Vedic Rāmāya a Mahābhārat Bhagavad-Gītā Pā ini Time line 500 to 700 BCE Sanskrit Vedic – Non Vedic Prākrits / Tamils Patañjali Time line 200 CE Amara Ko ha Time line 500 CE Post period According to this school, the meaning of the word ‘ ārya /anārya’ centers around racial / linguistic / ethnic identity related meanings. The second school makes their case as below: Language is not limited to historicity ethnicity and usage, which stands only for one linear dimension of communication. The guiding and binding rules of language differ according to the states of consciousness/ awareness (avasthā). The states of consciousness operate in a-historical way; it has non-linear dimension and style. The language associated with highest level of consciousness is called Shruti /Parā-vāk/ veda –vāk. The totality of such expressions associated with a state of higher consciousness in a historical period and in certain families is collected together; and these are called vedic documents. These collections are classified in to the four Vedas ik-yajus-sāma-atharvan / sub divisions of Sa hita-brāhmana-āranyaka-upani hat , which comes as a part of oral tradition , for use in the ritual and spiritual applications. These are, in a way mystic /magical incantations/ expressions in a Divine language, which manifested in certain historical time period. The veil of transparent historicity is for the purpose of reckoning a human period reference. It is like putting a date on the discovery of gravity or magnetism which always existed in nature. The vedic sound clusters manifests whenever an appropriate higher state of consciousness (turīya) is experienced by any human being irrespective of time- place limitation and truths of nature are accessed. These ‘ mantra-śhruti’ expressions are to be taken ‘as they are’ and shall not be meddled with the human language paradigms and grammar model. A set of six interconnected disciplines, out of which grammar rules are one, provide help in understanding the holistic nature of these expressions of sacred naturalness in a cosmic natural language and use them for human welfare applications. The above discussion has placed the evidence to show that Pā ini has a clear understanding of the meaning of the word ‘anārya/ārya’ as not carrying any flavor of race-caste-ethnicity-var a. This understanding has been documented in the post pā inian period literature and the lexicons. The evidence to show the acquaintance of Pā ini with the details of the vedic tradition and usages is also clearly shown in the deliberation of rules.With this the issue to be resolved is the historicity perspective. What should now be the meaning of the word ārya/anārya? Should these be resolved as per Pā inian guidelines OR differently? What should be the way to explain the perception of difference in meaning of the words by two streams of scholars?What is the impact of this difference? The interpretation and understanding of the above two words is critically twined with a number of significant issuesa) what is the criterion to call a document as ‘Veda’ (b) determination of the authentic nature of the vedic text and reading, importance of accent as a critical marker (c) relevance of hermeneutic postulations made in relation to the language, historicity and legitimacy of grammar of the vedic documents. 4. Questions at large and issues for future research, Conclusion The addressing of questions raised above are beyond the scope of the present paper. To wrap up the focused issues raised in this paper, based on evidence from Pā ini’s grammar, the following conclusions are made. a) Is Pā ini clear about the meaning of the word ārya? Pā ini is clear about the meaning of the word ārya. The meaning is ‘one born in noble family’. This does not carry 10 any ethnic, caste, racial, var a flavors. b) Are Pā inian rules for the compounding of the word ārya clear?- The rules of Pā ini are clear in the matter of forming compound words with ārya. The word is used as a plain adjective without any ethnic, caste, racial,var a flavors. c) Is Pā ini addressing / aware of the vedic documents where ārya/anārya issues are coming ? and how does he address the issue? Pā ini is clearly aware of the vedic documents where the words ārya/anārya are used. These guidelines are reflected and endorsed clearly even after a gap of one thousand years between Pā ini and Amarasi ha. The traditional commentaries have gone with Pā inian rule guidance. The current tradition of Hinduism is inheriting this continuity of understanding on the word ‘Ārya’ as an adjective indicating nobility.
References: 1. EJVS- vol7 (2001) Issue 3 (May 25) 2. Pā inian studies – Prof. S D Joshi felicitation volume, edited by Madhav M Deshpande / Saroja Bhate,1991, ISBN 0-89148-064-1, Center for south and southeast Asian studies, University of Michigan. a) This paper has carried materials from the discussions that took place in the IER forum on this topic during Dec 2005. I respectfully acknowledge the information provided in these posts. Some of the references have come from these discussions/references/ posts. Some modern scholars opine that ‘anārya’ is not found in the earlier vedic texts. It is said that the first appearance of the word anārya is seen in later Brahmanas, Paippalada Samhita 2.31.2 depended on the Kashmir ms, which as anaarya-, while the Bh. Edition has na aarya- 'not Aryans', a big difference). The other occurrences are in Jaiminiya Br., ed./tr. Caland par. 180 = 3.96, has: brāhmanam vā anāryam `a Brahmana (wrongly taken for) a Non-Aryan. `Jaim. Upanisad Br. 1.1.4.5 tasmād so`nāryassan api rājña prāpnoti `though he is a non-Aryan’ Late: Samavidhāna Br. 1.25 (read: 1.2.7, ed. B.R. Sharma) : satyam vaded, anāryair na sambhāśet: one should not talk with non-Aryans. Dharmasutras (see now Olivelle’s ed. & tr.; however, note that the Sutras have not yet been excerpted in toto in VWC) : Apastamba DhS 1.27.10 sex with non-Aryan woman Hiranyakesi DhS (see ed. Hir. Srautasutra, vol. 3, ch. 26, p.109 ) 1.7.35 : sex with non-Aryan woman Gautama DhS 26.8 : one should not talk with non-A.[The late Mahaa Up. 4.22 (seems a misquote) ]In short, the term can be found since the later Brahmana period, and the use in Yaska, etc. is not an innovation. b) Classical Sanskrit language documents Prior to Panini: - Bhagavad-gita: ‘anāryaju h am-asvargya akīrtikaramarjuna’ (2-2). c) Classical Sanskrit language documents Post Pā ini:Abhijñāna śhakuntalam – Fifth act. śhakuntalā (Prakrit expression) 2 The following is the an extract from another post, provided by by Prof. Madhav Deshpande in the thread of above discussions of IER forum. (Bloomfields Vedic Concordance gives: mānava śhrauta sūtra 7.2.10 anāryakarmann avakīr ī duścarita nirāk ta There are also : 3 occurences in MBh book 2 ; 3 occurences in MBh book 3 ; 6 occurences in MBh book 5 ;1 occurence in MBh book 6 ; 5 occurences in MBh book 7 ; 1 occurences in MBh book 8; 1 occurence in MBh book 9 ; 1 occurence in MBh book 11 ; 4 occurences in MBh book 12 ; 2 occurences in MBh book 13 ; 1 occurence in MBh book 14 ; 1 occurence in MBh book 17 ; 2 occurences in Ramayana book 2 2 occurences in Ramayana book 3 ; 1 occurence in Ramayana book 4 ; 3 occurences in Ramayana book 5 3 occurences in Ramayana book 6; Also 1 occurrence in Abhinavagupta's IPVV 3 Cf. IER Post from Prof. Madhav Deshpande : To add to this information, the Jain canonical and non-canonical texts do use the terms aNariya and aNajja ('N' for retroflex n) to refer to non-arya persons, languages etc. The term anArya also occurs in texts like Mahabharata, Ramayana, and Manu. "What to do with the Anaryas? Dharmic discourses of Inclusion and Exclusion" in Aryan and Non-Aryan in SouthAsia, edited by Bronkhorst and Deshpande, Harvard Oriental Series, Opera Minora,vol 3, 1999.] 4This is a summary of the discussions presented in the posts on this topic in the IER group. Many of these have found detailed references in the EJVS- vol7 (2001) Issue 3 (May 25) There have been references to understand ‘anāryan’ as ‘not belonging to Iran. The ethnic opposition of ārya with dāsa, dasyu, śhūdra, amānu ha, adevayu, śhu h a, gnaa,kīka a has been postulated, taking reference to vedic sources. 10.22.8 dasyu (here an unreligious person) 8.70.11 a-devayu (non-religious person, next to dasyu) 2.11.10 next to sorcerers, and daanava demons 10.22.7 zuSNa (apparently a demon) 10.95.8 gnaa (the non-human apsaras) The kiikaTa occur at RV 3.53.14, clearly as (southern Kuruksetra) enemies of the Bharata tribe. This is one of the 6 or so major RV populations (anu druhyu, yadu turvaza, puuru. --- All of this can be conveniently looked up in Grassmanns and Whitneys indexes. 5 The context is Second kā da- bra ma varga explaining the cateogires of the brāhminical var a. The textual line reads as follows: mahākula- kulīna- ārya-sabhya-sajjana- sādhava . This word ĀRYA in the (bra ma varga section should not be confused with the word ARYĀ (short a in the beginning and long a in the ending, listed at Vaiśhya varga of second kā da) .The word ARYĀ means a merchant, a man of third var a, known as vaiśhya. The textual line reads as below: This is a- ending, masculine gender word. Ūruvyā, ūrujā ARYĀ, vaiśhyā, bhūmisp uśho viśha . Sanskrit, as an inflectional language can provide a number of other instances where the sequential combination (–)arya(-) / (-)nārya(-) can come. For example, the declension of the word nārī – feminine gender with –ī ending gives the forms - nāryā, nāryai, nāryā . The search made on these words can not be taken to be of significance in this analysis. We have more of such examples in the yajurveda in the praise of Rudra where the forms like ‘ avāryāya, pāryāya’occur. When modern researchers make their judgements based on the ‘online resources’ which are anglicized transliteration of the devanagari Sanskrit text, many important features of Sanskrit language are lost sight of. To identify and point them out is a very difficult task. The issue is more linked to the computing technologies, sort orders, validation of contents of text data bases and the like. 6 There are some scholars who suggest Gita is a post Pā inian work. For such scholars, the specific statement of the problem could be addressed with the vedic refrences / mā ava dharma-śhāstra references listed separately. The shift of reference source does not alter the prime issue on deciding the meaning of the word ‘ārya’ and the dissolution of the compound ‘’anārya’. 7 If the post period model is to be followed, this offends the historicity issue and brings in anachronism. The postulation of ‘traditional continuity’ needs to be accepted as postulated in tradition, leading to the debate on issues of authenticity / reliability of tradition. The argument ends in the mute point: Is Pā ini a reliable source for the understanding of the vedic documents? If the past period model is to be followed, this offends the understanding of ‘vedas’ as divine revelation and makes vedic documents/ references as ‘nomadic, ethnic historic poetry’. The entire understanding of ‘vedas’ as described in the śhāstras as the authority in the matter of Dharma, seems to have emerged as a ‘fabricated understanding by a ruling /invading class, in some historical period beyond India’ to which the Indian natives seem to have succumbed. And this ‘fabricated understanding’ has continued over millennia to end up as current Hinduism. Both approaches have strengths and mute points. The question is where does the occam’s razor apply? 8 Pā ini uses the words ‘mantre’ (mantre ghasahvara aśha v udahāddgach k ugamijanibhyo le 2-4-80/SK3402; 3-3-96/ SK3420, 6-1-152/SK 3527,6-3-131/SK 3533, 6-4-53/SK 3542,6-4-141/SK 3554; yaju hi kā hake 7-4-38/SK 3591; nigame 7-4-74/SK 3597; yajña-karma 8-2-88/SK3607, 1-2-34/ SK3663 ; yājya mantra’s 8-2-60/SK 3609; agnīt-pre ha a 8-2-92/SK 3611; Special usages: nig uhyānuyoge cha 8-2-94/SK3613; sentence construction of addressing 8-2-96/3615 ; āmre ita bhartsane- 8-2-95/SK 3624;8-2-98 / SK 3617 ; 8-2-99/SK3618; 8-2- 100/SK 3619;8-2-103 /SK3622; 8-2-104/ SK 3623; 8-2-104/ SK3624; ), 9 Exploring the difference between ūha and chandasi , mantre are beyond the scope of the current paper. The author holds the view that ūha is the non-revelation part of vedic ritual, which is human construction on the model of reveled mantra. In this ūha modeling, the guidance for accent simulation comes from Pā inian grammar. It would be erroneous to imply Pā ini, a vedā ga writer to be doing any of the threelines of investigation as below, which is the main argument of colonial / historical interpreters of Veda: (a) Pā ini was creating rules of explanation for revelation or (b) Pā ini was writing rules of justification for the past revelations or (c ) Pā ini composed guidance rules for future composition of vedic poetry similar to past period vedic verses! The pursuers of this path have been shunning the debate of human linguistic expression associated with the states of consciousness. The complete argument stems in the background of rules of linguistics, which have been derived from the plank of social historical usage of inaccurate, non-grammatical, non-religious language which has been changing in an unregulated way. In Sanskrit tradition this model is called Prakrit-Prakrit comparison. This kind of study has its value for a different purpose. But this is an inaccurate tool for the Sanskrit studies. 10 To me an ethnologist who speaks of an Aryan race, Aryan blood, Aryan eyes and hair, is as great a sinner as a linguist would be if he spoke of a dolichocephalic dictionary or brachycephalic grammar’ (Attributed to Maxmuller , Quoted by Paramahamsa yogananda in his exposition on Gita Chapter 2-2 – page 173, foot note, ).
