Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Indian Palaeography from about B.C. 350 to about A.D. 1300 c6.s2: § 2. — Literary evidence for the use of writing

Indian Palaeography from about B.C. 350 to about A.D. 1300 c6.s2

Language
English

Contents

§ 2. — Literary evidence for the use of writing

A. — Brahmanical literature

c6.s2.t1.1

² B.IS. III², 5 f.; M.M.HASL. 497 ff.; L.IA.², 1, 1008 ff.; B.ESIP. 1 ff.; WEBER, Ind. Streifen 3, 348 f.

c6.s2.t1.2

Among Vedic works, the Vāsiṣṭha Dharmasūtra, which according to Kumārila (about A. D. 750) originally belonged to a school of the Ṛgveda, and which is younger than the lost Mānava Dharmasūtra but older than the existing Manusaṃhitā,³ offers clear evidence for the widely spread use of writing during the "Vedic" period. Vasiṣṭha in XVI, 10, 14—15, mentions written documents as legal evidence, and the first of these sūtras is a quotation from an older work or from the traditional lore. Further, Pāṇini's grammar, which belongs to the Vedāṅgas, contains, besides the term *yavanānī* mentioned above, the compounds *lipikara* and *libikara*, "writer" (III, 2, 21), which sometimes have been rendered errroneously, against the authority of the Koṣas, by "maker of inscriptions."⁴ In addition to these few certain passages, the later Vedic works contain some technical terms, such as *akṣara*, *kāṇḍa*, *paṭala*, *grantha*, &c., which some scholars have quoted as evidence for writing. But others have explained them differently, and it is indeed not necessary to consider them as referring to written letters and MSS.⁵ Similarly, opinions are much divided with respect to the force of some other general arguments for the early use of written documents and MSS., drawn from the advanced state of Vedic civilisation, especially from the high development of trade and the complicated monetary transactions mentioned in Vedic works, from the use of prose in the Brāhmaṇas from the collection, the methodical arrangement, the numeration, and the analysis of the Vedic texts, and from the grammatical, phonetic, and lexicographic researches in the Vedāṅgas.⁶ Though some of these points, especially the first and the last, undeniably possess considerable weight, they have yet not gained general recognition, as will always happen if an *argumentum ex impossibili* is used, even if it should be supported by fuller special enquiries than Sanskrit scholars have hitherto devoted to these subjects.

c6.s2.t1.3

³ SBE. 14, XVII ff.

c6.s2.t1.4

⁴ M.M.ṚV.², 4, LXXII.

c6.s2.t1.5

⁵ M.M.HASL. 521 ff.; GOLDSTÜCKER, Mānava Kalpasūtra, Intr. 14 ff.; W.IS. 5, 16 ff.; M.M.ṚV.², 4, LXXII ff.

c6.s2.t1.6

⁶ WHITNEY, Or. and Ling. St. 82; J.AOS. 6, 563; BENFEY, ZDMG. 11, 347; BÖHTLINGK, Bull. Pet. Akad. 1859. 347: PISCHEL and GELDNER, Vedische Studien, 1, XXIII, XXVI; J. DAHLMANN, Das Mahābh. 185; against these views, M.M.ṚV.², 4, loc. cit.; Letter in Takakusu's transl. of Itsing, X ff.; W.IS. 5, loc. cit.

c6.s2.t1.7

While this kind of evidence will probably not be generally accepted very soon, it is to be hoped that the *argumentum ex silentio*, — the inference that a Vedic work which does not mention writing must have been composed when writing was unknown in India, — will be dropped. The *argumentum ex silentio* is certainly not conclusive, because the Hindus even at present, in spite of a long continued use of writing, esteem the written word less than the spoken one, because they base their whole literary and scientific intercourse on oral communications, and because, especially in scientific [4] works, writing and MSS. are mentioned very rarely. Though MSS., being *Sarasvatīmukha*, "the face of the goddess of speech," are held sacred and are worshipped, the Veda and the Sāstras exist, even for the modern Hindu, only in the mouth of the teacher, whose word has more weight than a written text, and they can only be learned properly from a teacher, not from MSS. Even in our days, the Hindus esteem only the *mukhasthā vidyā*, the learning which the Pandit has imprinted on his memory. Even in our days, learned discussions are carried on with reference to living speech, and even the modern poets do not wish to be read, but hope that their verses will become "ornaments for the throats of the learned" (*satāṃ kaṇṭhabhūṣaṇa*). As far as our observation reaches, this state of things has been always the same since the earliest times. Its ultimate cause probably is that the beginning of the Hindu Sāstras and poetry goes back to a time when writing was unknown, and that a system of oral teaching, already traceable in the Ṛgveda, was fully developed before the introduction of written characters. The reasons just stated do not permit us to expect many traces of the use of writing in the works of the schools of priests or Pandits, or to look in them for frequent references to letters and written documents. But, on the other hand, there is nothing to bar the conjecture, repeatedly put forward, that, even during the Vedic period, MSS. were used as auxiliaries both in oral instruction and on other occasions. And, as an argument in favour of this conjecture, it is now possible to adduce the indisputable fact that the Brāhmī alphabet has been formed by phonologists or by grammarians and for scientific use.¹

c6.s2.t1.8

¹ See below, page 17.

c6.s2.t1.9

But such Brahmanical works as the Epics, Purāṇas, Kāvyaṣ, dramas, &c., which describe actual life, or the metrical law-books which fully teach not only the sacred but also the civil and criminal law, as well as compositions such as the Nīti-, Nāṭya-, and Kāma-śāstras which exclusively refer to worldly matters, contain numerous references to writing and to written documents of various kinds, and likewise evidence for the occurrence of MSS. of literary works. Unfortunately, however, it is not possible to assert of any of the existing books of these classes, — excepting the two Epics, — that they are older than the period to which the oldest inscriptions belong. And even the evidence of the Epics may be impugned, since we cannot prove that every word of their texts goes back to a high antiquity. Professor JACOBI's examination of the several recensions of the Rāmāyaṇa has shown that the greater part of the verses, now read, did not belong to the original poem.² As far as is known at present, the MSS. of the Mahābhārata do not show equally great variations. But the existence of the majority of its chapters can be proved only for the eleventh century A. D.³ Though the testimony of the Epics can, therefore, only be used with due reserve, yet it is undeniable that their terms regarding writing and writers are archaic. Like the canonical works of the Southern Buddhists,⁴ they use the ancient expressions *likh*, *lekha*, *lekhaka*, and *lekhana*, not the probably foreign word *lipi*.

c6.s2.t1.10

² JACOBI, Das Rām. 3 ff.

c6.s2.t1.11

³ KIRSTE in B. IS. II, 27 ff.

c6.s2.t1.12

⁴ See below, under B.

c6.s2.t1.13

The most important passages of the Epics, concerning writing, have been collected in the St. Petersburg Dictionary under the words mentioned, and by J. DAHLMANN, Das Mahābhārata, 185 ff. Regarding the passages on writing in Manu, see the Index in Sacred Books of the East, Vol. XXV, under "Documents," and for the legal documents, described in the later Smṛtis, see Vol. II. of this Encyclopedia, Part 8, Recht und Sitte, § 35. An interesting collection of statements regarding MSS. in the Purāṇas is found in Hemādri's Dānakhaṇḍa, Adhy. 7, p. 544 ff. (Bibl. Ind.). The Kāmasūtra I, 3 (p. 33, Durgāprasād) enumerates *pustakavācana*, "the reading of MSS.," among the 64 kalās.

B. — Buddhistic literature

c6.s2.t2.1

⁵ B.IS. III.², 7-16; OLDENBERG, SBE. 13, XXXII ff.; D'ALWIS, Introd. to Kaccāyana's Gram. XXVI f., CXV f., 72-108; WEBER, Ind. Streifen 2, 337 ff.

c6.s2.t2.2

[5] More important than the testimony of the Brahmans is that of the Ceylonese Tripiṭaka, where numerous passages bear witness not only to an acquaintance with writing, but also to its extensive use at the time when the Buddhist canon was composed. *Lekhā*, "writing,"

c6.s2.t2.3

and *lekhaka*, "a writer," are mentioned in the Bhik[k]u-Pācittya 2, 2, and in the Bhikkhunī-Pācittiya 49, 2; and the former work praises writing as [a] branch of knowledge that is honoured in all countries. The Jātakas repeatedly speak of private¹ and official² letters. They also know of royal proclamations,³ of which Mahāvagga 1, 43 likewise mentions an instance; and they narrate that important family affairs or moral and political maxims were engraved on gold plates.⁴ Twice we hear of debtor's bonds (*iṇapaṇṇa*),⁵ and twice even of MSS. (*potthaka*).⁶ A game called *akkhārikā* is mentioned repeatedly in the Vinayapiṭaka and the Nikāyas;⁷ according to Buddhaghoṣa, its main feature was that letters were read in the sky. The Pārājika section of the Vinayapiṭaka (3, 4, 4) declares that Buddhist monks shall not "incise" (*chind*) the rules which show how men may gain heaven, or riches and fame in the next life, through particular modes of suicide. From this passage it follows (1) that the ascetics of pre-Buddhistic times used to give their lay-disciples rules, incised on bamboo or wooden tablets, concerning religious suicide, which the ancient Brahmans and the Jainas strongly recommended, and (2) that the knowledge of the alphabet was widely spread among the people.

c6.s2.t2.4

¹ B.IS. III², 7 f.

c6.s2.t2.5

² B.IS. III², 8 f., 120.

c6.s2.t2.6

³ B.IS. III², 10, 18.

c6.s2.t2.7

⁴ B.IS. III², 10 f.

c6.s2.t2.8

⁵ B.IS. III², 10, 120.

c6.s2.t2.9

⁶ B.IS. III², 120.

c6.s2.t2.10

⁷ B.IS. III², 16.

c6.s2.t2.11

Finally, Jātaka No. 125, and Mahāvagga 1, 49,⁸ bear witness to the existence of elementary schools, in which the method of teaching and the matter taught were about the same as in the indigenous schools of modern India. The Jātaka mentions the wooden writing-board (*phalaka*), known (as well as the *varṇaka* or wooden pen) also to the Lalitavistara⁹ and to Berūnī,¹⁰ and still used in Indian elementary schools. The passage of the Mahāvagga gives the curriculum of the schools, *lekhā*, *gaṇanā* and *rūpa*, which three subjects, according to the Hāthigumphā inscription of the year 165 of the Maurya era,¹¹ king Khāravela of Kaliṅga learnt in his childhood. *Lekhā*, of course, means "writing," and *gaṇanā*, "arithmetic," *i.e.*, addition, substraction and the multiplication-table formerly called *aṅka* and now *āṅk*, while *rūpa*, literally "forms," corresponds to applied arithmetic, the calculations with coins, of interest and wages, and to elementary mensuration. These three subjects are still "the three R's" taught in the indigenous schools called *gāṁṭī niśāl*, *pāṭhśālā*, *lekhaḍ* or *toll*.

c6.s2.t2.12

⁸ B.IS. III², 13 ff.

c6.s2.t2.13

⁹ Sansk. text, 143; comp. BOR. 1, 59.

c6.s2.t2.14

¹⁰ India 1, 182 (SACHAU).

c6.s2.t2.15

¹¹ Sixth Oriental Congress. 3, 2, 154.

c6.s2.t2.16

These very plain statements of the Ceylonese canon refer certainly to the actualities of the period between B. C. 500—400, possibly even of the sixth century.¹² Their antiquity is proved also by the fact that all the terms for writing, letters, writers, — *chindati*, *likhati*, *lekha*, *lekhaka*, *akkhara*, — as well as nearly all the writing materials, wood or bamboo, *paṇṇa* or leaves, and *suvaṇṇapaṭṭa* or gold plates, point to the oldest method of writing, the incision of the signs in hard materials. All traces of the use of ink are wanting, though the statements of Nearchos and Q. Curtius regarding the writing materials used at the time of Alexander's invasion (see below under C) make it very probable that ink was known in the fourth century B. C., and though an ink-inscription of the third or second century B. C. is found on the inner side of the lid of the relic vessel from Stūpa No. III. at Andher.¹³ Moreover, the Ceylonese books are not acquainted with the words *lipi*, *libi*, *dipi*, *dipati*, *dipapati*, *lipikara* and *libikara* for "writing," "to write," and "writer," of which the first six are found in the **[6]** Aśoka edicts and the last two, as stated above, in Pāṇini's grammar. *Dipi* and *lipi* are probably derived from the Old Persian *dipi*, which cannot have reached India before the conquest of the Pañjāb by Darius about B. C. 500, and which later became *lipi*.¹⁴

c6.s2.t2.17

¹² B.IS. III², 13 ff.; OLDENBERG, Vinayapiṭaka 1, XXXIV ff.; M. MÜLLER, SBE, 10, XXIX ff.

c6.s2.t2.18

¹³ CUNNINGHAM, Bhilsa Topes, p. 349, pl. 30, 6.

c6.s2.t2.19

¹⁴ B.IS. III, 21 f.: WESTERGAARD, Zwei Abhandl. 33

C. — Foreign Works

c6.s2.t3.1

To the last quarter of the fourth century B. C. refer the statement of Nearchos,¹ according to which the Hindus wrote letters on well beaten cotton cloth, and the note of Q. Curtius,² which mentions the tender inner bark of trees as serving the same purpose, and clearly points to the early utilisation of the well known birch bark. The fact that, according to these two writers, two different *indigenous* Indian materials were used in B. C. 327—325, shows that the art of writing was then generally known and was nothing new. To a slightly later time belongs the fragment No. 36 *a* of Megasthenes,³ which speaks of mile-stones indicating the distances and the halting places on the high roads. In another often discussed passage,⁴ Megasthenes says that the Indians decided judicial cases according to unwritten laws, and adds in explanation that they knew no γράμματα and settled everything ἀπὸ μνήμης. According to the now usual interpretation, this statement has been caused by a misunderstanding. Megasthenes took the term *smṛti*, used by his informants, in the sense of μνήμη, “memory,” while they meant it in the sense of “the sacred tradition concerning law,” or “the lawbooks,” which, according to Indian principles, can only be explained orally by one who knows the Dharma.

c6.s2.t3.2

¹ Strabo, XV, 717.

c6.s2.t3.3

² Hist. Alex. VIII, 9; comp. C. MÜLLER, Fragm. Hist. Graec. 2, 421.

c6.s2.t3.4

³ C. MÜLLER, op. cit. 430.

c6.s2.t3.5

⁴ Frag. 27; C. MÜLLER, op. cit. 421; SCHWANBECK, Megasthenes, p. 50, n. 48; M M HASL. 515; B.ESIP. 1; L.IA. II², 724; WEBER, Ind. Skizzen 131 f.

Linked texts (12)