Some musings on Ancient Indian Geography

December 6, 2008

Another route by which Aryans seem to have gone to South

India was by sea – from Indus to Kutch and from there, by sea coast to

Saurashtra or Kathiawar. From Kathiawar, they went to Modern Broach , from

where they proceeded to Sopara (Supparaka) in Thane district, Maharashtra.

After Mahabharata war, there was a declinein Aryan civilzation and

there was a mix of various tribes, just as feared by Arjuna in the first

chapter of Bhagavad Gita that there will be destruction of Varna Dharma and the

women folk will become daring in their marriage with men from other Varnas.

Baudhayana in his Dharmasutras

quotes a verse from the Bhallavan school fo Law, which tells us that

The inhabitants of Sindhu , Sauvira and Surashtra like those

of Deccan were of mixed origin. It is possible that Aryans were recolonizing

these parts, much time after Mbh. Towards the end of period of Dharma sutras,

they seem to have advanced as far south as Sopara. Since no mention is traceable of any inland

countries or towns between the sea coast

and Deccan, it is clear that they must have taken a sea route.

Kittel in his Kannada

English Dictionary gives a long list of Sanskrit words which seems to have been

derived from Dravidian languages.

For eg., Matachi (Chandogya 1.10.1) occuring in the passage "matachi

hateshu Kurushu atikya saha jayaya ushastir , ha chakrayana ibhya –grame pradranaka uvasa"

The verse speaks of devastation of crops in Kuru country due

to matachi, which is nothing but locusts(red colored winged creatures)

(JRAS,1911, p 510), which is equivalent to midiche in Kannada or midatha in

Telugu. (grasshopper or locust) It is

astonishing that how a dravidian word is found in a purely north Indian

Upanishad, which was supposed to have composed primarily in Punjab. That some

explanations that Dravidian languages

were present in NI prior to Aryanization, say as evidenced by the language of

Brahuii does not explain this fact very well.

This only can be explained by a) the antiquity of the Upanishads, taking

them much before the times of IVC and b) the interaction between the NI and SI.

The Aryan words or langauge supplanting in a Dravidian country rather superficially can not be really argued because for eg., the names

of even lowly goldsmiths or leather workers in Bhattiprolu and Amaravati inscriptions of

early periods were totally sanskrit names and not dravidian, as evidenced by

the early inscriptions. The names

mentioned are Siddhartha, Vriddhika , Naga, Kanha and so on. One curious thing happens here that Kanha, an

Aryan by name, calls himself a Damila (ASSI, I p 104) This shows that Damila is

not a race distinct from Aryans.

Coupled this with the fact we find Pali inscriptions of much

early periods show that Aryans were settled in South India for a very long time

than that is being thought today. Pali was

in fact continued to be the official langauge in "dravidian " kingdoms and this

shows that Pali was not a which was supplanted at a later date must have been a

natural langauge of the area. Here, we

are talking of Malavalli inscriptions, Karnataka by Chutukalanamda satakarni of

Kadamba dynasty , king of Vaijayanti or Banavasi of North canarese district,

Karnataka. Another king connected to this dynasty is Mulanamda , both of who

have issued coins. Jayavarman, Pallavan king of Kanchi issued copper plate

grants in Pali language, as did Vijayadevavarman.

That fact that every one of these is a title deed and has

been drawn up in Pali shows that this Aryan langauge must have been known not

only to officials but also to literate and semi literate people, since these

grants went even to villagers and guards and cowherds. By no stretch of imagination, you can think

that these common people could understand a foreign language, thus making Pali

a local and natural language in South India at that time.

December 9, 2008

If Pali is an outside language to South India and rather powerfully

deployed by the kings there as an official language over not less than 7

centuries, it is bewildering to see why it has not totally replaced the various

Dravidian languages. Most of the scholars appear to accept this argument but

they simply have no answer to this.

The exact question to be answered is why the Dravidian was supplanted by Aryans

in North India but not in South India, although Aryan Civilization had

apparently permeated South India as much as in North India.

Similarly, it is said that the

island of Ceylon was converted to Buddhism about the middle of the third

Century BCE by the preaching of Mahinda (or Mahindra), a son of the great

Buddhist Emperor Asoka from Magadha. Naturally, therefore, the scriptures

which Mahinda brought with him from his father's capital must have been in

Magadhi, the dialect of the Magadha Country. As a matter of fact, however,

the language of these scriptures, as we have them now, is anything but Magadhi,

though a few Magadhisms are traceable at random. For e.g., Prof Oldenberg

boldly rejects the Sinhalese tradition that Mahindra brought the sacred texts

to Ceylon. He compares the Pali language to that of the cave inscriptions

in Maharashtra and of the epigraph of King Kharavela in old Kalinga, thus

concluding that they are essentially the same dialect and that the Ti-pitaka

was brought to the Island from South

India either from Maharashtra or Kalinga, with the natural spread of Buddhism

southwards (Vinaya pitakam, Vol I, Intro) If this be true, especially since the

Mahinda's story seems to be too well founded to be rejected, we have to push

the establishment of the dialects to much earlier dates than advent of Buddhism

in Sinhala- probably cultivated by the same set of tribes who colonized

Maharashtra and Orissa.

Another point to be noted here that

Aryans went to Kalinga not by the eastern but by southern route. For e.g., the

Buddhist Pali canons knew Anga, Magadha, Asmaka and Kalinga but it does not

know Vanga, Pundra and Sushma , which are the countries exactly intervening

between Anga and Kalinga. These countries would have been known to

Buddhists if they have certainly passed and where they certainly would have

settled if they have gone to Kalinga by the eastern route.

We have a passage in the Chullavagga

(V.33.1) of Vinaya-pitaka, in which Buddha distinctly ordains that his word was

to be conveyed by Bhikshus in their own dialects. Thus, it could be seen that Mahinda was

certainly not a Magadha. His matrimonial lineage does not support the Pali

connection either. However, it should be remembered that Pali and Magadhi share

their roots and it is possible that Mahinda's date and hence, Buddha's date is

so antique that there is not much of difference between Magadhi and Pali and

people were speaking both the languages, utilizing Pali for official

purposes. Thus, while Buddha has used

Magadhi for preaching, it has been replaced by Pali when it came to South

India, being preached by Mahinda. We can perfectly understand how in this

gradual replacement a few Magadhisms of the original must have escaped this

weeding out.

December 13, 2008

hinducivilization , " Ramesh Krishnamurthy " <rkmurthy wrote:Kishore-ji, your posts are all mixed up with far too many things and

it is not clear what is it that you are trying to say.Regarding Pali, it is the language of the oldest layer of Bauddhatexts and remains to this day the scriptural language of the TheravadaBauddha tradition in Sri Lanka, Thailand, Myanmar, etc. So Mahinda or

whoever else travelled to Sri Lanka would have carried the Pali textswith him. How is this related to Magadhi etc is something I cannotfathom.Pl note that in the Mahayana tradition as followed in China, Japan,

etc, the texts are all in the local languages. Some of these aretranslations of the original Indian texts (typically Sanskrit Mahayanatexts) and some are texts composed in the local language. However, theTheravada tradition continues to follow the old Pali texts and there

is no local language canon as such.Regarding the Maharashtra cave inscriptions you refer to, if theinscriptions are by Bauddha bhikshu-s then it is natural that they arein Pali. It hardly means that the local language is Pali. Similarly

the use of Pali by some kings hardly proves anything - it may meanthat Pali was understood locally (as you seem to indicate) but it isalso probable that the kings were patrons of the Bauddha-s and henceused Pali as an official language.

2008/12/9 kishore patnaik <kishorepatnaik09:>> We have a passage in the Chullavagga (V.33.1) of Vinaya-pitaka, in which> Buddha distinctly ordains that his word was to be conveyed by Bhikshus in

> their own dialects. Thus, it could be seen that Mahinda was certainly not a> Magadha. His matrimonial lineage does not support the Pali connection> either. However, it should be remembered that Pali and Magadhi share their

> roots and it is possible that Mahinda's date and hence, Buddha's date is so> antique that there is not much of difference between Magadhi and Pali and> people were speaking both the languages, utilizing Pali for official

> purposes. Thus, while Buddha has used Magadhi for preaching, it has been> replaced by Pali when it came to South India, being preached by Mahinda. We> can perfectly understand how in this gradual replacement a few Magadhisms of

> the original must have escaped this weeding out.>--- End forwarded message ---

December 13, 2008

Kishore-ji, your posts are all mixed up with far too many things and

it is not clear what is it that you are trying to say.Regarding Pali, it is the language of the oldest layer of Bauddhatexts and remains to this day the scriptural language of the TheravadaBauddha tradition in Sri Lanka, Thailand, Myanmar, etc. So Mahinda or

whoever else travelled to Sri Lanka would have carried the Pali textswith him. How is this related to Magadhi etc is something I cannotfathom.

Pl note that in the Mahayana tradition as followed in China, Japan,

etc, the texts are all in the local languages. Some of these aretranslations of the original Indian texts (typically Sanskrit Mahayanatexts) and some are texts composed in the local language. However, theTheravada tradition continues to follow the old Pali texts and there

is no local language canon as such.Regarding the Maharashtra cave inscriptions you refer to, if theinscriptions are by Bauddha bhikshu-s then it is natural that they arein Pali. It hardly means that the local language is Pali. Similarly

the use of Pali by some kings hardly proves anything - it may meanthat Pali was understood locally (as you seem to indicate) but it isalso probable that the kings were patrons of the Bauddha-s and henceused Pali as an official language.

Dear Rameshji,

The message is part of a series of posts I am making based on various

text books. So, I think you are not following my earlier messages. Your understanding that Buddhists have followed primarily two languages- Mahayana followed Sanskrit and Theravada followed Pali language - is indeed correct. So, what you find in Japan and other countries is translation of original Sanskrit canons in the local languages.

However, same kind of translations are not found for Pali language canons. For eg., Mahinda on one hand spread Buddhism in Sri Lanka in Pali as well as Priyadarsi Asoka also engraved his edicts in South India in Pali language - they have not done in local languages in the local languages.

It is clear that they have done so because Pali is not only the original language in which Buddhist canons are written but also because the language is read and understood by common man in South India - if not, at least Priyadarsi would have published the translations as he is done elsewhere.

This is further supported by the fact that inspite of Pali canons are not published by Mahinda in the local language, Buddhism became a popular religion in Sri Lanka. One may be tempted to draw a parallel of this to Hinduism being preserved in South India, since Sanskrit is not the spoken language there. But this kind of attempt will be futile since Hinduism evolved in a natural way and the basics of HInduism is rituals and life style. Philosophy grew later, In case of Buddhism, it is the teachings and philosophy which form the corner stone of the religion and to take that into the masses, you need to converse with them in a language they understand.

Secondly, Pallavans who have published the copper plates are not Bauddhists and thus, they have no motivation to make it their official language unless it is a popular local language. Thus it is clear that Pali must have been a popular language being used by the masses of South India.

Hope this clarifies, regards, Kishore patnaik

December 13, 2008

Dear Kishoreji,

From my studies I find that Pali was the language in which Lord Buddha spoke and preached, in the 19th century BCE. Pali is therefore called the Buddha -Vacchana or the language of Budddha. The Pali, as was spoken by Lord Buddha was frozen, so that no further change is made in that language, and it became the classical language as the Hinayana scriptures were also written in that. Thus Pali could preserve the linguistic purity of the Hinayana scriptures to this day. Obviously the Pali as the classical language spread to the countries such as Sri Lanka and Myanmar, where the Hinayana Buddhisn spread. Pali is also called the Shuddha Magadhi.

The Local language in Magadha did change in course of time and that evolving language is referred to as the Magadhi.

In the 6th century BCE, ie 13 centuries after Lord Buddha, there came Lord Mahavira, who preached in Ardha-Magadhi (literally Half-Magadhi), which is an Apabhramsa of Magadhi. We will not be wrong if we also say that Ardha-magadhi was an Apabhramsa of Pali or the Shuddha magadhi.

I feel that Pali or Shuddha Magadhi originally belonged to the Mahadha region. Later on during the time of amudragupta it spread to Ujjaini and then to other places. Some scholars however think that Ujjaini was the region where it belonged to.

Due to misconception on the dates of Lord Buddha and Lord Mahavira, many scholars believe in the impossible situation that Pali (or Shuddha-magadhi), Magadhi and Ardha-Magadhi (ot Jaina Prakrit) flourished side be side

Regards,

Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

--- On Fri, 12/12/08, kishore patnaik <kishorepatnaik09 wrote:

kishore patnaik <kishorepatnaik09 Re: Some musings on Ancient Indian Geography , "" , "indiaarchaeology" <IndiaArchaeology >, bharatiyaexpertsforum , hinducivilization , akandabaratam Date: Friday, December 12, 2008, 8:41 PM

hinducivilization, "Ramesh Krishnamurthy" <rkmurthy wrote:Kishore-ji, your posts are all mixed up with far too many things andit is not clear what is it that you are trying to say.Regarding Pali, it is the language of the oldest layer of Bauddhatexts and remains to this day the scriptural language of the TheravadaBauddha tradition in Sri Lanka, Thailand, Myanmar, etc. So Mahinda orwhoever else travelled to Sri Lanka would have carried the Pali textswith him. How is this related to Magadhi etc is something I cannotfathom.Pl note that in the Mahayana tradition as followed in China, Japan,etc, the texts are all in the local languages. Some of these aretranslations of the original Indian texts (typically Sanskrit Mahayanatexts) and some are texts composed in the local language.

However, theTheravada tradition continues to follow the old Pali texts and thereis no local language canon as such.Regarding the Maharashtra cave inscriptions you refer to, if theinscriptions are by Bauddha bhikshu-s then it is natural that they arein Pali. It hardly means that the local language is Pali. Similarlythe use of Pali by some kings hardly proves anything - it may meanthat Pali was understood locally (as you seem to indicate) but it isalso probable that the kings were patrons of the Bauddha-s and henceused Pali as an official language.2008/12/9 kishore patnaik <kishorepatnaik09@ ...>:>> We have a passage in the Chullavagga (V.33.1) of Vinaya-pitaka, in which> Buddha distinctly ordains that his word was to be conveyed by Bhikshus in> their own dialects. Thus, it could be seen that Mahinda was certainly not a> Magadha. His matrimonial lineage

does not support the Pali connection> either. However, it should be remembered that Pali and Magadhi share their> roots and it is possible that Mahinda's date and hence, Buddha's date is so> antique that there is not much of difference between Magadhi and Pali and> people were speaking both the languages, utilizing Pali for official> purposes. Thus, while Buddha has used Magadhi for preaching, it has been> replaced by Pali when it came to South India, being preached by Mahinda. We> can perfectly understand how in this gradual replacement a few Magadhisms of> the original must have escaped this weeding out.>--- End forwarded message ---

December 13, 2008

Dear Sunilji, While i have no comments on the dating of Mahavir, I fully support your thinking about Buddha's date. Here, it has been proposed that Pali had been a popular language in South India for a very long time.

regards, Kishore patnaik On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 10:57 AM, Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya wrote:

Dear Kishoreji,

From my studies I find that Pali was the language in which Lord Buddha spoke and preached, in the 19th century BCE. Pali is therefore called the Buddha -Vacchana or the language of Budddha. The Pali, as was spoken by Lord Buddha was frozen, so that no further change is made in that language, and it became the classical language as the Hinayana scriptures were also written in that. Thus Pali could preserve the linguistic purity of the Hinayana scriptures to this day. Obviously the Pali as the classical language spread to the countries such as Sri Lanka and Myanmar, where the Hinayana Buddhisn spread. Pali is also called the Shuddha Magadhi.

The Local language in Magadha did change in course of time and that evolving language is referred to as the Magadhi.

In the 6th century BCE, ie 13 centuries after Lord Buddha, there came Lord Mahavira, who preached in Ardha-Magadhi (literally Half-Magadhi), which is an Apabhramsa of Magadhi. We will not be wrong if we also say that Ardha-magadhi was an Apabhramsa of Pali or the Shuddha magadhi.

I feel that Pali or Shuddha Magadhi originally belonged to the Mahadha region. Later on during the time of amudragupta it spread to Ujjaini and then to other places. Some scholars however think that Ujjaini was the region where it belonged to.

Due to misconception on the dates of Lord Buddha and Lord Mahavira, many scholars believe in the impossible situation that Pali (or Shuddha-magadhi), Magadhi and Ardha-Magadhi (ot Jaina Prakrit) flourished side be side

Regards,

Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

--- On Fri, 12/12/08, kishore patnaik <kishorepatnaik09 wrote:

kishore patnaik <kishorepatnaik09 Re: Some musings on Ancient Indian Geography

, " " , " indiaarchaeology " <IndiaArchaeology >, bharatiyaexpertsforum , hinducivilization , akandabaratam

Friday, December 12, 2008, 8:41 PM

hinducivilization, " Ramesh Krishnamurthy " <rkmurthy wrote:Kishore-ji, your posts are all mixed up with far too many things and

it is not clear what is it that you are trying to say.Regarding Pali, it is the language of the oldest layer of Bauddhatexts and remains to this day the scriptural language of the TheravadaBauddha tradition in Sri Lanka, Thailand, Myanmar, etc. So Mahinda or

whoever else travelled to Sri Lanka would have carried the Pali textswith him. How is this related to Magadhi etc is something I cannotfathom.Pl note that in the Mahayana tradition as followed in China, Japan,

etc, the texts are all in the local languages. Some of these aretranslations of the original Indian texts (typically Sanskrit Mahayanatexts) and some are texts composed in the local language.

However, theTheravada tradition continues to follow the old Pali texts and thereis no local language canon as such.Regarding the Maharashtra cave inscriptions you refer to, if theinscriptions are by Bauddha bhikshu-s then it is natural that they are

in Pali. It hardly means that the local language is Pali. Similarlythe use of Pali by some kings hardly proves anything - it may meanthat Pali was understood locally (as you seem to indicate) but it isalso probable that the kings were patrons of the Bauddha-s and hence

used Pali as an official language.2008/12/9 kishore patnaik <kishorepatnaik09@ ...>:>> We have a passage in the Chullavagga (V.33.1) of Vinaya-pitaka, in which> Buddha distinctly ordains that his word was to be conveyed by Bhikshus in

> their own dialects. Thus, it could be seen that Mahinda was certainly not a> Magadha. His matrimonial lineage

does not support the Pali connection> either. However, it should be remembered that Pali and Magadhi share their> roots and it is possible that Mahinda's date and hence, Buddha's date is so> antique that there is not much of difference between Magadhi and Pali and

> people were speaking both the languages, utilizing Pali for official> purposes. Thus, while Buddha has used Magadhi for preaching, it has been> replaced by Pali when it came to South India, being preached by Mahinda. We

> can perfectly understand how in this gradual replacement a few Magadhisms of> the original must have escaped this weeding out.>--- End forwarded message ---

December 14, 2008

Let us talk about Madhya desa and related names.

Madhya desa is the most central of the earliest

political provinces in India.

According to Manu, Madhya desa is the land

between Himalaya in the north, the Vindhya in the South, Prayaga (Allahabad) in the east

and Vinasana (the place where Sarasvati disappears) in the West. Evidently ,

this kind of description is traditional since it appears to be older than what

we find in the Buddhist Pali canon. Pali canons describe the eastern tip

of Madhya desa to be far to the east of Prayaga, unlike Manu. This proves beyond doubt that Manu Smriti is

composed earlier to Buddha.

The description of Madhya desa in Pali canons

occurs in Vinaya Pitaka (Vin.i.197; DA.i.173; MA.i.316, etc.; AA.i.55, etc.;

J.i.49; Mbv.12)in connection with Avanti Dakshinapatha country where the

Buddhist monk Maha Katyayana was carrying on his missionary work. Avanti

Dakshinapatha was , we are told, outside the Middle country and it

appears that Buddhist had not made much progress there when Maha Katyayana

began his work. He was the same monk who has converted King Asmaka or Assika of

Bodhan in Andhra pradesh. (We have already discussed about Asmaka

desha earlier)

When a new member was received into the Buddhist

Order, the necessary initiation ceremony had to be performed before a chapter

of at least ten monks. This was the rule ordained by Buddha, but this was well

nigh impossible in the Avanti Dakshina patha country as there were very few

Bhihus there. Maha Katyayana , therefore sent a pupil of his to Buddha to

get the rule relaxed. Buddha relaxed the rule and laid down that all provinces

outside the Middle country (i.e. where Buddhism was prominent during the living

days of Buddha) a chapter of four Bhikshus was quite sufficient. It was

however necessary to specify the boundaries of the Middle country and this was

done by Buddha with characteristic precision. To the east , was the town

called Kajangala , beyond that lies Mahasala. To the south east is the river

Salalavati , to the south is the town Setakanuika, to the west is the

Brahman village called Thuna and to the north is the mountain called

Ustraddhaja. Unfortunately, none of these boundary places here specified

have been identified except one. This exception is the easterly point ie

Kajangala.

Kajangala:

Kajangala , according to Prof Rhys Davids, is situated

nearly 70 miles east of Bhagalpur. Kajangala

must be spreading across an area what is now part of Birbhum district in

West Bengal and Santhal paraganas in Jharkhand (Roy, Niharranjan, Bangalir

Itihas, Adi Parba, (Bengali),

first published 1972, reprint 2005, pp. 99-100, 81-93, Dey's Publishing, 13

Bankim Chatterjee Street, Kolkata,) This formed part of the Rarh region

of later times, mentioned in Bhubaneswar stone tablet of Bhatta Bhabadev,

a minister of King Harinbarmadev of 11th c . CE. Hiuen Tsang ( 640

CE)also had mentioned about Kajangala in his writings that he traveled from Bhagalpur or champa to

Kajangala and then proceeded to Pundravardhana

Kajangala seems to be a prosperous

place where provisions could easily be obtained (dabbasambhárasulabhá)

(J.iv.310) during Buddha's times . Once when the Buddha was staying in the

Veluvana at Kajangala, the lay followers there heard a sermon from the Buddha

and went to the nun Kajangalá to have it explained in detail (A.v.54f). On

another occasion the Buddha stayed in the Mukheluvana and was visited there by

Uttara, the disciple of Párásariya. Their conversation is recorded in the

Indriyabháváná Sutta (M.iii.298ff). In the Milindapañha (p.10), Kajangala is

described as a brahmin village and is given as the place of Nágasena's birth.

In the Kapota Játaka mention is made of Kajangala, and the scholiast

(J.iii.226-7) explains that it may be the same as Benares.

According to the scholiast of the Bhisa Játaka (J.iv.311), the tree-spirit

mentioned in that story was the chief resident monk in an old monastery in

Kajangala, which monastery he repaired with difficulty during the time of

Kassapa Buddha.

In the time of Buddha , therefore, the eastern

limit of the Middle country had extended nearly 400 miles eastward of Prayaga

which was its eastern most point in Manu's time. Now there can not be any doubt

that Madhya desa was looked upon as a territorial division. Jataka tales

make constant reference to it. Thus in one place we read of two merchants

going from Utkala to the Middle country (Jataka tales I, 80) We

also read there that Videha is a part of Middle country or Majjhima desa/

(Jat., III.364) Again, we hear of hermits fearing to descend from

Himalayas to go into Majjhima desa because people there are too learned (Jat

III, 115-6) Thus, it is clear that that Majjhima desa was a name not created

by literary authors but was actually in vogue among the people and denoted a

particular territorial division. It was with reference to this Middle Country

that the terms Dakshina patha and Uttara patha seem to have come into

use. Thus, it is possible that Dakshinapatha originally meant a

country to the south not of Vindhyas but a country to the south of Middle

country. This is clear from the fact that we find mention made of Avanti

Dakshinapatha. (ie Southern Avanti ) It

is worthy of note that Avanti was a very extensive country and that in Buddhist

works we sometimes hear of Ujjeni and some times of Mahissati (or present

Maheswari) as being its capital. While Ujjeni is the well known Ujjain, Mahissati must be

the same as the Sanskrit Mahismati.

Mahismati:

Mahismati is variously identified but

today, it is taken as the modern Maheswar, a town in the Khargone District in

Madhya Pradesh (http://stable.toolserver.org/geohack/geohack.php?pagename=Maheshwar & params=22.18_N_75.58_E_)

Mahismati, popular as the capital of Heheyas ,

the dynasty to which Kartavirya Arjuna belongs, was mentioned in Mbh as well as

in Ramayan. (Mbh 13:52) Karvavirya was a contemporary of Ravana ,

who has unsuccessfully attacked Mahismati. Sahadeva ,one of the Pandava

brothers, also attacked Mahismati when king Nila was its ruler (Mbh

2:30) King Nila also fought on the side of Kauravas in the war of Kuruksetra.

It appears that Ujjain was the capital of the northern

division of Avanti or Avanti country and Maheswar of the southern

division , which was therefore called Avanti Dashkina patha. It is possible

that the Southern Avanti included parts of

Vidarbha which were to the south of Vindhya . Thus, the country of Avanti

Dakshinapatha (Jat III. 463.16) was not exactly to the south of Vindhya as its

upper half was to the north of Vindhyas and lower half to the south of

Vindhyas. Yet if it was called Dakshinapatha, it is because it was lying to the

south not so much of the Vindhyas but of the Middle country. The same appears

to be the case with term Uttarapatha.

Uttarapatha:

One Jataka (II. 287.15) speaks of certain horse

dealers as having come from Uttarapatha to Baranasi or Benares.

Uttarapatha cannot here signify Northern India because Benares itself is

in Northern India. Evidently it denotes

a country at least outside and to the north of the Kasi kingdom whose capital

was Benares. As the horses of the

dealers just referred to are called Sindhava , it clearly indicates that they

came from the banks of Indus (Sindh8).

Indus is as much to the north as to the west of Saraswati and therefore must

have been in the north west

of Madhya desa also. It was thus with reference to the Middle country that the

name Uttarapatha also was devised. In fact, Divyavadana clearly mentions that

Taxila was placed in Uttarapatha. . We find that the term Uttarapatha was

in this sense almost till 10th Century CE.

Thus, when Prabhakaravardhana, king of Sthaneswar

, sent his son Rajyavardhana to invade Huna territory in Himalayas,

Bana , the author of Harsacarita, represents him to have gone to the

Uttarapatha.. As the Huna territory was

thus placed in Uttarapatha, it is clear that Prabhakaravardhana's kingdom was

excluded from Uttaraptha. As Thaneswar was on the eastern side of Saraswati,

his kingdom was understood to be included in the Madhyadesa with reference to which

alone the Huna territory seems to have been described as being in the

Uttarapatha.

Similarly, the poet Rajasekhara (880-920 CE), in

his Kavyamimansa attests that Uttarapatha lay to the west of Prithudaka

(modern Pehoa) near Thaneswar in Haryana. Prithudaka lies on the banks of river Saraswati and is associated with the

legendary king Prithu. Prithudaka

literally means the pool of Prithu and is said to be place where Prithu is

believed to have performed the Shraddha of his father. Hiuen Tsang also records the existence of the town Pehoa,

named after Prithu, " who is said to be the first person that obtained the

title Raja (king) " . The town is referred as the boundary between Northern

and central India

and referred to by Patanjali.

Coming back to Kavyamimamsa, it further lists the Sakas, Vokkanas, Hunas, Kambojas,

Keikayas, Bahlikas (Bactrian's), Pahlavas, Lampakas, Kulutas, Tanganas,

Tusharas, Turushakas (Turks), Barbaras among the tribes of Uttarapatha (Kavyamimamsa

Chapter 17).

It is

therefore clear that the terms Dakshinapatha and Uttarapatha came into vogue

only in regard to the Madhyadesa. It

must, however, be borne in mind that the

term Uttarapatha denoted different meanings in Northern and Southen Indias even

at the time of Bana. In North India, it denoted the country north of Madhya desha. But in South

India, it held a different meaning. It denoted the whole of North India even during times of Bana as mentioned above.

Thus Harshavardhana, Bana's patron, has been described in South Indian

inscriptions as Srimad Uttarapathadhipati

i.e. sovereign of Uttaraptha which must here signify North

India. (JBBRAS , XIV, 26; I.A., VIII, 46).

December 14, 2008

Does any one has the list of 55 countries? (chapphanna desha) regards, Kishore patnaik

December 14, 2008

On 55, (permit me) Lord Jagannath takes Chappan Bhoga. The brahmin official entrusted with such duty is known as Chappan Bhogi Mahapatra, he lives in Chudanga Sahi, Puri.

-

kishore patnaik

; ; indiaarchaeology ; bharatiyaexpertsforum ; hinducivilization ; akandabaratam

Sunday, December 14, 2008 5:18 PM

Re: Some musings on Ancient Indian Geography

Does any one has the list of 55 countries? (chapphanna desha) regards, Kishore patnaik

December 14, 2008

Can the web master, consider to hoist\mail a copy of the Mss of SKB, on the topic Buddha's date. Some time ago, I had asked the author for it.

Regards

Dr. db

-

kishore patnaik

Saturday, December 13, 2008 11:02 AM

Re: Re: Some musings on Ancient Indian Geography

Dear Sunilji, While i have no comments on the dating of Mahavir, I fully support your thinking about Buddha's date. Here, it has been proposed that Pali had been a popular language in South India for a very long time. regards, Kishore patnaik

On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 10:57 AM, Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya > wrote:

Dear Kishoreji,

From my studies I find that Pali was the language in which Lord Buddha spoke and preached, in the 19th century BCE. Pali is therefore called the Buddha -Vacchana or the language of Budddha. The Pali, as was spoken by Lord Buddha was frozen, so that no further change is made in that language, and it became the classical language as the Hinayana scriptures were also written in that. Thus Pali could preserve the linguistic purity of the Hinayana scriptures to this day. Obviously the Pali as the classical language spread to the countries such as Sri Lanka and Myanmar, where the Hinayana Buddhisn spread. Pali is also called the Shuddha Magadhi.

The Local language in Magadha did change in course of time and that evolving language is referred to as the Magadhi.

In the 6th century BCE, ie 13 centuries after Lord Buddha, there came Lord Mahavira, who preached in Ardha-Magadhi (literally Half-Magadhi), which is an Apabhramsa of Magadhi. We will not be wrong if we also say that Ardha-magadhi was an Apabhramsa of Pali or the Shuddha magadhi.

I feel that Pali or Shuddha Magadhi originally belonged to the Mahadha region. Later on during the time of amudragupta it spread to Ujjaini and then to other places. Some scholars however think that Ujjaini was the region where it belonged to.

Due to misconception on the dates of Lord Buddha and Lord Mahavira, many scholars believe in the impossible situation that Pali (or Shuddha-magadhi), Magadhi and Ardha-Magadhi (ot Jaina Prakrit) flourished side be side

Regards,

Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

--- On Fri, 12/12/08, kishore patnaik <kishorepatnaik09 > wrote:

kishore patnaik <kishorepatnaik09 > Re: Some musings on Ancient Indian Geography , "" , "indiaarchaeology" <IndiaArchaeology >, bharatiyaexpertsforum , hinducivilization , akandabaratam Date: Friday, December 12, 2008, 8:41 PM

hinducivilization, "Ramesh Krishnamurthy" <rkmurthy wrote:Kishore-ji, your posts are all mixed up with far too many things andit is not clear what is it that you are trying to say.Regarding Pali, it is the language of the oldest layer of Bauddhatexts and remains to this day the scriptural language of the TheravadaBauddha tradition in Sri Lanka, Thailand, Myanmar, etc. So Mahinda orwhoever else travelled to Sri Lanka would have carried the Pali textswith him. How is this related to Magadhi etc is something I cannotfathom.Pl note that in the Mahayana tradition as followed in China, Japan,etc, the texts are all in the local languages. Some of these aretranslations of the original Indian texts (typically Sanskrit Mahayanatexts) and some are texts composed in the local language. However, theTheravada tradition continues to follow the old Pali texts and thereis no local language canon as such.Regarding the Maharashtra cave inscriptions you refer to, if theinscriptions are by Bauddha bhikshu-s then it is natural that they arein Pali. It hardly means that the local language is Pali. Similarlythe use of Pali by some kings hardly proves anything - it may meanthat Pali was understood locally (as you seem to indicate) but it isalso probable that the kings were patrons of the Bauddha-s and henceused Pali as an official language.2008/12/9 kishore patnaik <kishorepatnaik09@ ...>:>> We have a passage in the Chullavagga (V.33.1) of Vinaya-pitaka, in which> Buddha distinctly ordains that his word was to be conveyed by Bhikshus in> their own dialects. Thus, it could be seen that Mahinda was certainly not a> Magadha. His matrimonial lineage does not support the Pali connection> either. However, it should be remembered that Pali and Magadhi share their> roots and it is possible that Mahinda's date and hence, Buddha's date is so> antique that there is not much of difference between Magadhi and Pali and> people were speaking both the languages, utilizing Pali for official> purposes. Thus, while Buddha has used Magadhi for preaching, it has been> replaced by Pali when it came to South India, being preached by Mahinda. We> can perfectly understand how in this gradual replacement a few Magadhisms of> the original must have escaped this weeding out.>--- End forwarded message ---

December 15, 2008

Actually, it is 56 andf not fifty five. Chappanna bhoga and chappanna desas are not related.

Kishore patnaik

On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 7:03 PM, ODDISILAB <oddisilab1 wrote:

On 55, (permit me) Lord Jagannath takes Chappan Bhoga. The brahmin official entrusted with such duty is known as Chappan Bhogi Mahapatra, he lives in Chudanga Sahi, Puri.

-

kishore patnaik

; ; indiaarchaeology ; bharatiyaexpertsforum ; hinducivilization ; akandabaratam

Sunday, December 14, 2008 5:18 PM

Re: Some musings on Ancient Indian Geography

Does any one has the list of 55 countries? (chapphanna desha) regards, Kishore patnaik

December 15, 2008

type error - Pl. read as 'On 56'. In words i have written Chappan Bhogi'

db

-

kishore patnaik

Monday, December 15, 2008 1:14 PM

Re: Re: Some musings on Ancient Indian Geography

Actually, it is 56 andf not fifty five. Chappanna bhoga and chappanna desas are not related.

Kishore patnaik

On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 7:03 PM, ODDISILAB <oddisilab1 (AT) dataone (DOT) in> wrote:

On 55, (permit me) Lord Jagannath takes Chappan Bhoga. The brahmin official entrusted with such duty is known as Chappan Bhogi Mahapatra, he lives in Chudanga Sahi, Puri.

-

kishore patnaik

; ; indiaarchaeology ; bharatiyaexpertsforum ; hinducivilization ; akandabaratam

Sunday, December 14, 2008 5:18 PM

Re: Some musings on Ancient Indian Geography

Does any one has the list of 55 countries? (chapphanna desha) regards, Kishore patnaik

December 17, 2008

hinducivilization , Vedaprakash Vedaprakash

<vedamvedaprakash wrote:

The so-called " Dravidians " have " Sangam literature " , just like

" Aryans " who have " Sanskrit literature " .

Like the research conducted by the Indologists on " Sanskrit

literature " to discover or invent Aryans and Dravidians, enough

research have not been conducted on " Sangam literature " .

If you read " Ancient Tamil / Sangam literature " , you cannot find any

reference implicitly or explicitly that they were called themselves

" Dravidians " or they came from outside, as the " geographical

description " as described in it, it locates within the boundaries of

South India or perhaps beyond South India!

--- On Sat, 12/6/08, kishore patnaik <kishorepatnaik09 wrote:

kishore patnaik <kishorepatnaik09

[hc] Re: Some musings on Ancient Indian Geography

, " "

, " indiaarchaeology "

<IndiaArchaeology >,

bharatiyaexpertsforum ,

hinducivilization , akandabaratam

Saturday, December 6, 2008, 9:28 PM

Another route by which Aryans seem to have gone to South

India was by sea ï¿½ from Indus to Kutch and from there, by sea coast to

Saurashtra or Kathiawar. From Kathiawar, they went to Modern Broach , from

where they proceeded to Sopara (Supparaka) in Thane district,

Maharashtra.

After Mahabharata war, there was a declinein Aryan civilzation and

there was a mix of various tribes, just as feared by Arjuna in the first

chapter of Bhagavad Gita that there will be destruction of Varna

Dharma and the

women folk will become daring in their marriage with men from other

Varnas.

ï¿½

Baudhayanaï¿½ in his Dharmasutras

quotes a verse from the Bhallavan school fo Law, which tells us that

The inhabitants of Sindhu , Sauvira and Surashtra like those

of Deccan were of mixed origin. It is possible that Aryans were

recolonizing

these parts, much time after Mbh. Towards the end of period of Dharma

sutras,

they seem to have advanced as far south as Sopara.ï¿½ Since no mention

is traceable of any inland

countries or towns betweenï¿½ the sea coast

and Deccan, it is clear that they must have taken a sea route.

Kittelï¿½ in his Kannada

English Dictionary gives a long list of Sanskrit words which seems to

have been

derived from Dravidian languages.

For eg., Matachi (Chandogya 1.10.1) occuring in the passage " matachi

hateshu Kurushu atikya saha jayaya ushastir , ha chakrayanaï¿½ ibhya

ï¿½grame pradranaka uvasa "

The verse speaks of devastation of crops in Kuru country due

to matachi, which is nothing but locusts(red colored winged creatures)

(JRAS,1911, p 510), which is equivalent to midiche in Kannada or

midatha in

Telugu. (grasshopper or locust)ï¿½ It is

astonishing that how a dravidian word is found in a purely north Indian

Upanishad, which was supposed to have composed primarily in Punjab.

That some

explanations thatï¿½ Dravidian languages

were present in NI prior to Aryanization, say as evidenced by the

language of

Brahuii does not explain this fact very well.ï¿½

This only can be explained by a) the antiquity of the Upanishads, taking

them much before the times of IVC and b) the interaction between the

NI and SI.

The Aryan words or langauge supplanting in a ï¿½Dravidian country rather

superficially ï¿½can not be really argued because for eg., the names

of even lowly goldsmiths or leather workers ï¿½in Bhattiprolu and

Amaravati inscriptions of

early periods were totally sanskrit names and not dravidian, as

evidenced by

the early inscriptions. ï¿½The names

mentioned are Siddhartha, Vriddhika , Naga, Kanha and so on.ï¿½ One

curious thing happens here that Kanha, an

Aryan by name, calls himself a Damila (ASSI, I p 104) This shows that

Damila is

not a race distinct from Aryans.

Coupled this with the fact we find Pali inscriptions of much

early periods show that Aryans were settled in South India for a very

long time

than that is being thought today.ï¿½ Pali was

in fact continued to be the official langauge in " dravidian " kingdoms

and this

shows that Pali was not a which was supplanted at a later date must

have been a

natural langauge of the area. ï¿½Here, we

are talking of Malavalli inscriptions, Karnataka by Chutukalanamda

satakarni of

Kadamba dynasty , king of Vaijayanti or Banavasi of North canarese

district,

Karnataka. Another king connected to this dynasty is Mulanamda , both

of who

have issued coins. Jayavarman, Pallavan king of Kanchi issued copper plate

grants in Pali language, as did Vijayadevavarman.

ï¿½

That fact that every one of these is a title deed and has

been drawn up in Pali shows that this Aryan langauge must have been

known not

only to officials but also to literate and semi literate people, since

these

grants went even to villagers and guards and cowherds.ï¿½ By no stretch

of imagination, you can think

that these common people could understand a foreign language, thus

making Pali

a local and natural language in South India at that time.

ï¿½

--- End forwarded message ---

December 17, 2008

, " Kishore patnaik "

<kishorepatnaik09 wrote:

>

> hinducivilization , Vedaprakash Vedaprakash

> <vedamvedaprakash@> wrote:

>

> The so-called " Dravidians " have " Sangam literature " , just like

> " Aryans " who have " Sanskrit literature " .

>

> Like the research conducted by the Indologists on " Sanskrit

> literature " to discover or invent Aryans and Dravidians, enough

> research have not been conducted on " Sangam literature " .

>

> If you read " Ancient Tamil / Sangam literature " , you cannot find any

> reference implicitly or explicitly that they were called themselves

> " Dravidians " or they came from outside, as the " geographical

> description " as described in it, it locates within the boundaries of

> South India or perhaps beyond South India!

>

> --- On Sat, 12/6/08, kishore patnaik <kishorepatnaik09@> wrote:

> kishore patnaik <kishorepatnaik09@>

> [hc] Re: Some musings on Ancient Indian Geography

> , " "

> , " indiaarchaeology "

> <IndiaArchaeology >,

> bharatiyaexpertsforum ,

> hinducivilization , akandabaratam

> Saturday, December 6, 2008, 9:28 PM

>

Another route by which Aryans seem to have gone to South

> India was by sea ï¿½ from Indus to Kutch and from there, by sea coast to

> Saurashtra or Kathiawar. From Kathiawar, they went to Modern Broach

, from

> where they proceeded to Sopara (Supparaka) in Thane district,

> Maharashtra.

>

> After Mahabharata war, there was a declinein Aryan civilzation and

> there was a mix of various tribes, just as feared by Arjuna in the first

> chapter of Bhagavad Gita that there will be destruction of Varna

> Dharma and the

> women folk will become daring in their marriage with men from other

> Varnas.

>

> ï¿½

>

> Baudhayanaï¿½ in his Dharmasutras

> quotes a verse from the Bhallavan school fo Law, which tells us that

>

> The inhabitants of Sindhu , Sauvira and Surashtra like those

> of Deccan were of mixed origin. It is possible that Aryans were

> recolonizing

> these parts, much time after Mbh. Towards the end of period of Dharma

> sutras,

> they seem to have advanced as far south as Sopara.ï¿½ Since no mention

> is traceable of any inland

> countries or towns betweenï¿½ the sea coast

> and Deccan, it is clear that they must have taken a sea route.

>

> Kittelï¿½ in his Kannada

> English Dictionary gives a long list of Sanskrit words which seems to

> have been

> derived from Dravidian languages.

>

> For eg., Matachi (Chandogya 1.10.1) occuring in the passage " matachi

> hateshu Kurushu atikya saha jayaya ushastir , ha chakrayanaï¿½ ibhya

> ï¿½grame pradranaka uvasa "

>

> The verse speaks of devastation of crops in Kuru country due

> to matachi, which is nothing but locusts(red colored winged creatures)

> (JRAS,1911, p 510), which is equivalent to midiche in Kannada or

> midatha in

> Telugu. (grasshopper or locust)ï¿½ It is

> astonishing that how a dravidian word is found in a purely north Indian

> Upanishad, which was supposed to have composed primarily in Punjab.

> That some

> explanations thatï¿½ Dravidian languages

> were present in NI prior to Aryanization, say as evidenced by the

> language of

> Brahuii does not explain this fact very well.ï¿½

> This only can be explained by a) the antiquity of the Upanishads, taking

> them much before the times of IVC and b) the interaction between the

> NI and SI.

>

> The Aryan words or langauge supplanting in a ï¿½Dravidian country rather

> superficially ï¿½can not be really argued because for eg., the names

> of even lowly goldsmiths or leather workers ï¿½in Bhattiprolu and

> Amaravati inscriptions of

> early periods were totally sanskrit names and not dravidian, as

> evidenced by

> the early inscriptions. ï¿½The names

> mentioned are Siddhartha, Vriddhika , Naga, Kanha and so on.ï¿½ One

> curious thing happens here that Kanha, an

> Aryan by name, calls himself a Damila (ASSI, I p 104) This shows that

> Damila is

> not a race distinct from Aryans.

>

> Coupled this with the fact we find Pali inscriptions of much

> early periods show that Aryans were settled in South India for a very

> long time

> than that is being thought today.ï¿½ Pali was

> in fact continued to be the official langauge in " dravidian " kingdoms

> and this

> shows that Pali was not a which was supplanted at a later date must

> have been a

> natural langauge of the area. ï¿½Here, we

> are talking of Malavalli inscriptions, Karnataka by Chutukalanamda

> satakarni of

> Kadamba dynasty , king of Vaijayanti or Banavasi of North canarese

> district,

> Karnataka. Another king connected to this dynasty is Mulanamda , both

> of who

> have issued coins. Jayavarman, Pallavan king of Kanchi issued copper

plate

> grants in Pali language, as did Vijayadevavarman.

>

> ï¿½

>

> That fact that every one of these is a title deed and has

> been drawn up in Pali shows that this Aryan langauge must have been

> known not

> only to officials but also to literate and semi literate people, since

> these

> grants went even to villagers and guards and cowherds.ï¿½ By no stretch

> of imagination, you can think

> that these common people could understand a foreign language, thus

> making Pali

> a local and natural language in South India at that time.

>

> ï¿½

>

> ï¿½

>

> ï¿½

>

> --- End forwarded message ---

>

December 17, 2008

hinducivilization , " Kishore patnaik "

<kishorepatnaik09 wrote:

The most intriguing factor is the commonality and the differences

between North Indians and South Indians.

I am a Telugu and I think my language is " Aryan " , In fact, I place it

in the sub group of Dardic languages. The Linguists differ.

Pali langauge, an Aryan language, was prevalent in south India

Relationship fo the language of Pisaci, from which modern Telugu

evolved, with Pali is to be explored.

All said and done, we have to reject the existing prejudices and start

afresh looking into the 'Aryan " and " Dravidian " definitions.

Kishore patnaik

hinducivilization , Vedaprakash Vedaprakash

<vedamvedaprakash@> wrote:

>

> The so-called " Dravidians " have " Sangam literature " , just like

" Aryans " who have " Sanskrit literature " .

>

> Like the research conducted by the Indologists on " Sanskrit

literature " to discover or invent Aryans and Dravidians, enough

research have not been conducted on " Sangam literature " .

>

> If you read " Ancient Tamil / Sangam literature " , you cannot find any

reference implicitly or explicitly that they were called themselves

" Dravidians " or they came from outside, as the " geographical

description " as described in it, it locates within the boundaries of

South India or perhaps beyond South India!

>

> --- On Sat, 12/6/08, kishore patnaik <kishorepatnaik09@> wrote:

> kishore patnaik <kishorepatnaik09@>

> [hc] Re: Some musings on Ancient Indian Geography

> , " "

, " indiaarchaeology "

<IndiaArchaeology >,

bharatiyaexpertsforum ,

hinducivilization , akandabaratam

> Saturday, December 6, 2008, 9:28 PM

>

Another route by which Aryans seem to have gone to South

> India was by sea ï¿½ from Indus to Kutch and from there, by sea coast to

> Saurashtra or Kathiawar. From Kathiawar, they went to Modern Broach

, from

> where they proceeded to Sopara (Supparaka) in Thane district,

Maharashtra.

>

> After Mahabharata war, there was a declinein Aryan civilzation and

> there was a mix of various tribes, just as feared by Arjuna in the first

> chapter of Bhagavad Gita that there will be destruction of Varna

Dharma and the

> women folk will become daring in their marriage with men from other

Varnas.

>

> ï¿½

>

> Baudhayanaï¿½ in his Dharmasutras

> quotes a verse from the Bhallavan school fo Law, which tells us that

>

> The inhabitants of Sindhu , Sauvira and Surashtra like those

> of Deccan were of mixed origin. It is possible that Aryans were

recolonizing

> these parts, much time after Mbh. Towards the end of period of

Dharma sutras,

> they seem to have advanced as far south as Sopara.ï¿½ Since no mention

is traceable of any inland

> countries or towns betweenï¿½ the sea coast

> and Deccan, it is clear that they must have taken a sea route.

>

> Kittelï¿½ in his Kannada

> English Dictionary gives a long list of Sanskrit words which seems

to have been

> derived from Dravidian languages.

>

> For eg., Matachi (Chandogya 1.10.1) occuring in the passage " matachi

> hateshu Kurushu atikya saha jayaya ushastir , ha chakrayanaï¿½ ibhya

ï¿½grame pradranaka uvasa "

>

> The verse speaks of devastation of crops in Kuru country due

> to matachi, which is nothing but locusts(red colored winged creatures)

> (JRAS,1911, p 510), which is equivalent to midiche in Kannada or

midatha in

> Telugu. (grasshopper or locust)ï¿½ It is

> astonishing that how a dravidian word is found in a purely north Indian

> Upanishad, which was supposed to have composed primarily in Punjab.

That some

> explanations thatï¿½ Dravidian languages

> were present in NI prior to Aryanization, say as evidenced by the

language of

> Brahuii does not explain this fact very well.ï¿½

> This only can be explained by a) the antiquity of the Upanishads, taking

> them much before the times of IVC and b) the interaction between the

NI and SI.

>

> The Aryan words or langauge supplanting in a ï¿½Dravidian country

rather superficially ï¿½can not be really argued because for eg., the names

> of even lowly goldsmiths or leather workers ï¿½in Bhattiprolu and

Amaravati inscriptions of

> early periods were totally sanskrit names and not dravidian, as

evidenced by

> the early inscriptions. ï¿½The names

> mentioned are Siddhartha, Vriddhika , Naga, Kanha and so on.ï¿½ One

curious thing happens here that Kanha, an

> Aryan by name, calls himself a Damila (ASSI, I p 104) This shows

that Damila is

> not a race distinct from Aryans.

>

> Coupled this with the fact we find Pali inscriptions of much

> early periods show that Aryans were settled in South India for a

very long time

> than that is being thought today.ï¿½ Pali was

> in fact continued to be the official langauge in " dravidian "

kingdoms and this

> shows that Pali was not a which was supplanted at a later date must

have been a

> natural langauge of the area. ï¿½Here, we

> are talking of Malavalli inscriptions, Karnataka by Chutukalanamda

satakarni of

> Kadamba dynasty , king of Vaijayanti or Banavasi of North canarese

district,

> Karnataka. Another king connected to this dynasty is Mulanamda ,

both of who

> have issued coins. Jayavarman, Pallavan king of Kanchi issued copper

plate

> grants in Pali language, as did Vijayadevavarman.

>

> ï¿½

>

> That fact that every one of these is a title deed and has

> been drawn up in Pali shows that this Aryan langauge must have been

known not

> only to officials but also to literate and semi literate people,

since these

> grants went even to villagers and guards and cowherds.ï¿½ By no

stretch of imagination, you can think

> that these common people could understand a foreign language, thus

making Pali

> a local and natural language in South India at that time.

>

> ï¿½

>

> ï¿½

>

> ï¿½

>

--- End forwarded message ---

December 17, 2008

hinducivilization , " Bhalchandra Thattey "

<tobhalgt wrote:

You are right.

Marathi langugae is nearest to Sanskrit, but Maharashtra is one of the

Panch_Dravidas including Karnataka, Andhra, TamilNadu and Kerala.

The regions to the north are home to the Pancha_Gaudas.

Traditionally Pancha_Dravidas intermarry but they do not marry with the

Panch_Gaudas. and vice-a-versa

On 12/7/08, Kishore patnaik <kishorepatnaik09 wrote:

>

> The most intriguing factor is the commonality and the differences

> between North Indians and South Indians.

>

> I am a Telugu and I think my language is " Aryan " , In fact, I place it

> in the sub group of Dardic languages. The Linguists differ.

>

> Pali langauge, an Aryan language, was prevalent in south India

> Relationship fo the language of Pisaci, from which modern Telugu

> evolved, with Pali is to be explored.

>

> All said and done, we have to reject the existing prejudices and start

> afresh looking into the 'Aryan " and " Dravidian " definitions.

>

> Kishore patnaik

>

> --- In

hinducivilization <hinducivilization%40>,

> Vedaprakash Vedaprakash

> <vedamvedaprakash@> wrote:

> >

> > The so-called " Dravidians " have " Sangam literature " , just like

> " Aryans " who have " Sanskrit literature " .

> >

> > Like the research conducted by the Indologists on " Sanskrit

> literature " to discover or invent Aryans and Dravidians, enough

> research have not been conducted on " Sangam literature " .

> >

> > If you read " Ancient Tamil / Sangam literature " , you cannot find any

> reference implicitly or explicitly that they were called themselves

> " Dravidians " or they came from outside, as the " geographical

> description " as described in it, it locates within the boundaries of

> South India or perhaps beyond South India!

> >

> > --- On Sat, 12/6/08, kishore patnaik <kishorepatnaik09@> wrote:

> > kishore patnaik <kishorepatnaik09@>

> > [hc] Re: Some musings on Ancient Indian Geography

> > <%40>,

> " "

> < <%40>>,

> " indiaarchaeology "

> <IndiaArchaeology <IndiaArchaeology%40>>,

>

bharatiyaexpertsforum <bharatiyaexpertsforum%40>

> ,

> hinducivilization <hinducivilization%40>,

> akandabaratam <akandabaratam%40>

> > Saturday, December 6, 2008, 9:28 PM

> >

> > Another route by which Aryans seem to have gone to South

> > India was by sea ï¿½ from Indus to Kutch and from there, by sea coast to

> > Saurashtra or Kathiawar. From Kathiawar, they went to Modern Broach

> , from

> > where they proceeded to Sopara (Supparaka) in Thane district,

> Maharashtra.

> >

> > After Mahabharata war, there was a declinein Aryan civilzation and

> > there was a mix of various tribes, just as feared by Arjuna in the

first

> > chapter of Bhagavad Gita that there will be destruction of Varna

> Dharma and the

> > women folk will become daring in their marriage with men from other

> Varnas.

> >

> > ï¿½

> >

> > Baudhayanaï¿½ in his Dharmasutras

> > quotes a verse from the Bhallavan school fo Law, which tells us that

> >

> > The inhabitants of Sindhu , Sauvira and Surashtra like those

> > of Deccan were of mixed origin. It is possible that Aryans were

> recolonizing

> > these parts, much time after Mbh. Towards the end of period of

> Dharma sutras,

> > they seem to have advanced as far south as Sopara.ï¿½ Since no mention

> is traceable of any inland

> > countries or towns betweenï¿½ the sea coast

> > and Deccan, it is clear that they must have taken a sea route.

> >

> > Kittelï¿½ in his Kannada

> > English Dictionary gives a long list of Sanskrit words which seems

> to have been

> > derived from Dravidian languages.

> >

> > For eg., Matachi (Chandogya 1.10.1) occuring in the passage " matachi

> > hateshu Kurushu atikya saha jayaya ushastir , ha chakrayanaï¿½ ibhya

> ï¿½grame pradranaka uvasa "

> >

> > The verse speaks of devastation of crops in Kuru country due

> > to matachi, which is nothing but locusts(red colored winged creatures)

> > (JRAS,1911, p 510), which is equivalent to midiche in Kannada or

> midatha in

> > Telugu. (grasshopper or locust)ï¿½ It is

> > astonishing that how a dravidian word is found in a purely north

Indian

> > Upanishad, which was supposed to have composed primarily in Punjab.

> That some

> > explanations thatï¿½ Dravidian languages

> > were present in NI prior to Aryanization, say as evidenced by the

> language of

> > Brahuii does not explain this fact very well.ï¿½

> > This only can be explained by a) the antiquity of the Upanishads,

taking

> > them much before the times of IVC and b) the interaction between the

> NI and SI.

> >

> > The Aryan words or langauge supplanting in a ï¿½Dravidian country

> rather superficially ï¿½can not be really argued because for eg., the

names

> > of even lowly goldsmiths or leather workers ï¿½in Bhattiprolu and

> Amaravati inscriptions of

> > early periods were totally sanskrit names and not dravidian, as

> evidenced by

> > the early inscriptions. ï¿½The names

> > mentioned are Siddhartha, Vriddhika , Naga, Kanha and so on.ï¿½ One

> curious thing happens here that Kanha, an

> > Aryan by name, calls himself a Damila (ASSI, I p 104) This shows

> that Damila is

> > not a race distinct from Aryans.

> >

> > Coupled this with the fact we find Pali inscriptions of much

> > early periods show that Aryans were settled in South India for a

> very long time

> > than that is being thought today.ï¿½ Pali was

> > in fact continued to be the official langauge in " dravidian "

> kingdoms and this

> > shows that Pali was not a which was supplanted at a later date must

> have been a

> > natural langauge of the area. ï¿½Here, we

> > are talking of Malavalli inscriptions, Karnataka by Chutukalanamda

> satakarni of

> > Kadamba dynasty , king of Vaijayanti or Banavasi of North canarese

> district,

> > Karnataka. Another king connected to this dynasty is Mulanamda ,

> both of who

> > have issued coins. Jayavarman, Pallavan king of Kanchi issued copper

> plate

> > grants in Pali language, as did Vijayadevavarman.

> >

> > ï¿½

> >

> > That fact that every one of these is a title deed and has

> > been drawn up in Pali shows that this Aryan langauge must have been

> known not

> > only to officials but also to literate and semi literate people,

> since these

> > grants went even to villagers and guards and cowherds.ï¿½ By no

> stretch of imagination, you can think

> > that these common people could understand a foreign language, thus

> making Pali

> > a local and natural language in South India at that time.

> >

> > ï¿½

> >

> > ï¿½

> >

> > ï¿½

> >

>

--

Bhalchandra G. Thattey

Shubham Bhavatu

Svalpasya Yogasya Trayate Mahato Bhayat

--- End forwarded message ---

December 17, 2008

hinducivilization , " Ramesh Krishnamurthy "

<rkmurthy wrote:

> Dear Rameshji,

>

> The message is part of a series of posts I am making based on

various text

> books. So, I think you are not following my earlier messages.

I have been following all your messages as this is a topic that

interests me. My only quibble is that you jump to conclusions far too

quickly.

>

> Your understanding that Buddhists have followed primarily two languages-

> Mahayana followed Sanskrit and Theravada followed Pali language - is

indeed

> correct. So, what you find in Japan and other countries is

translation of

> original Sanskrit canons in the local languages.

Not only translations but also original works in Chinese, Japanese and

Korean.

> However, same kind of translations are not found for Pali language

canons.

> For eg., Mahinda on one hand spread Buddhism in Sri Lanka in Pali as

well as

> Priyadarsi Asoka also engraved his edicts in South India in Pali

> language - they have not done in local languages

>

> It is clear that they have done so because Pali is not only the original

> language in which Buddhist canons are written but also because the

language

> is read and understood by common man in South India - if not, at least

> Priyadarsi would have published the translations as he is done

elsewhere.

>

This hardly proves anything. Please note that the " common man " for

most of world history (not just India) has been illiterate. This is

not because society was hierarchical but simply because literacy was

not a useful economic tool for most people. It was required primarily

by priests, scholars, administrators, traders, accountants, etc. The

rest of society had no use for it. So the language of written

communication need not be the language of the common man.

If Ashokan edicts in southern India are exclusively in Pali, there

could be other reasons for it. Perhaps he was an indirect ruler in

these areas. Or maybe there was a Mauryan administrative class and his

edicts were mainly addressed to them. That Pali was a commonly

understood language in southern India during Ashokan times is a fairly

unlikely scenario - at least it cannot be so established merely on the

basis of Ashokan edicts.

> This is further supported by the fact that inspite of Pali canons

are not

> published by Mahinda in the local language, Buddhism became a popular

> religion in Sri Lanka.

Pl understand the nature of the old Bauddha tradition. It was

essentially a monastic school and the texts were meant for bhikshu-s

who spent all their time in study/practice of the Bauddha school. Even

today the bhikshu-s in Sri Lanka, Thailand and Myanmar study the texts

in Pali only. The texts were not meant for householders and so there

was never a need to translate them. The average Bauddha family in

these countries has little use for the Pali canon.

>

> One may be tempted to draw a parallel of this to Hinduism being

preserved

> in South India, since Sanskrit is not the spoken language there. But

this

> kind of attempt will be futile since Hinduism evolved in a natural

way and

> the basics of HInduism is rituals and life style. Philosophy grew

later, In

> case of Buddhism, it is the teachings and philosophy which form the

corner

> stone of the religion and to take that into the masses, you need to

converse

> with them in a language they understand.

And who said that the Bauddha tradition was meant for the " masses " ? At

least the formal textual tradition was meant for a small set of

bhikshu-s who used Pali only. To speak to the masses one has no use

for texts. The bhikshu-s, on the basis of their understanding gleaned

from the texts and debate, could preach to householders in the local

language if required, just as Hindu acharya-s over the centuries have

explained the classical Sanskrit texts to common people through the

medium of local language pravachana-s.

> Secondly, Pallavans who have published the copper plates are not

Bauddhists

> and thus, they have no motivation to make it their official language

unless

> it is a popular local language.

Pl understand that the distinction between Bauddha, Jaina and Vaidika

was not always hard & fast. Bodhidharma, the acharya from Kanchipuram

who is the legendary founder of Chan/Zen Buddhism, is described by

some as a scion of the Pallava dynasty. As long as there was a

sizeable presence of Theravadin Bauddha-s in Kanchipuram during the

Pallava period, they had every reason to use Pali in some of their

communication. If you can establish that they used only Pali to the

exclusion of all other languages, then your contention gains some

strength. But it is clear that a lot many Pallava copper plates are in

Sanskrit.

> Thus it is clear that Pali must have been a popular language being

used by

> the masses of South India.

Your conclusion is far fetched. If at all, one may say that Pali was

some kind of special purpose language along with Sanskrit. Of course

it would have influenced the local vocabulary without doubt.

Ramesh

--- End forwarded message ---

December 17, 2008

hinducivilization , " Ramesh Krishnamurthy "

<rkmurthy wrote:

Kishore-ji,

May I gently remind you that I am not making any conjectures or

advancing any propositions at all. You were the one making the

proposition that Pali was a " commonly understood language " in southern

India. All I said is that the " evidences " you provided can be

explained through more parsimonious assumptions and listed out some

possibilities.

>

> You are rather in a confusion here. Buddhism is said to be the common

> man's religion, what ever that means.

> I am not saying the language of Buddhism is not Pali. On the

> contrary, I am saying that Pali must be prevalent in Srilanka,

> otherwise, Buddhism could not have populated there, by being

> singluarly preached in Pali. There is no proof to show that Buddhism

> had been preached in local languages of Sri lanka. It was purely

> taught in Pali and if Pali was not understood by the local populace,

> Buddhism could not have taken roots in Sri Lanka.

That Buddhism is some kind of " common man's religion " is a notion

spread by modern revisionists. If you have actually cared to

understand the early Bauddha teachings in any depth, you would note

that they are essentially targeted not at the " common man " but at the

individual who is willing to dedicate his life for duHkha nivR^itti

(cessation of suffering), i.e. the Bauddha monk. The early Bauddha

tradition, of which the Theravada is the surviving representative, was

one of several ascetic/monastic traditions that arose in the

late-Vedic and post-Vedic periods. Some earlier representatives of the

same trend include the protagonists of the Mundakopanishad and the

Samkhya school.

In that context, saying that Bauddha was a common man's religion is

like saying that Vedanta or Samkhya is a common man's religion.

Historically, the Bauddha-s institutionalized monasticism through the

formation of the sangha and developed it into a power centre through

royal patronage. If the Theravada tradition took root in Lanka, it was

because it received royal patronage early on and did not have to

compete against rival traditions for the same patronage for most of

the last 2 millenia. The membership of the sangha was, for most of

history, obtained from the elite & educated sections of society. In

the case of mainland India, this membership was mostly from Brahmin

and Kshatriya clans.

The common Sri Lankan's understanding of Buddhism is of hardly any

relevance here. Even today, with widespread education etc, most Sri

Lankans have next to no understanding of Buddhism, just as most

Indians have a poor understanding of the Hindu philosophical

traditions. What was transmitted to Sri Lanka historically was an

elite Pali scholastic tradition confined to the sangha and that is

what has survived for over 2000 years. It hardly proves that Pali was

some kind of common language there. By your criteria, Pali should have

been a common language in Thailand and Myanmar too!

Ramesh

--- End forwarded message ---

>

December 17, 2008

hinducivilization , " Kishore patnaik "

<kishorepatnaik09 wrote:

Rameshji,

>

> May I gently remind you that I am not making any conjectures or

> advancing any propositions at all. You were the one making the

> proposition that Pali was a " commonly understood language " in southern

> India. All I said is that the " evidences " you provided can be

> explained through more parsimonious assumptions and listed out some

> possibilities.

This is not a new proposition made by me. It was there for a very long

time. I would want you to read " Buddhist History in the Vernacular " by

Stephen C. Berkwitz in this regard, where SB powerfully describes the

usage of Pali. In fact, he almost assumes that pali was a popular

language in Sri Lanka and South India. the " parsimonious " assumptions

made by you remain what they are - assumptions and no more than that.

I am sorry to say they are neither supported by logic nor by evidence.

I have no dispute over the fact that Buddhism is more of a

philosophical religion and was an off shoot of Sankhya philosophy.

More often than not, it is argued that it was a reaction to the

plethora of rituals that became a heavy burden for common Hindu to

practice but I do not agree with this in toto. But,I would rather

think Budhism is more of a continuity of Sankhya texts looking for a

simpler solution of Sorrow. In fact, it might be a more practical

supplement of Bhagavad gita which tried to synthesize Sankhya and

Yoga. Buddhism did not try to synthesize these two in a theoretical

way as did Gita but utilized both the concepts for alleviation of Sorrow.

However, you are wrong in saying that Buddhism was meant for only

Buddhist monks. Existence of monasticism during Buddha's time did not

preclude lay upasakas or Buddhist followers who are not monks. In

fact, all the kings who followed Buddhism were not merely non monks

but in fact blatant followers of violent path,even during the times of

Buddha. Perhaps, Priyadarsi is known so much only because he was both

lay upasak and a pacifist, which is not really common amongst Buddhist

kings. (I have pointed out earlier that most of the pacifist Buddhism

kings are known by the name Asoka and thus Asoka must be a title just

as Rajarshi in Hinduism rather than a personal name) In fact, Buddha

himself never cared to condemn Varna , which enabled Hindus continue

to follow Varna as well as Buddhism at the same time. Conversion was

limited to important personalities in the society such as Royalty,

Government officials and Merchants.

The concept that Buddhism is meant only for monks has not developed

until 2nd Century CE at the earliest. By this time, there was a steady

decline of Buddhism of India both in practice and in philosophy. By

this rule, Buddhism not only was revived as a religion of substance

but also, could convert important philosophers into its bandwagon,

since Buddhism is not allowed to be studied unless you are a monk.

Kishore patnaik

--- End forwarded message ---

December 17, 2008

Dear Rameshji,In HinayanaBuddhism, the initiation to monkhood was restricted only to the able-bodied, healthy, disease-free and physically non-handicapped (or physically non-challenged) persons. Generally the monk had to live in the viharas, away from the common society, so that they could observe the shilas in order not to acquire fresh samkharas (karmaphal). By being a monk and following the routine of monk's life and practising meditation for long hours the monks are said to be able to achieve nirvana (or liberation) in lesser number of births than the laity, who also followed Lord Buddha's teachings. Because of this, some people think that Buddhism was not for the common man. However to to my mind Buddhism was open for all but the monk-hood was not.As regards the Pali language it went to Sri Lanka when Hinayana

Buddhism went to

Sri Lanka. According to some it went to Sri Lanka in the middle of the third century BCE. In the Buddhist council held in Sri Lanka in 80 BCE the Hinayana scriptures were compiled there in the Pali language. However later on some of these were transcribed in the local Sinhali(a) language as well. Some scholars believe that the the word "Sinhala" itself was adopted after the "Sinha" families, who went from Bengal / Orissa region to Sri Lanka in the middle of the third century BCE. It appears that the Pali language was not native to Sri Lanka before Buddhism went to Sri lanka..Regards.sunil K. Bhattacharjya--- On Tue, 12/16/08, Kishore patnaik <kishorepatnaik09 wrote:Kishore patnaik <kishorepatnaik09 Re: Some musings on Ancient Indian

Geography Date: Tuesday, December 16, 2008, 10:53 PM

hinducivilization, "Ramesh Krishnamurthy"

<rkmurthy@.. .> wrote:

Kishore-ji,

May I gently remind you that I am not making any conjectures or

advancing any propositions at all. You were the one making the

proposition that Pali was a "commonly understood language" in southern

India. All I said is that the "evidences" you provided can be

explained through more parsimonious assumptions and listed out some

possibilities.

>

> You are rather in a confusion here. Buddhism is said to be the common

> man's religion, what ever that means.

> I am not saying the language of Buddhism is not Pali. On the

> contrary, I am saying that Pali must be prevalent in Srilanka,

> otherwise, Buddhism could not have populated there, by being

> singluarly preached in Pali. There is no proof to show that Buddhism

> had been preached in local languages of Sri lanka. It was purely

> taught in Pali and if Pali was not understood by the local populace,

> Buddhism could not have taken roots in Sri Lanka.

That Buddhism is some kind of "common man's religion" is a notion

spread by modern revisionists. If you have actually cared to

understand the early Bauddha teachings in any depth, you would note

that they are essentially targeted not at the "common man" but at the