more

people. 2. Comparing Sanskrit and Prakrit, Sanskrit is refined and

Prakrit is unrefined. 3. Jains have defined Prakrit as the most

ancient language. They divide the word into 'Prak' and 'krit', and

they believe all other languages originated from Prakrit

(Ardhamagadhi).

 

Some people term all the languages placed under ancient Prakrit as

Pali, but we find there are many ancient Prakrits other than Pali.

Edicts of Ashoka, Hinayani Tripitakas, Mahavamsha, Jatakas etc.,

ancient Jain Sutras, and Prakrits of ancient dramas are grouped under

this language. [Mishra, p.377]

 

The language of Ashoka's edicts and Hinayana Scriptures has come to

be known as Pali. The language of scriptures is considered by

Buddhists as "Magadhi". [Mishra, p.377]

 

Ashoka Edicts

 

The language of Ashoka's Edicts differs in different areas. At least

two different types can be discerned. As the Buddha was from Magadha,

and he preached in people's language, it should be Magadhi, but after

due consideration, it seems that it was not Magadhi but general

Prakrit, because later Buddhist scriptures do not show the traits

seen in Magadhi Prakrit. [Mishra, p.377] Therefore, His preachings

were in "Pacchahi" language from which was originated Shouriseni

Prakrit of the middle lands and Maharashtri Prakrit of the whole

country. Ashoka also considered it the main language. The language of

Jain sutras is considered Ardha Magadhi, which should mean that it

has got traits of both Shourseni and Magadhi thus it is clear that

the language of middle country was the basis of evolution of Prakrit.

[Mishra, p.378]

 

Middle Prakrit consists of Maharashtri Prakrit, Prakrit used in

dramas, Prakrit of later Jain scriptures and Paishyachi i.e language

of Brihat Katha.

 

Maharashtri had more respect among the Prakrits. The Maharashtri name

could be because of region like Shourseni or Magadhi but, it should

be considered as Maha as vast and Maharashtri means language of the

greater part of the country as becomes clear from a verse of Dandin.

[Mishra, p.379]

 

Apabhransha

 

Apbhramsha originated from Prakrit. Grammarians consider two forms of

it, "Nagar" and "Brachad". Sindhi evolved from Brached and Gujarathi,

Rajasthani, Braji etc. evolved from Nagar. There are two types

according to time. Early and late. Avahatha can be considered a late

type. The Apbhramsha more nearer to modern regional languages can be

placed in late type of Apbhramsha. [Mishra, p.382]

 

Modern Regional Languages of India

 

They originated after Apbhramsha. It can not be said definitely when

the poetry in regional languages started. But looking at the late

Apbhramsha, it is clear that the words of modern regional languages

are seen in them. Therefore, the time of the origin of regional

languages must be placed in Tenth or Eleventh centuries of Vikram

Era. [Mishra, p.383]

 

Hindi

 

Hindi was the first regional language to originate. Its ancient roots

are in Shourseni and also Magadhi or Ardha Magadhi. Name Hindi

originated from Hindu. Others do not agree with this. Hindu is a name

given by Muslims.

 

There are four types, Khadiboli, Rekhata, Nagari, and high Hindi.

[Mishra, p.389] Urdu evolved from language soldiers spoke in the

market, and thus it is basically hindi only. [Mishra, p.391] After

Britishers came Hindi got mixed with words from all languages and was

called "Hindusthani". [Mishra, p.393]

 

Classification of Hindi

 

1. Western (paschimi) (a) Khadi boli -

(i) Urdu - of three types of Northern (Uttari) - Rekhati; Dehalvi;

and Lakhanavi. And one Southern (Dakhani)

(ii) Mixed

(iii)High Hindi (uccha hindi)

(b)Bangaru © Central (Madyavarti) with

(i) Braji (ii) Kanauji and (iii) Bundeli

 

2. Eastern (Purvi) : - (a) Avadhi - with (i) Western (Pashimi) and

(ii) Eastern (Purvi) (b) Bagheli © Chattisgadhi

 

Scripts of India

 

Only two scripts were in vogue at the time of Ashoka, Brahmi and

Kharoshti. On the basis of available Brahmi inscriptions, the time of

Brahmi script is considered to be from 500 B.C. to 350 A.D. Two

styles were visible in Brahmi in 4th century A.D. which are called

Northern and Southern. The scripts evolved from Northern are, Gupta,

Kutil, Nagari, Sharda and Bangala, and from Southern are Western,

Madhya Pradeshi, Telugu Kannad, Grantha, Kalinga and Tamil. [Mishra,

p.454]

 

Script of Gupta kings is termed as "Gupta", from which evolved in

sixth to nineth century, a script called "Kutil". From tenth century

onwards, we find traces of "Nagari" in North India. In South, it was

called "Nanda Nagari" and appeared around 8th century. From Nagari

evolved the Bangala, Kaithi, Gujarathi, Marathi languages. Sharda of

Kashmir evolved from Kutil. From Sharada evolved, Takkari and

Gurumukhi. From early Bangala script originated, present Bangala,

Maithili and Udiya. [Mishra, p.454] Out of Southern Styles, script

found in Kathiyavad, Gujarath, Nashik, Khandesh, Satara etc. is

termed Western. That found in Madhya Pradesh, North Hyderabad and

Bundelkhand is called Madhya Pradeshi, and Telgu-Kannad script was

precursor of present Telgu and Kannad scripts. A different script

called "Grantha" was being used to write Sanskrit works, from it

evolved Malayalam and Tulu. Kalinga script was in Kalinga. [Mishra,

p.455]

 

About origin of word Nagari, there are different views. One view is

it was Urban (meaning Nagari) script. Some connect it with Nagar

Brahmins. There are others who consider that, previous to image

worship, devas were worshiped in the form of Yantras, the symbols of

which were called "Devnagar" giving the name to the script. [Mishra,

p.455]

 

How India got divided into numerous linguistic areas

 

The picture of diversity of languages and scripts in India - past and

present. How India, which, during Buddhist period, had only one main

language and one or two main scripts, got divided into various groups

with their intrinsic rivalries? This is the main problem, which

nobody bothers to refer to. After the fall of Buddhism, Brahmanism

not only divided the people into numerous castes with graded

inequality and numerous tiny dynasties with rivalries due to sense of

high and low, but also divided the whole country into small segments.

It taught that each kingdom, though small, is a different country.

The result was that the feeling of oneness was never present among

the Hindus. There never arose a feeling on one India among them. In

scriptures, we find definitions of 'foreign' lands at many places.

They denote the mischief caused. [surendra Kumar Adnyat - "hindu

dharm ne bachaya ya pitavaya", Sarita Mukta Reprint vol. 7, p. 24]

 

Brahspati says that if there is a big river or a big mountain in

between, or if the language differs, then the countries on either

side should be treated as foreign lands of each other. Some say after

60 yojanas, new country starts, some say 40 and some say 30 yojanas.

(One yojana equals 8 miles). Brahaspati mentions another opinion

using the word 'videsh' in place of 'deshantara', that the videsh is

that where one can not get messages within one day. [surendra Kumar

Adnyat - "hindu dharm ne bachaya ya pitavaya", Sarita Mukta Reprint

vol. 7, p. 24]

 

Dharmasindhu defines 'deshantara' or 'videsh' on the basis of caste.

For a brahmin distance of 20 yojanas from his residence,

is 'deshantara', for ksatriya it is 24 yojanas, for a vaishya it is

30 yojanas and for a sudra it is 60 yojanas. If a big mountain or

river comes in way or if there is difference of language, then it is

a different country, as said by some people. It only means, in such

an event, even though the distance is less than 20, 24, 30 or 60

yojanas, even then it is 'deshantara' for brahmins, ksatriyas,

vaishyas and sudras respectively. [surendra Kumar Adnyat - "hindu

dharm ne bachaya ya pitavaya", Sarita Mukta Reprint vol. 7, p. 24]

 

Thus as per scriptures, at the most 480 miles is the limit of your

country, every thing beyond is a foreign land. Even today, we use the

word 'pardeshi' meaning a foreigner for a resident of a town, some

distance away. When the sastras declare all areas except in immediate

vicinity are alien lands, how can one expect the rajas and subjects

consider other fellow Indians as their own in this vast land.

 

Kalivarjya was the method of control

 

That the kalivarj is the method of Brahmins to tackle with the

Buddhist influence over the masses and impose their supremacy. They

changed their laws without actually condemning them. All laws and

rules, were amended including Civil, Criminal, Revenue and personal

laws. It is not properly realized by the masses, that King was not

the Law maker; he had no legislative powers, contrary to the popular

belief. He was only the executive head and had a responsibility to

implement the laws made by the Brahmins. At the most he could only

legislate on revenue matters, that too, as per the rules already laid

down. He had some judicial powers, but that too, he could not pass

judgment against the law given by the Brahmins.

 

Who suffered in Kalivarjya

 

In Kalivarjya, main law was against sea voyage. That is how the sea

worthy races of Pallava and Chola countries suffered. All the trade

that was being conducted through the sea stopped. Who suffered? Not

the Brahmins, surely. It will be clear, if we take a look at the

products of export. Most of the products of export were based on the

agriculture, horticulture, animal husbandry and forest economy. Even

the textile industry which had reached a high acclaim in foreign

lands, was based on cotton, silk and wool. All these occupations were

in the hands of working classes, who were all doomed to be shudras.

All these industries suffered. All these castes in the village

economy suffered. All these occupational groups, which were

prosperous during the Buddhist rule, were degraded into castes, due

to rigid caste rules imposed.

 

The mobility of the professions was stopped. Telis, who extracted oil

from oil seeds, Malis, who grew the vegetables, the Dhangars, who

reared the goats and lambs, Sutars, who made and repaired the

farmers' implements, Kumar, who suppled earthen pots to villagers and

Mahars and Mangs who protected the villages from strangers, all were

segregated. All these professions became hereditary and social

intercourse among them stopped. Not only this caused multiplicity of

castes, and regional variations in languages but also a different

language for various castes. This ultimately lead to present

situation of confusion, distrust and hostility among the people

destroying social fabric of country, for which we have only to thank

the fall of Buddhism and rise of Brahmanism.