Tracing Vedic Dialects
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
1 Version July 27,1987 (published Paris 1989) {Maps excluded} M. Witzel, Cambridge, Mass. TRACING THE VEDIC DIALECTS To F.B.J. Kuiper on his 8oth birthday 1. INTRODUCTION 2. Materials for this study 3. Discussion of the materials 4. PARAMETERS 4.1. Geography 4.2. Time 4.2.1 Internal chronology of the texts 2. Development of the ritual 3. Development of thought 4. Absolute dates 5. Relative chronology 4.3. Linguistic chronology 4.3.1 Ṛgvedic Sanskrit 2. Mantra language 3. Saṃhitā prose 4. Brāhmaṇa prose 5. Sūtra language 6. Yajñagāthās, Pāṇini's bhāṣā, Epic, Classical Skt. 5. ESTABLISHING A PATTERN 5.0 Procedure, maps 1. Gen. fem. sg. -ai 2. Narrative impf. and perf. 3. Perf. in traditional formulas 4. Infinitives in -toḥ 5. Absolutive -tvī 2 6. TYPICAL ŚĀKHĀ DIFFERENCES 6.1. -ch-, -śch-, -cch- 6.2. kś/ khy 6.3. "Ṛgvedic" ḷ- 6.4. -jm- > -ym- 6.5. súvar/svàr, anaptyxis 6.6. Late developments: nom. yuvām, 3rd sg.dugdhe 6.7. Sandhi -e/o a- 7. FEATURES OF SYNTAX AND STYLE 7.1. khalu 7.2. svid 7.3. Some other particles 7.4. spṛdh : sam.yat 8. SOME INDIVIDUAL CASES 8.1. purūvásu: purovásu 8.2. A case of religious belief: punarmṛtyu- 8.3. An unauspicious word: pāpa- 9. THE RELATION WITH EARLY MIDDLE INDIAN 9.1. Vedic ḷ- 9.2. Nom.pl.m. -āsaḥ; te devāḥ; 9.3. Instr.pl.-ebhiḥ > aiḥ; 9.4. Gen.fem.sg. -ai 9.5. Preterite 9.6. Subjunctive 9.7. Precative -eṣ(ma) 9.8. Infinitives 9.10. hi ṣma/ha vai 9.11. sa in initial position 10. CONCLUSIONS 10.1. Dialects and centres of innovation 10.2. Three centres: Kurukṣetra, Pañcāla, (Kosala-)Videha 10.3. Successive waves of immigration 10.4. Vedic dialects and archeology 10.5. Dating the Vedas 3 10.6. Conclusion and prospects 4 § 1. INTRODUCTION It is believed, and quite generally so, that the Vedic language had no dialects. One usually admits that the archaic poetic language of the Ṛgveda is a mixture of many dialects which had influenced each other. On the other hand, the educated speech of post-Ṛgvedic times, found in the prose texts, the so-called Brāhmaṇas, is regarded as the contemporary, the living language of the priests and other well-educated men, while the rest of the population spoke various degrees of early Middle-Indian, i.e., archaic Prākṛts. But this is as far as one will go.1 My contention will be that even this standard North Indian Koine, "Vedic," which does not seem to have regional variations at all, shows traces of the local dialects-- if only one looks carefully enough. Until now, this has not been done, chiefly because the language is apparently uniform in all the texts. There are, as has been noted from time to time, a few words or phrases, like the famous ŚB quotation, he 'lavo he 'lavo, spoken by the Asuras, which is believed to be from an early Eastern 'Prākṛt' for: he (a)rayaḥ.2 But otherwise, the sound system and even the phonetical variants of one particular phoneme are the same, the Sandhis show little variation, the forms of the noun and verb system seem to be the same throughout the texts, and the same applies to the syntax. If there are "Vedic Variants," they are usually attributed to matters of style or described as late (or post-Vedic) influence of Prākṛt on the Vedic texts.3 Actually, this does not, if one reads the texts carefully, agree with the testimony of the Vedic texts themselves; there are a number of very clear statements indicating that the Vedic people noticed and thought about regional differences in speech: 1 F.Edgerton, Dialectic phonetics in the Veda: Evidence from the Vedic variants, in Studies in honour of Hermann Collitz, Baltimore (The John Hopkins Press), 1930, p.25-36; - M.B.Emeneau, The dialects of Old Indo-Aryan, in: Ancient Indo-European dialects, ed. H.Birnbaum and J. Puhvel, Berkeley and Los Angeles 1966, p. 123-138. 2 Thieme, Pāṇini and the Veda, notes the closeness of Pāṇ.'s bhāṣā and KS, see p. 17,76,80; cf. below, ann. 65, 239, 280; cf. now Cardona, Pāṇini. A survey of research, Delhi 1980, p.238 sq. 3 Bloomfield-Edgerton, Vedic Variants, treat only the Mantras belonging to the so-called Mantra language, see below § 4.2.2; cf. Oertel, Kasusvariationen, SB Aakd. München 1937- 1939. Especially Renou and Caland regarded many of the variations in grammar to be treated below, as mere variations in the style of Vedic viz. of the various Vedic schools. 5 * the better speech of the Northerners: KB 7.64 * the higher tones of the Kurus, Pañcālas: ŚBM 3.2.3.15; or Kurus, Mahāvṛṣas: ŚBK 4.2.3.15 uttarāhi/°hai)5 * the son of a king of Kosala speaks "like the Easterners": JB 1.338 = ed.Caland §115 * nyagrodha bowls = "nyubja" in Kurukṣetra: AB 7.30 * the names of Agni/Rudra in the East viz. West: Śarva with the Easterners, Bhava with the Bāhīkas: ŚB 1.7.3.8, cf. 6.1.3.11-15 * The Pañcala use kuśa instead of darbha, also in the names of their kings (Keśin)6 Such clearly mentioned l o c a l peculiarities must, of course, be distinguished from social levels of language: * the gods, Gandharvas, Asuras, and men speak differently, ŚB 10.6.4.1 * so do the gods on one hand (rātrīm) and the author of the passage in question (rātrim), MS 1.5.12:81.3-4 * the dīkṣita has his own language7 * so have the Vrātyas (cf. H. Falk, Bruderschaft) * note the difference in the language of women: they speak candratara,8 probably "more clearly", with higher pitch; at RV 10.145.2, a woman uses the younger (and more popular) kuru instead of kṛṇu.9 4 See Weber, Lit.Gesch.p.49, Ind. St. II,309; cf.Thieme, Pāṇ. and the Veda 80; cf. TS 5.3.4.4 with tr. Keith, cf. below ann. 20. 5 About this, author, forthc. 6 Most of these passages have been noticed by W. Rau, Staat und Gesellschaft im alten Indien, Wiesbaden 1957, p.18. Cf. AV 12.1.45, 'everywhere on Earth there are men of different speech and customs'; and yatra-āryā vāg vadati KA 8.9 "where the Aryan speech is spoken" (cf. the similar expression in O.Pers. DB IV 89: āriya- " Aryan language"), cf. AA 3.2.5; -- the Pañcāla use kuśa instead of darbha, apparently to denote their kings, in succession to Keśin Dārbhya, who, according to BŚS, was called Śīrṣaṇya Kuśa after performing the Apaciti sacrifice, see JB 2.100 §133, BŚS 18.38, PB 19.8. Yet, apparently, this usage is also found in everyday language, see ŚBK 1.2.3.9 kuśā but darbha in the parallel version ŚBM 2.2.3.11. This passage underlines what will be said below, §4.1., about the homeland of ŚBK as neigbouring the Pāñcāla area. Passages like TS 7.5.9.2: "all forms of speech they speak" (at a Sattra), have to be understood, with H.Falk, (Bruderschaft und Würfelspiel, Freiburg 1986), differently, in terms of the ritual in question. For later texts, see Patañjali, I p.9, line 25, on dātra, hammati, śavati, and the various words for cow, (cf. also Pkt. goṇā, gopatalikā). 7 Cf. the names of Keśin Dālbhya; also the various designations of the horse: haya, vājin, arvan, aśva ŚB 10.6.4.1 etc.; cf. W. Rau., Staat, p. 18. 8 See KS 30.1:181.15, - but only at night! 6 All of these features, however, have either been largely neglected, or have at least never been investigated in the context of Vedic dialects. Another reason why one does not have an idea how there could have existed dialects in Vedic is that one does not really know when the texts were composed or where. Without an area of composition (or redaction) for a Vedic text, there are, of course, no dialects. In fact, the Vedic texts seem to have been composed at an unknown time in an unknown area (of N. India); in other words, even after some 150 years of studying the texts, a dark mist still covers the whole Vedic period, which makes it very difficult to make out who did what, where, and at what time. The only point usually admitted is the relative chronology of the texts (see below § 4.2.1, 4.2.5), and even in this area there is no general agreement. I believe that we can finally move a few steps further. I have tried to localise as many texts as possible in the Fel. Vol. Eggermont (Louvain 1986/7). The absolute dates of the texts remain in balance, if we do not take refuge in external evidence like the Mitanni agreement of ca. 1380 B.C., 7hich mentions the Vedic gods, or the often discussed date of the Buddha and the age of the older Upaniṣads. The results are summarised in the maps and in the tables provided below where the texts are dated according to the linguistic developments found in them.10 On this basis, we can observe a number of dialect divergencies in the post Ṛgvedic (i.e. Middle Vedic) texts. I refrain here, to a large extent, from dealing with the RV, as this text is clearly much older and limited to the Panjab and its surroundings. The AV knows all of the N. Indian plains of the Ganges-Yamunā doab / Uttar Pradesh.