VyÄkaraį¹a (pronounced as /sa/) refers to one of the six ancient Vedangas, ancillary science connected with the Vedas, which are scriptures in Hinduism.[1] VyÄkaraį¹a is the study of grammar and linguistic analysis in the Sanskrit language.[2] [3]
PÄį¹ini and YÄska are the two celebrated ancient scholars of VyÄkaraį¹a; both are dated to several centuries prior to the start of the common era, with PÄį¹ini likely from the fifth century BCE. PÄį¹ini's Aį¹£į¹ÄdhyÄyÄ« is the most important surviving text of the VyÄkaraį¹a traditions. This text, as its very title suggests, consists of eight chapters, each divided into four padas, cumulatively containing 4000 sutras. The text is preceded by abbreviation rules grouping the phonemes of Sanskrit. PÄį¹ini quotes ten ancient authorities whose texts have not survived, but they are believed to have been VyÄkaraį¹a scholars.
VyÄkaraį¹a is related to the fourth VedÄnga called Nirukta. VyÄkaraį¹a scholarship has dealt with linguistic analysis to establish the exact form of words to properly express ideas, and Nirukta scholarship has focused on linguistic analysis to help establish the proper meaning of the words in context.
VyÄkaraį¹a (pronounced as /sa/) means "separation, distinction, discrimination, analysis, explanation" of something.[4] It also refers to one of the six VedÄngas, or the Vedic field of language analysis, specifically grammatical analysis, grammar, linguistic conventions which creates, polishes, helps a writer express and helps a reader discriminate accurate language.[5]
The word VyÄkaraį¹a is also found in Mahayana sutras and first-millennium Mahayana Buddhist texts, but with a different meaning. VyÄkaraį¹a, in these Buddhist texts, means a prediction or prophecy by a Buddha to a Bodhisattva who has just embarked on the path, that he will achieve enlightenment and be a buddha, in other words, an enlightened one.[4]
See also: Sanskrit grammar.
VyÄkaraį¹a emerged as a distinct auxiliary field of Vedic study in ancient times.[6] Its aim was to prevent sloppy usage and transmission of the Vedic knowledge, states Howard Coward ā a professor emeritus at the University of Victoria and the founding editor of the Journal for Hindu-Christian Studies. VyÄkaraį¹a helped ensure that the Vedic scriptures of Hinduism and its message of "Sabda Brahman" (explanation of metaphysical truths through words) that Vedic Rishis had realized by their efforts, remains available to all in a pristine form. In Indian traditions, VyÄkaraį¹a has been one of the most important sciences, one extensively studied over its history, and that led to major treatises in the philosophy of language.
PÄį¹ini and YÄska, two celebrated ancient scholars of VyÄkaraį¹a, are both dated to several centuries prior to the start of the common era, likely the 5th-century BCE. However, both of them cite prior scholars and texts, which though lost to history, imply that the field of VyÄkaraį¹a was an established and developed science of language before them. Between the two, Yaksa may be the older one and more known for Nirukta (etymology) ā the fourth auxiliary field of Vedic studies, but the evidence for him preceding PÄį¹ini is scanty and uncertain. In terms of dedicated treatise on VyÄkaraį¹a, PÄį¹ini is the most recognized ancient Hindu scholar, and his Aį¹£į¹ÄdhyÄyÄ« ("Eight Chapters") is the most studied extant ancient manuscript on Sanskrit grammar. PÄį¹ini's fame spread outside India, and the reverence for ancient PÄį¹ini in northwest India is mentioned in Chinese texts of Xuanzang ā the 7th-century traveller and scholar.[7]
The study of grammar and the structure of language is traceable to the Rigveda, or 2nd millennium BCE, in hymns attributed to sage Sakalya. Sakalya is acknowledged by PÄį¹ini's works. The literary evidence that the science of VyÄkaraį¹a existed in Vedic times abound in the Brahmanas, Aranyakas and Upanishads, states Moriz Winternitz. The extant manuscripts of PÄį¹ini and Yaksa suggest that the Vedic age had competing schools of grammar. One school, for example, held that all nouns have verbal roots, while another held that not all nouns have verbal roots. However, it is unclear how, who or when these ancient Vedic theories of grammar originated, because those texts have not survived into the modern era.
There were many schools of Sanskrit grammar in ancient India, all established before the mid 1st-millennium BCE. PÄį¹ini's Aį¹£į¹ÄdhyÄyÄ«, which eclipsed all other ancient schools of grammar, mentions the names of ten grammarians.[8] [9] [10]). Some of these pre-PÄį¹inian scholars mentioned by PÄį¹ini include Apisali, Kasyapa, Gargya, Galava, Cakravarmana, Bharadvaja, Sakatayana, Sakalya, Senaka and Sphoį¹ayÄna.[8]
The works of most these authors are lost but we find reference of their ideas in the commentaries and rebuttals by later authors. YÄska's Nirukta is one of the earlier surviving texts, and he mentions ÅÄkaį¹Äyana, Krauį¹£į¹uki, GÄrgya among others.
PÄį¹ini's Aį¹£į¹ÄdhyÄyÄ« is the most ancient extant manuscript on VyÄkaraį¹a. It is a complete and descriptive treatise on Sanskrit grammar in aphoristic sutras format. This text attracted a famous and one of the most ancient commentary (bhÄį¹£ya) called the MahÄbhÄį¹£ya. The author of the MahÄbhÄį¹£ya is named PataƱjali, who may or may not be the same person as the one who authored Yogasutras.[11] The MahÄbhÄį¹£ya, or "Great Commentary", is more than a commentary on the Aį¹£į¹ÄdhyÄyÄ«, it is the earliest known philosophical text of the Hindu grammarians. Non-Hindu texts and traditions on grammar emerged after PataƱjali, some of which include the Sanskrit grammar by the Jain author Jainendra and the CÄndra grammar by the Buddhist Candragomin.[12]
Later Indian scholars simplified PÄį¹ini rules, and trimmed his compilation of sutras to essential 1,400 from comprehensive 4,000, eliminating those they felt were too difficult and complicated or those narrowly concerned with Vedic language. Non-Hindu traditions, such as Jainism and Buddhism, developed their own VyÄkaraį¹a literature, but all of them are dated to the 1st-millennium CE, all of them condensed PÄį¹ini, accepted and flowered largely from his theories of VyÄkaraį¹a.
The 5th-century Hindu scholar Bhartį¹hari has been the next most influential VyÄkaraį¹a thinker, wherein he presented his philosophy of grammar and how language affects thoughts. His theories on "philosophical problem of meaning", contained in the VÄkyapadÄ«ya, has been unique, states Howard Coward. Bhartį¹hari is considered to be a major architect of the "sphoį¹a theory" of meaning, in the Hindu traditions.
Bhartį¹hari ideas were widely studied, but challenged as well in the last half of the first millennium, particularly by the, MÄ«mÄį¹sÄ school of Hindu philosophy and by Dharmakirti of Buddhism. The Advaita Vedanta school of Hinduism defended the ideas of Bhartį¹hari.
About the seventh century, the KÄÅikÄvį¹ttÄ« co-authored by Jayaditya and Vamana, and the tenth century studies of Helaraja on VyÄkaraį¹a were the next major milestone. These Hindu texts were not only commented in Hindu tradition, but were the foundation of works of the Buddhist Jinendrabuddhi who is known for his grammar insights in Buddhist literature.
The most studied VyÄkaraį¹a scholars of early and mid-second millennium are Ksirasvamin, Haradatta, Maitreya Rakshita, and Kaiyata. The modern era VyÄkaraį¹a scholars have included Bhattoji Dikshita, Konda Bhatta and Nagesha Bhatta.
Between 1250 and 1450 AnubhÅ«ti SvarÅ«pÄcÄrya created a simplified grammatical system called SÄrasvatavyÄkaraį¹a.
In the 14th century grammarian Padmanabhadatta, founder of the Supadma School, composed the SupadmavyÄkaraį¹a.[13] The text is based on PÄį¹ini's Ashtadhyayi, but remodeled and rearranged with explanatory notes. It is written in Bengali alphabet, making it accessible to the Bengal provinces by removing the complexity of Sanskrit grammar.[14] The main objective of Padmanabhadatta was to make knowledge of Sanskrit grammar clear and simple and to Sanskritize the new words that developed in the language.
In terms of the place of VyÄkaraį¹a scholarship over South Asian history, from ancient to 16th-century, Kashmir, Kerala, Nepal, Andhra Pradesh, Varanasi and Bengal have been influential, but the location of many VyÄkaraį¹a scholars is unknown.
PÄį¹ini's text Aį¹£į¹ÄdhyÄyÄ« is in sutras format, has eight chapters, and cumulative total of 4,000 sutras. These rules are preceded by a list of fourteen groups of sounds, in three sections called the Shiva-sutra, Pratyahara-sutra and Maheshvara-sutra. The Aį¹£į¹ÄdhyÄyÄ« groups the rules of language, for clear expression and understanding, into two, the verbal (Dhatupatha) and the nominal bases (Ganapatha). The text consists of an analytical part covered in the first five chapters, and a synthetic part found in the last three chapters.
The Aį¹£į¹ÄdhyÄyÄ« manuscript has survived with sets of ancillary texts (appendices) whose dates of composition and authors are contested. The main text is notable for its details and systematic nature, syntactic functions and arranging the sutras in an algorithmic fashion where the grammar rules typically apply in the order of sutras.
The Aį¹£į¹ÄdhyÄyÄ« sutras were widely studied and a subject of the bhÄį¹£ya (review and commentary) tradition of Hinduism. The oldest emendation and commentary on the Aį¹£į¹ÄdhyÄyÄ« is attributed to KÄtyÄyana (~3rd century BCE), followed by the famous MahÄbhÄį¹£ya of PataƱjali (~2nd century BCE) which has survived into the modern age. Other commentaries on the Aį¹£į¹ÄdhyÄyÄ« likely existed, because they are cited by other Indian scholars, but these texts are believed to be lost to history.
PÄį¹ini writes that the Anjna (popular usage of a word) is the superseding authority, and the theoretically derived meaning of a word must be discarded and instead superseded by that which is the popular usage. The artha (meaning) of a shabda (word) is established by popular usage at the time the text was composed, not by etymological theory nor historical usage nor later usage.
A sentence is a collection of words, a word is a collection of phonemes, states PÄį¹ini. The meaning of Vedic passages has to be understood through context, the purpose stated, keeping in mind the subject matter being discussed, what is stated, how, where and when.
The Aį¹£į¹ÄdhyÄyÄ« tradition of Sanskrit language, with some reservations, accepts the premise that all words have verbal roots, and that words are created by affixing fragments to these roots. However, PÄį¹ini asserts that it is impossible to derive all nouns from verbal roots.
The Aį¹£į¹ÄdhyÄyÄ« is primarily focussed on the study of words, how words are formed, and their correct architecture. However, it does not exclude syntax. PÄį¹ini includes the discussion of sentence structure. The text, state Howard and Raja, describes compound word formation based on syntactic and semantic considerations, such as in sutra 2.1.1.
PÄį¹ini asserts that a proper sentence has a single purpose, and is formed from a group of words such that, on analysis, the separate words are found to be mutually expecting each other. A sentence, states PÄį¹ini, must have syntactic unity, which includes mutual expectancy (ÄkankshÄ) of the words and phonetic contiguity (Sannidhi) of construction. PÄį¹ini adds semantic fitness (YogyatÄ), but not tacitly. He accepts that a sentence can be grammatically correct even if it is semantically inappropriate or a deviant.
The Aį¹£į¹ÄdhyÄyÄ« describes numerous usage of words, and how the meaning of a word is driven by overall context of the sentences and composition it is found in. The popular usage and meaning of a word at the time the text was composed supersedes the historical or etymologically derived meanings of that word. A word has the conventional meaning at the time the text was composed, but it is not so when it is quoted (cited or referred to) from another prior art text. In the latter case, the Sanskrit word is suffixed with iti (literally, thus), whereupon it means what the prior text meant it to be.
YÄska asserted that both the meaning and the etymology of words is always context dependent.
VyÄkaraį¹a in the Hindu traditions has been a study of both the syntax structure of sentences, as well as the architecture of a word. For instance, PÄį¹ini asserts that grammar is about the means of semantically connecting a word with other words to express and understand meaning, and words are to be analyzed in the context they are used. KÄtyÄyana is quoted in PataƱjali's MahÄbhÄį¹£ya on VyÄkaraį¹a as asserting the nature of a sentence as follows:
Similarly, Sayana asserts the scope of VyÄkaraį¹a to be as follows:
A word that is a verb is concerned with bhava (to become), while a noun is concerned with sattva (to be, reality as it is). Sattva and bhava are two aspects of the same existence seen from the static and dynamic points of view. Verbs according to VyÄkaraį¹a indicate action in a temporal sequence while nouns are static elements, states K Kunjunni Raja.
PataƱjali's 2nd-century BCE MahÄbhÄį¹£ya is another important ancient text in VyÄkaraį¹a scholarship. It is not a full commentary on everything PÄį¹ini wrote in Aį¹£į¹ÄdhyÄyÄ«, but it is more a commentary on KÄtyÄyana's text on grammar called Varttikas, as well as the ideas of Vyadi. While KÄtyÄyana's additions have survived, Vyadi have not.
The KÄtyÄyana's text reflects an admiration for PÄį¹ini, an analysis of his rules, their simplification and refinement. The differences between the grammar rules of PÄį¹ini and of KÄtyÄyana may be because of historical changes to Sanskrit language over the centuries, state Howard Coward and K Kunjunni Raja.
The VÄkyapadÄ«ya of Bhartį¹hari is a treatise on the philosophy of language, building on the insights of prior VyÄkaraį¹a scholarship.[15]
According to Bhartį¹hari, states Scharfstein, all thought and all knowledge are "words", every word has an outward expression and inward meaning.[15] A word may have a definition in isolation but it has meaning only in the context of a sentence.[15] Grammar is a basic science in the Hindu traditions, explains Scharfstein, where it is externally expressed as relations between words, but ultimately internally understood as reflecting relations between the different levels of reality.[15] Word is considered a form of energy in this Hindu text, one with the potential to transform a latent mind and realize the soul.[15] Language evolves to express the transient material world first, and thereon to express feelings, the human desire for meaning in life and the spiritual inner world.[15]
In YÄska's time, nirukta "etymology" was in fact a school which gave information of formation of words, the etymological derivation of words. According to the nairuktas or "etymologists", all nouns are derived from a verbal root. YÄska defends this view and attributes it to ÅÄkaį¹Äyana. While others believed that there are some words which are "Rudhi Words". 'Rudhi" means custom. Meaning they are a part of language due to custom, and a correspondence between the word and the thing if it be a noun or correspondence between an act and the word if it be a verb root. Such word can not be derived from verbal roots.YÄska also reports the view of GÄrgya, who opposed ÅÄkaį¹Äyana who held that certain nominal stems were 'atomic' and not to be derived from verbal roots[16]
The VyÄkaraį¹a texts have been highly influential on Hindu philosophies. The concept of a sentence (vakya) defined by PÄį¹ini, for instance, influenced and was similar to Jaimini, the later era founder of MÄ«mÄį¹sÄ school of Hindu philosophy. However, ritual-focussed Mimamsa school scholars were generally opposed to central ideas of the Hindu Grammarians, while others Hindu schools such as Vedanta championed them.
PÄį¹ini's work on VyÄkaraį¹a has been called by George Cardona as "one of the greatest monuments of human intelligence".
