Note on the Paiśāchī language

Note: this text is extracted from Book I, chapter 7.

As the Piśācas are dealt with in Appendix I at the end of this volume (see p. 205), it is only the so-called “Paiśāchī,” or language of the Piśācas, with which we are here concerned.

The language of the Piśācas is described as a kind of gibberish, and hence natives call the English language piśāca-bhāṣā, or “goblin language,” as to them it appears only as gibberish.

In the Mahābhāraia the Piśācas are described as a human race inhabiting N.W. India, the Himālaya and Central Asia. Moreover, Kashmir tradition connects their original home with an oasis in the Central Asian desert. There are two distinct streams of tradition concerning the language spoken by this tribe. The first is that in our text, while the other is derived from the works of Indian grammarians.

The first of these, Vararuci (circa sixth century a.d.), familiar to us from the Ocean of Story, speaks of only one Paiśāchī dialect, but by the time of Mārkaṇḍēya (seventeenth century) the number had increased to thirteen. This, however, includes many dialects which had no connection with Paiśāchī. Accordingly Sir George Grierson (see article “Piśācas,” Hastings’ Ency. Rel. Eth., vol. x, pp. 43-45) considers it safest to accept the statement of Hēmacandra (thirteenth century), who states that there were at most three varieties. Although the later grammarians assign different localities all over India as to where the language was spoken, there is only one locality on which they are all agreed—namely, Kēkaya, a country on the east bank of the Indus, in the N.W. Pañjāb.

Mārkaṇḍēya considers the Kēkaya Paiśāchī to be without doubt the language of the Bṛhat-Kathā, and consequently of the Ocean of Story, and makes quotations in support of his theory. As the forms of the dialect as described by Vararuci closely agree with the Kēkaya Paiśāchī, we may conclude that the language in our text belonged to the extreme N.W. corner of modern India. All scholars, however, are not agreed on this point.

From a passage in Rājaśēkhara’s (see No. 7 in list given below) Kāvyamīmāṃsā Konow infers that in the ninth century the country in the neighbourhood of the Vindhya range was considered as the home of the old dialect of the Bṛhat-Kathā. Grierson (see notes below), however, shows that there were two distinct schools, an eastern and a western one, and it is of the greatest importance to keep these strictly apart when attempting to determine the home of Paiśāchī.

Readers wishing to study the different theories and to obtain further general information on the subject should see the following:—

1. G. A. Grierson, “Piśāca =’Ωμοφάγος,” in Journ. Roy. As. Soc., 1905, p. 285 et seq.
2. S. Konow, “The Home of Paiśācī,” Zeitschrift der deutschen morgen - Vàndischen Gesellschaft, 1910 , lxiv, p. 95 et seq.
3. G. A. Grierson, “Piśācas in the Mahābhārata,” in Festschrift für Vilhelm Thomsen, Leipzig, 1912 , p. 138 et seq.
4. G. A. Grierson, “Paiśācī, Piśācas, and ‘Modern Piśāca,’” in Zeit. der deuts. morg. Gesell., 1912 , lxvi, p. 68 .
5. A. A. Macdonell and A. B. Keith, Vedic Index of Names and Subjects, London, 1912, vol. i, p. 533.
6. G. A. Grierson, Linguistic Survey oj India: the Dardic or Piśāca Languages, Calcutta Government Press, 1919-
7. S. Konow, “Rājaśēkhara and the Home of Paiśācī,” in Joum. Roy. As. Soc., April 1921, pp. 244-246.
8. G. A. Grierson, “Rājaśēkhara and the Home of Paiśācī,” in Joum. Roy. As. Soc., July 1921 , pp. 424-428.
9. A. B. Keith, Classical Sanskrit Literature, Heritage of India Series, 1923, pp. 90, 91. (Keith considers Grierson’s reply to Konow ineffective.)— n.m.p.