Part 11 - Some Observations about the Buddhist Sanskrit

Edgerton's appreciation of mixed Sanskrit as Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit may not always be palatable to an Indian. Traditionally a vāc is secret for being an outcome of inner berth of a person. Most of the Indian languages are therefore regarded as a source of genesis like one's mother. The Mother language is mātṛbhāsā. In the structural linguistics some scholars have shown this tem scientifically. However, academically many scholars prefer Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit for Mixed Sanskrit. S. K. Chatterjee has shown it in his 'The origin and the development of the Bengali language ' (p - 53).

In this regards Satya Swarup Mishra critically points out the relationship between the dialect of Indo Aryan Languages (IA) and its development. "In fact, BHS is originally a non -artificial language being a spoken form of IAL with a dialect showing a transitional stage between the Old Indo Āryan language (OIA) and Middle Indo Āryan Language (MIA). When a language changes, several dialects develop in several manners ". He wants to show like this, if we call the language X and the dialects A, B, C, etc., the position may be shown as follows: Dialect A may be identical with the language X (and therefore may be stamped as the standard dialect). Dialect B might be showing a position sixty percent like A with forty percent linguistic changes. Dialect C may show thirty percent conservatism like A and seventy percent linguistic change. And dialect D may show ninety percent or cent percent linguistic change. Dialect, Awhich is identical with language X, is much different from dialect D at this stage, may in course of time change and may become in course of time somewhat identical with dialect D of this stage. Dialects D itself of course will have further change and will always remain different from dialect A.

He further adds: "Similarly, BHS was a spoken form of IA, where OIA was changing towards MIA. IA was more conservative in some areas where the OIA type of language remained for a considerably longer period. IA was quite progressive in some areas where the language had more linguistic change and became MIA type. Some areas also retained a structure, which is a transitional type. BHS belongs to such areas as a spoken language. Buddha was an easterner and belonged to the area where the language was more MIA type. When preaching of Buddha reached the area, which was having a language of the traditional type, the preaching was also recorded in this language, which was transitional type. This might have been extended to some neighboring areas also. From the point of view of standard, the language looks like a mixture of OIA and MIA and therefore scholars consider it as such. A similar popular mistake is found in the border area of two languages. The border dialect of language A neighboring B is considered to be influenced by B and the border dialect of language B, on the other hand, is considered to be influenced by language A. But if A and B belong to a branch of one language family, then the linguistic peculiarities of the border dialect of A and B are normal dialectal developments and not due to language contact."^[1]

The above theory may be shown in a graphic description.

D leaves room to be distinct from A in course of BHS preserves the norms and forms Usage by the context of time. Admixture with both OIA and MIA.

Spoken Sanskrit, the basic language of the typical Buddhistic Sanskrit, it has the following characteristics in general.

A. The Phonological pattern is almost the same as that of classical Sanskrit. There are, however, exceptions.

(i) There is Middle Indo -Aryan vocables which show the expected simplification.

(ii) There is no rigidity of Sandhi rules. It follows the sandhi rules of MIA. The find visarga after a vowel other than is more often dropped than retained. The final-aḥ becomes more often -o than not.

(iii) The final -n generally becomes -ṃ.

(iv) The length of the stem vowel is as often retained as not.

(v) There is often samprasāraṇa of ya and va.

B. Morphological characteristics are as follows.

(i) The dual number is replaced by the plural as in MIA.

(ii) The noun stems ending in consonants are lost as in MIA, leaving a few fossils.

(iii) The a-declension influences all other non -feminine declensions.

(iv) The ablative singular is formed with the adverbial suffix -tas.

(v) The regular locative singular ending for the non-feminine is -smin. But the regular form for the a -stems is also current.

(vi) The ending for the instrumental, dative, ablative, genitive and locative singular fem. is - (a) ye (-yāi, the OIA dative singular).

(vii) The ending for the instrumental, dative, ablative and locative plural for all stems is -hi (-bhis).

(viii) The personal pronouns have developed some additional forms such as mamam etc.

(ix) In the conjugation of the verb the Atmanepada forms are replaced by the Parasmaipada, even in the passive voice. A few Atmanepada forms survive in the verses mainly.

(x) The-a-(and-aya-) conjugation predominates. The-ya-conjugation survives in the passive. The other conjugations survive sporadically.

(xi) The root bhū (bhavati) generally becomes bho-(ho-) and bhe.

Sukumar Sen says "Buddhistic Sanskrit was not a hieretic language; it was a general language, the spoken Sanskrit of the few centuries before and after Christ. It was used as an administrative language in Madhyadesa by Kanishka and his successors. The Sarnath Buddhist Image Inscription of Kanishka (Epigraphia Indica viii p. 173 ft), the Set-Mahet Image and Umbrella staff Inscription are the same (Ep. Ind. Viii p. 180 f., p. 291), the Mathura Stone Inscription of Huvishka (Ep. Ind. xxi p. 60 f) etc is written in almost the same language as Buddhistic Sanskrit. It also appears in a few documents from Niya region. "^[2]

Winternitz rightly has justified his position by stating that the Buddha's sayings had been a spoken language of his age. Two traditions are followed regarding the language in which the Buddha spoke. Some Theravādins, who preserved the Buddhavacana in Pāli, claimed the Buddha used to speak in the local speeches with the common people, like Māgadhi (speech of the Magadhan people), Koshambi or that of Koshala. On the other hand, the North Western Buddhists after the Schism of the unitary sangha (c. 5^th century B.C) preserve the language structure as explained, Dr. Mishra above in the Vaipulya Sūtra.

However, Winternitz did not enter into this debate, though he mentions various languages in preservation of Buddhavacana. Winternitz says about Pure and Mixed Sanskrit in Buddhistic Literature: "In the North and North West of India there were great centres of learning, such as the universities of Nālandā and Takkhasilā (Taxila) where for hundreds of years not only all branches of secular knowledge, especially medicine, but also the philosophical and theological literature of the Buddhists were cultivated with great zeal. Indian Pandits went then to Tibet and China, learned Tibetan and Chinese and translated Sanskrit works into these languages. Chinese pilgrims like Hiuan-Tsang learnt Sanskrit at Nālandā and translated Buddhists texts into Chinese. Some of the Sanskrit works which were produced there, and the originals of which are lost, would not be known to us, but for the Tibetan and Chinese texts. The manuscripts found in Central Asia include fragments not only of Sanskrit texts, but also of translations of Indian works in Central Asiatic languages.

By far the greater part of this literature written in pure and mixed Sanskrit we call it briefly Buddhist Sanskrit literature belongs either to the Mahāyāna or has been certainly more or less influenced by it. For understanding this literature, it is therefore necessary by way of an introduction, to make a few remarks on the division of Buddhism into its two great sections -Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna." (M. Winternitz, V-II, P-217).^[3]

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

Some Observation on the Evolution of the Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit by Satya Swarup Mishra. An article has published in Higher Tibetan Research Institute, Sarnath, Varanasi. 1985.

[2]:

Sen, Sukumar, "On Buddhistic (hybrid) Sanskrit." (Reprint B. T. N. S. No-1, 1977). Bulletin of Tibetolog. 2 (1997). p.78.

[3]:

Winternitz, M. A History of Indian Literature. Vol. II, Motilal Banarasidass, Delhi, 1993, p - 217.