What is the origin of Jat Language.

[deepakchoudhry]

I was looking up on information on "Prakrit" The Language of the Vedas.

And I found something interesting, which I would like to share with you.

1) Contrary to all beliefs, Sanskrit is not the mother of all languages rather it has been derived from Parkrit. Samskrit literally means polished or cultured.

To quickly illustrate my point, If we look at the Maruya period who spoke pali / Prakrit. There was no mention of Sanskrit and there is plenty of evidence to support this. Sanskrit is mentioned much after this period.

As a matter of fact there is no mention of Sanskrit language in Vedas, which predates everything....but this topic is for another time.


2) Now something that might interests Jats; Language spoken in and around the region of North India (in particular rajasthan) has origins in Prakrit we all know that and also rajasthani (or similar languages) was the language spoken by Scythes.

Hence based on this information can we safely say Origins of Jats is Scythic and their language has come from PRAKRIT.

Your comments.

Deepak

PS: If I have repeated something which already has been commented on..pls excuse.

 

[choudhary_tapan]

this is really interesting thing to know about...m not sure about this but would like to know more...what is the basic difference of the Prakrit from Sanskrit...thanks

 

[narenderkharb]

1) Contrary to all beliefs, Sanskrit is not the mother of all languages rather it has been derived from Parkrit. Samskrit literally means polished or cultured.

To quickly illustrate my point, If we look at the Maruya period who spoke pali / Prakrit. There was no mention of Sanskrit and there is plenty of evidence to support this. Sanskrit is mentioned much after this period.

As a matter of fact there is no mention of Sanskrit language in Vedas, which predates everything....but this topic is for another time.


2) Now something that might interests Jats; Language spoken in and around the region of North India (in particular rajasthan) has origins in Prakrit we all know that and also rajasthani (or similar languages) was the language spoken by Scythes.

Hence based on this information can we safely say Origins of Jats is Scythic and their language has come from PRAKRIT.

Your comments.

Deepak

PS: If I have repeated something which already has been commented on..pls excuse.

Deepak you have just restated a TRUTH that is well known to all the historians but concealed or ignored due to their own vested interests.

Prakrit is the oldest not the sanskrit and there is no other language between the original prakrit of indus valley and modern jat language of Haryana up rajasthan or punjab.

Some attempts by some historians with vested interests to insert sanskrit and vedas in indian history has just muddled the Indian as well as Jat history and we are forced to trace our own roots in supposedly great vedas that have seen indus areas later than Jats of great Indus valley civilization.

This has given rise to unnecceary controversy as Aryan Invasion theory that really doesn't exist.

If we just negate such myths as sanskrit ancient to prakrit the history of INDIA is just simple with no controversie.

I have often challanged such persons to have a discussion but they just run away after some posts seeing the fallacy of their line of argument.

Our respected historians too fall for this lure of relating ourselves to vedas as they were belived most ancient and jats too living here from day one but result was counterproductive denying our own jat past of Indus valley Civilization.

I request all rational thinking members to argue and challange me or anybodyelse to dispel myths and search our true past.


PS Prakrit was not the language of vedas that was ancient sanskrit related to faraway mittani language.

 

[sktewatia]

slowly from jat languages, the other languages were derived, wherever went Jats. these were called Indo-european languages, initially n till today. these indo-european languages were made systematic from time 2 time n that systematic language was called as sanskrit.

panini's sanskrit was different from veda's sanskrit. however, it was Jat who spread it as the most popularly speaking language in the world. today 3 billion people speak these Jat(indo-european) languages.

 

[sktewatia]

these languages were made systematic not only in india but outside also. like latin, greek, english, dutch, french, iranian,......etc.

The Indo-European languages comprise a family of several hundred languages and dialects <SUP class=reference id=_ref-0>[1]</SUP>, including most of the major languages of Europe, as well as many spoken in Southwest Asia, Central Asia and South Asia. Contemporary languages in this family with more than 100 million native speakers each include Hindi, Spanish, English, Portuguese, Bengali, Russian, French, German and Punjabi. Numerous national or minority languages with fewer than 100 million native speakers also exist. Indo-European has the largest numbers of speakers of the recognised families of languages in the world today, with its languages spoken by approximately 3 billion native speakers.<SUP class=reference id=_ref-1>[2]</SUP> The Indo-Iranian languages form the largest sub-branch of Indo-European

 

[sktewatia]

However, the original composer of these languages was Jat in Indus Valley. from where they spread all out to whole India n Europe n other parts of the world.

Hence, till today known as Indo-European languages.

--------------------------------------------------------------

Sanskrit means systematic in Sanskrit itself. proves that it was not the original language but was made systematic from time to time n place to place.


Even our Haryanvi, Braj, Punjabi, Pashtoon, Bhojpuri, .... etc. are older than Sanskrit, at least Panini's Sanskrit.
.

 

[lrburdak]

The subject of this thread is very interesting. So far we are not able to fix properly the origin of Jats itself. Origin of Jats and their languages go together. In literature Jat language is not mentioned as such any where. It is true that Prakrat is oldest language and used in Jat areas. We can safeky assume Sauraseni as the language of Jats and it is part of Prakrit languages. Here is some excerpt from Wikipedia about Prakrit language which may be useful as it has defined as "original, natural, artless, normal, ordinary, usual", i.e. "vernacular", (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prakrit):

Prakrit (Sanskrit prākṛta प्राकृत (from pra-kṛti प्रकृति), "original, natural, artless, normal, ordinary, usual", i.e. "vernacular", in contrast to samskrta "excellently made", both adjectives elliptically referring to vak "speech") refers to the broad family of the Indic languages and dialects spoken in ancient India. The Prakrits became literary languages, generally patronized by kings identified with the ksatriya caste, but were regarded as illegitimate by the Brahmin orthodoxy. The earliest extant use of Prakrit are the inscriptions of Asoka, emperor of Northern India, and while the various Prakrit languages are associated with different patron dynasties, with different religions and different literary traditions, none of them were at any time an informal "mother tongue" in any area of India.

In Sanskrit drama, kings speak in Prakrit when addressing women or servants, in contrast to the Sanskrit used in reciting more formal poetic monologues.

The three Dramatic Prakrits - Sauraseni, Magadhi, Maharashtri, as well as Jain Prakrit each represent a distinct tradition of literature within the history of India. Other Prakrits are reported in historical sources, but have no extant corpus (e.g., Paisaci).

Prakrit is foremost a native term, designating "vernaculars" as opposed to Sanskrit. Some modern scholars follow this classification by including all Middle Indo-Aryan languages under the rubric of "Prakrits", while others emphasise the independent development of these languages, often separated from the history of Sanskrit by wide divisions of caste, religion, and geography. Ardhamagadhi, which was used extensively to write Jain scriptures, is the definitive form of Prakrit, while others are considered variants. Courses teaching Prakrit teach Ardhamagadhi often.

Pali (the language of Theravada orthodoxy) tends to be treated as a special exception, as classical (Sanskrit) grammars do not consider it as a Prakrit per se, presumably for sectarian rather than linguistic reasons.

 

[vinodks]

Narender, we will address the question of Jats being native Harappan people separately, here I would request you to provide proofs that Prakrit is older than sanskrit.

Ealier texts in Prakrit were written in Ashoka's time whereas ealiest texts in sanskrit were written 2000 years earlier. Sanskrit became langue of learned people when Prakrit became language of mass.
Here I would make few points clear. Prakrit (and so the language of agriculture population of north India) has some words which are not IE but of Melachhan origin, (Witzel claims 40% of words for agricultural objects in north India are not IE but he doesn't give examples) and they may have come from Harappan culture. But Prakrit is closely related to Sanskrit in its fundamental structure and the former may have just evolved from the later. As for scripts, some say prakrit script is closer to Harappan and devnagri may have evolved from Brahmni script. Would request you to go through

http://www.boloji.com/history/021.htm

and

http://www.ancientscripts.com/brahmi.html

Prakrit may have some non-IE words which may have come from Harappan culture but as an language they doesn't form different class. Commonness of words between langauges doesn't prove their affinity and similarity difference in script is also very superficial. There are more fundamental attributes of language which classify languages in different classes. Malyalam has more than 50% words from sanskrit, same is the case with Telgu. Tamil also has lots of words from sanskrit but that doesn't mean they are related. Thats because of Sanskritzation of South. Right now I am reading a book "Teach yourself: Linguitics", once I am through I would be interested in comparative study of languages.

But please give proofs that Prakrit is older than Sanskrit. Even thought Brahmai script is older than Devnagri, that doesn't prove your claim. Finally you may say that Prakrit is older than Classical Sanskrit but not Vedic sanskrit which you have already agreed to

"PS Prakrit was not the language of vedas that was ancient sanskrit related to faraway mittani language"

So Sanskrit is the oldest language.

-vinod

Deepak you have just restated a TRUTH that is well known to all the historians but concealed or ignored due to their own vested interests.

Prakrit is the oldest not the sanskrit and there is no other language between the original prakrit of indus valley and modern jat language of Haryana up rajasthan or punjab.

Some attempts by some historians with vested interests to insert sanskrit and vedas in indian history has just muddled the Indian as well as Jat history and we are forced to trace our own roots in supposedly great vedas that have seen indus areas later than Jats of great Indus valley civilization.

This has given rise to unnecceary controversy as Aryan Invasion theory that really doesn't exist.

If we just negate such myths as sanskrit ancient to prakrit the history of INDIA is just simple with no controversie.

I have often challanged such persons to have a discussion but they just run away after some posts seeing the fallacy of their line of argument.

Our respected historians too fall for this lure of relating ourselves to vedas as they were belived most ancient and jats too living here from day one but result was counterproductive denying our own jat past of Indus valley Civilization.

I request all rational thinking members to argue and challange me or anybodyelse to dispel myths and search our true past.


PS Prakrit was not the language of vedas that was ancient sanskrit related to faraway mittani language.

 

[sktewatia]

Comparison of antiquity of Sanskrit with original Indo-european languages is absurd. Sanskrit Grammer kept revising from time to time, and place to place. So, the question is that which Sanskrit we are comparing.

 

[sktewatia]

Narender, we will address the question of Jats being native Harappan people separately, here I would request you to provide proofs that Prakrit is older than sanskrit.

Ealier texts in Prakrit were written in Ashoka's time whereas ealiest texts in sanskrit were written 2000 years earlier. Sanskrit became langue of learned people when Prakrit became language of mass.
Here I would make few points clear. Prakrit (and so the language of agriculture population of north India) has some words which are not IE but of Melachhan origin, (Witzel claims 40% of words for agricultural objects in north India are not IE but he doesn't give examples) and they may have come from Harappan culture. But Prakrit is closely related to Sanskrit in its fundamental structure and the former may have just evolved from the later. As for scripts, some say prakrit script is closer to Harappan and devnagri may have evolved from Brahmni script. Would request you to go through

http://www.boloji.com/history/021.htm

and

http://www.ancientscripts.com/brahmi.html

Prakrit may have some non-IE words which may have come from Harappan culture but as an language they doesn't form different class. Commonness of words between langauges doesn't prove their affinity and similarity difference in script is also very superficial. There are more fundamental attributes of language which classify languages in different classes. Malyalam has more than 50% words from sanskrit, same is the case with Telgu. Tamil also has lots of words from sanskrit but that doesn't mean they are related. Thats because of Sanskritzation of South. Right now I am reading a book "Teach yourself: Linguitics", once I am through I would be interested in comparative study of languages.

But please give proofs that Prakrit is older than Sanskrit. Even thought Brahmai script is older than Devnagri, that doesn't prove your claim. Finally you may say that Prakrit is older than Classical Sanskrit but not Vedic sanskrit which you have already agreed to

"PS Prakrit was not the language of vedas that was ancient sanskrit related to faraway mittani language"

So Sanskrit is the oldest language.

-vinod

Sanskrit, at least, can not be the oldest language. Sanskrit means systematic. whom will u make systematic if u have nothing with u?

Today's Hindi is not the same as it used to be 100 years ago. Its bolchal ki Hindi/Saral Hindi that today we people use. This bolchal ki hindi contains many words from arabian, persian, english, pashtoon etc.. But modern Hindi Grammer recognises that. Modern English Grammer also is not the same as it used to be 100 years back. The hindi words like jungle, lathi charge, jail, gherao etc. are well recognised in it. American english is bit different from classical english where as you speak exactly you write in spelling like nite instead of night; behavior instead of behaviour etc.

comparing antiquity of Sanskrit with other original Indo-European languages is an absurd comparison.

 

[narenderkharb]

Narender, we will address the question of Jats being native Harappan people separately, here I would request you to provide proofs that Prakrit is older than sanskrit.

Ealier texts in Prakrit were written in Ashoka's time whereas ealiest texts in sanskrit were written 2000 years earlier. Sanskrit became langue of learned people when Prakrit became language of mass.
Here I would make few points clear. Prakrit (and so the language of agriculture population of north India) has some words which are not IE but of Melachhan origin, (Witzel claims 40% of words for agricultural objects in north India are not IE but he doesn't give examples) and they may have come from Harappan culture. But Prakrit is closely related to Sanskrit in its fundamental structure and the former may have just evolved from the later. As for scripts, some say prakrit script is closer to Harappan and devnagri may have evolved from Brahmni script. Would request you to go through

http://www.boloji.com/history/021.htm

and

http://www.ancientscripts.com/brahmi.html

Prakrit may have some non-IE words which may have come from Harappan culture but as an language they doesn't form different class. Commonness of words between langauges doesn't prove their affinity and similarity difference in script is also very superficial. There are more fundamental attributes of language which classify languages in different classes. Malyalam has more than 50% words from sanskrit, same is the case with Telgu. Tamil also has lots of words from sanskrit but that doesn't mean they are related. Thats because of Sanskritzation of South. Right now I am reading a book "Teach yourself: Linguitics", once I am through I would be interested in comparative study of languages.

But please give proofs that Prakrit is older than Sanskrit. Even thought Brahmai script is older than Devnagri, that doesn't prove your claim. Finally you may say that Prakrit is older than Classical Sanskrit but not Vedic sanskrit which you have already agreed to

"PS Prakrit was not the language of vedas that was ancient sanskrit related to faraway mittani language"

So Sanskrit is the oldest language.

-vinod

Vinod it is nice you are discussing now otherwise you were just taking pot shots at jat history on jatland as was evident from your post on Nonica dutt book without ever coming to challange any of us.

Though you have already discused Indus valley once and accepted that jats may have been the author of this civilization but we can discuss it again for your assurance.

Now let us see what we say and what you say regarding sanskrit and parakrit.

We say that there is no sanskrit in between jat prakrit language of today and that of inhabitants of Indus valley civilization.

You say that first sanskrit language was evolved in 2000 years earlier than Ashoka.let us say appox.2200 or 2300 BC.

Than you say that sanskrit was the language of learned or ruling class as per your reference.

And parakrit became the language of farmers .ok.

Now please tell me how do you arrived on your conclusion that sanskrit was the language of learned or ruling class...How??

I want straight answers not that it was told by baloji .com. etc.

Secondly the people of Indus valley are said to be culturally advance learned etc..etc..Why they forgot sanskrit completely.Why these learned people started using the melussa language of farmers noted by your own favourite kalyanraman.

Though we find parakrit language inscriptions from the begining why we find sanskrit at such a late date as 150 ad. by rudaradaman Why...?

The first sanskrit compostion is reported by panini so late as between 300 to 400 bc but still I don't find him in India or even in pakistan He was a afghani native but never mind why even after that kushans used parakrit not sanskrit.

Will you say that sanskrit originated from parakrit or parakrit originated from sanskrit.

If sanskrit was the language of learned than why all the buddha literature or texts not written in sanskrit as this should have been the language known to literates both writers and readers.

Than how can you come to the conclusion that sanskrit even existed in 2300 BC IN India. when we don't find a proof for that in contemporary Indus valley or afterward period till its first recorded literatue in Afghanistan after 2000 years .Give me a single evidence of its existence in 2200BC .JUST ONE.


Ps..please don't take my environmental effect in other post in a negative way your belief in what ever Baloji .com wrote illustrate what I wanted to convey.Enviroment do effect us ,even Darwin accepted it.

 

[sktewatia]

rudradaman was a foreighner jat. its true that he created the first sanskrit inscription in india, rather in the world. gutas too encouraged it. n it was in their cour that ruling jats used to speak sanskrit n other common class n even jats used to speak vernacular jat languages.

these indo-european jat languages were not being made systematic in India only but outside also, like rome, latin, english,... etc. however, its true that in systematisation India was par excellent as compared to other places.

india's sankritisation or systematisation was much ahead of other grammarians and literates wordwide.

even as late as a few years back I read that Indias sanskrit is more suitable to computer language as compared to any other language in the world.

 

[sktewatia]

Narenderji, sometimes it looks that you are very true. There is no mass scale confrontation found in Indus valley. What we see from archaeology is plain truth. I'll advise again as earlier try to decipher Indus script. Its true we were having script before vedas. Yet vedas are called as shruti- means they were transferred orally from generation to generation in the absence of writing skills. Indian history shows contradictions sometimes and wherever contradiction comes there is a point to explore and think where what has gone wrong?

 

[sktewatia]

Deepak you have just restated a TRUTH that is well known to all the historians but concealed or ignored due to their own vested interests.

Prakrit is the oldest not the sanskrit and there is no other language between the original prakrit of indus valley and modern jat language of Haryana up rajasthan or punjab.

Some attempts by some historians with vested interests to insert sanskrit and vedas in indian history has just muddled the Indian as well as Jat history and we are forced to trace our own roots in supposedly great vedas that have seen indus areas later than Jats of great Indus valley civilization.

This has given rise to unnecceary controversy as Aryan Invasion theory that really doesn't exist.

If we just negate such myths as sanskrit ancient to prakrit the history of INDIA is just simple with no controversie

Dr. Rao, used to stress a lot on it. Once Firuz Tughlak saw Asoka pillar in Ambala and braught it to Delhi, called Pundits to decipher what was written on it. However, it was in 1837 that a british civil servant James Princep deciphered it. Indus script is not pictographic. If you really take pain its not far fetched thats what Dr. Rao used to say.

 

[vinodks]

We say that there is no sanskrit in between jat prakrit language of today and that of inhabitants of Indus valley civilization.

You say that first sanskrit language was evolved in 2000 years earlier than Ashoka.let us say appox.2200 or 2300 BC.

Than you say that sanskrit was the language of learned or ruling class as per your reference.

And parakrit became the language of farmers .ok.

Now please tell me how do you arrived on your conclusion that sanskrit was the language of learned or ruling class...How??

Earlier sanskrit was language of everyone in Aryan tribes. Later on it became language of elite people when they came in interaction with Indus valley people. As per language of Harappan people, nobody knows for sure. Our Jattu language is deformed version of Hindi and so of sanskrit with some non-IE words, which might be remnant from original Harappan language.

I want straight answers not that it was told by baloji .com. etc.

Secondly the people of Indus valley are said to be culturally advance learned etc..etc..Why they forgot sanskrit completely.Why these learned people started using the melussa language of farmers noted by your own favourite kalyanraman.

Sanskrit wasn't language of Indus valley otherwise they wouldn't have written seals in undecipherable script. I disagree with people like Dr K in their claims that Sanskrit was language of Harappan people but they preferred to write seals in coded languge for security purposes, symbols or so. In fact, Dr K uses Mlechha language in his decipherment efforts. According to him, most of the seals are names of maker of seal or name of the furnance where it was molded or the name of the merchant whose product it represents. He stresses role of metalurgy in the trade and meaning of seals should be interpreted along those lines. He convincingly (I wont say successfully) demonstrates meaning of few seals but it goes little too far when even "Soma" is interpreted name of metal rather than a drink. But anyway the point is importance of Mlechha in intrepretation of seals.

But Indus valley sites DO show archeological symbols resembliing vedic culture like fire altars, linga etc. Fire worshiping (IE culture) and liga cults might have been already popular in Indus valley before "Vedic sanskrit" influence. Here IE culture has broader meaning than "vedic sanskrit". Indus people might be speaking something similar to Mlechha and those words got intermixed with sanskrit but modern structure of Jattu language is similar to Hindi and so to Sanskrit whereas influence of Mlechha is limited to some archiac words. I might be wrong in this but would accpet contrary proofs.

Though we find parakrit language inscriptions from the begining why we find sanskrit at such a late date as 150 ad. by rudaradaman Why...?

What prakrit inscription you are talking about? Is there any inscription before Ashoka?

The first sanskrit compostion is reported by panini so late as between 300 to 400 bc but still I don't find him in India or even in pakistan He was a afghani native but never mind why even after that kushans used parakrit not sanskrit.

Afganistan was part of India. As I said by this time Prakrit had become language of mass. I still need to find out, how much influence has sanskrit on prakrit? How diff are two language? IS the diff limited to few words?

Will you say that sanskrit originated from parakrit or parakrit originated from sanskrit.

If sanskrit was the language of learned than why all the buddha literature or texts not written in sanskrit as this should have been the language known to literates both writers and readers.

Budhha's message was meant to reach to common people so he chose language of people. Many Budhhist scripture are in sanskrit also BTW.

Than how can you come to the conclusion that sanskrit even existed in 2300 BC IN India. when we don't find a proof for that in contemporary Indus valley or afterward period till its first recorded literatue in Afghanistan after 2000 years .Give me a single evidence of its existence in 2200BC .JUST ONE.

Do you want to say Vedas were initially written in prakrit or some other language and later on were translated to sankrit? Isn't Vedic sanskrit mother of IE languages?

-vinod

 

[narenderkharb]

Now you have taken a 180 degree turn from your earlier stand regarding AIT.

Do you now believe that Aryn invasion really took place.Just read any link see the arguments and than say why you think so.

Which group than you assosiate jats with Native or invading vedics.

Do you think that earlier sanskrit was spoken than meleccha was spoken than
again sanskrit than hindi and than haryanvi derived out of it as per your suggestion.Please clear what you want to say .

BTW Hindi is just derived from khari boli of braj and delhi areas with some influence of persian and arabic language .It is not older than eighteenth century and these are elimentary facts told in the evolution of Hindi .

Haryanvi Rajasthani are much ancient than that.

Do you suggest that meleccha and parakrit languages infact were spoken differently .How..?

Vinod If you just clear your picture on your stand regarding AIT jats nativity than we can argue in a better way.

I think Sanskrit and vedas originated in europian lands remembered and finally compiled somwhere in eastern iran or baluchistan.

Now Do you say Afghanistan was in India.I had the impression it was bordered by himalayas. Thinking of buddhas and panini ajatsatru etc himalaya formed its northern boundary ,than how you included it in India of ajatsatru or nanda periods.If you talk of cultural influence than what you say of turkistan whose people always called them aryan or ujbekistan that was included in kushan period ,was that also India?

 

[vinodks]

Now you have taken a 180 degree turn from your earlier stand regarding AIT.

I would say 90 degree. At that time I had read only one book on topic, now four. I dont believe in AIT version as portrayed by leftist neither does right-wing's defence convinces me completely. Truth is somewhere in between. My stand is that, there was Aryan influence from outside but it was more complex than invasion or migration. No doubt, India culture was very advanced at that time and some Aryan features like fire worshiping etc could have been already present in Harappan culture.

Do you now believe that Aryn invasion really took place.Just read any link see the arguments and than say why you think so.

Which group than you assosiate jats with Native or invading vedics.

Could be both. Native Harappan, Aryan and later some clans coming in even later.

Do you think that earlier sanskrit was spoken than meleccha was spoken than again sanskrit than hindi and than haryanvi derived out of it as per your suggestion.Please clear what you want to say .

BTW Hindi is just derived from khari boli of braj and delhi areas with some influence of persian and arabic language .It is not older than eighteenth century and these are elimentary facts told in the evolution of Hindi .

Hindi may not be older than yesterday, but its roots lie in sanskrit and mixture of Urdu words doesn't change the fact.

Haryanvi Rajasthani are much ancient than that.
Do you suggest that meleccha and parakrit languages infact were spoken differently .How..?

I dont know.

Vinod If you just clear your picture on your stand regarding AIT jats nativity than we can argue in a better way.
I think Sanskrit and vedas originated in europian lands remembered and finally compiled somwhere in eastern iran or baluchistan.

Yeah, central asia is key in understanding AIT puzzle.

Now Do you say Afghanistan was in India.I had the impression it was bordered by himalayas. Thinking of buddhas and panini ajatsatru etc himalaya formed its northern boundary ,than how you included it in India of ajatsatru or nanda periods.If you talk of cultural influence than what you say of turkistan whose people always called them aryan or ujbekistan that was included in kushan period ,was that also India?

I would even say land of Uttar-Kuru (north of Pamir) was also part of Vedic India even though Puranic texts define Aryavarta between Himalayas and Narmada or sea.

 

[vinodks]

Than how can you come to the conclusion that sanskrit even existed in 2300 BC IN India. .

I had overlooked your emphasis on IN. As I said Aryan influence has been orginally from outside but Vedas might have been composed in NW India. Though there are arguments for both sides, supporting and opposing it.

It may not be completely true but how much do you agree with Talageri's geography?

http://www.voi.org/books/rig/ch4.htm

-vinod

 

[deepakchoudhry]

Let me just say...I'm not anti any language.

As a matter of fact I love sanskrit as much as I love haryanvi or Hindi.

Now..When British ruled India and wanted to find out about Sanskrit. They approached the Brahmins (for obivious reasons) and Brahmins due to their ignorance or their agendas were biased towards Sanskrit. Hence everything was Pro sanskrit.

Thus history was distorted and generations were given wrong information.

Haryanvi is certainly older than hindi. Hindi is relatively a new language.

And Vedas were not wriiten in Sanskrit as said earlier they were shrutis (passed on by hearing). And this happend for a long time and only at later stage it was realised and they started documenting them.

As far as I'm concerned, Vedas were not in Prakrit. I'm still researching on this theory and I will keep you all updated.

PS: I know this is not relevent here but you will also be surprised to know that lot of our original scriputres were changed or new text was added to give Brahmins more power in the society.

 

[sktewatia]

Earlier sanskrit was language of everyone in Aryan tribes. Later on it became language of elite people when they came in interaction with Indus valley people. As per language of Harappan people, nobody knows for sure. Our Jattu language is deformed version of Hindi and so of sanskrit with some non-IE words, which might be remnant from original Harappan language.


Sanskrit wasn't language of Indus valley otherwise they wouldn't have written seals in undecipherable script. I disagree with people like Dr K in their claims that Sanskrit was language of Harappan people but they preferred to write seals in coded languge for security purposes, symbols or so. In fact, Dr K uses Mlechha language in his decipherment efforts. According to him, most of the seals are names of maker of seal or name of the furnance where it was molded or the name of the merchant whose product it represents. He stresses role of metalurgy in the trade and meaning of seals should be interpreted along those lines. He convincingly (I wont say successfully) demonstrates meaning of few seals but it goes little too far when even "Soma" is interpreted name of metal rather than a drink. But anyway the point is importance of Mlechha in intrepretation of seals.

But Indus valley sites DO show archeological symbols resembliing vedic culture like fire altars, linga etc. Fire worshiping (IE culture) and liga cults might have been already popular in Indus valley before "Vedic sanskrit" influence. Here IE culture has broader meaning than "vedic sanskrit". Indus people might be speaking something similar to Mlechha and those words got intermixed with sanskrit but modern structure of Jattu language is similar to Hindi and so to Sanskrit whereas influence of Mlechha is limited to some archiac words. I might be wrong in this but would accpet contrary proofs.



What prakrit inscription you are talking about? Is there any inscription before Ashoka?



Afganistan was part of India. As I said by this time Prakrit had become language of mass. I still need to find out, how much influence has sanskrit on prakrit? How diff are two language? IS the diff limited to few words?



Budhha's message was meant to reach to common people so he chose language of people. Many Budhhist scripture are in sanskrit also BTW.


Do you want to say Vedas were initially written in prakrit or some other language and later on were translated to sankrit? Isn't Vedic sanskrit mother of IE languages?

-vinod

Here I'd like to again clarify that Vedic Sanskrit was not the mother of all IE languages. Sanskrit was the systematic/grammer of IE languages that too only those IE languages which were spoken in India and around at that time. Its like modern Hindi which again is a sytematic made language of all the Indian and nearby (Pakistani) IE languages. Similar was the case with Prakrit/Pali/Ardhmagadhi etc. They were made from the local Indian IE languages prevailing at that time in those areas. Simiar is the case with modern Punjabi, Braj, Marathi etc. these languages are again made from the local IE languages/dialects prevailing in those areas. Efforts were made from time to time to make IE languages systematic from place to place. Latin, English, French, German etc. should also be viewed in the same context. They are as much IE/Aryan/Jat languages as is Sanskrit/Hindi/Marathi/Punjabi etc.

The strongest merit about Sanskrit is its perfect grammer most systematic as compared to other IE languages like this. This merit is also due to the reason of its geographical area of Indus-gangetic plane. where people found enough surplus time to think about languages like in other social and material sciences.

Jats are found where ever these IE languages are found, but still the Jats from Indus to Ganges are till today the most systematic in their Jat rules like marriage rules to avoid gotras of parents, democratic/republican character, etc. As Jats of this land are most systematic as compared to all other Indo-European Jats (I'm calling all IE speaking people Jats assuming that they have lost their history or could not prolong this name till today as compared to we Jats) similar is case with sanskrit.

However, its wrong to assume that vedic sanskrit is the mother of all IE languages the fact is other way round.