Ancient Indian Education (Brahmanical and Buddhist) c9.30

c9.30

**Evolution of Alphabets.** Thus Rigvedic education as its first step comprised the transmission of the sacred texts by the teacher to his pupil by means of regulated recitation and prescribed pronunciation which the pupil had to listen to as *Śruti* and commit to memory. Sāyaṇa [Introduction to Rigveda Commentary] quotes the saying that "the text of the Veda is to be learnt by the method of learning it from the lips of the teacher and not from a MS. (Adhyanavidhiścha likhitapāṭhādivyāvṛitya adhyayanasaṁskṛitatvaṁ svādhyāyasya gamayati)." Because this education was thus primarily a matter of hearing and memorizing by repetition of its texts in the manner of the croaking of frogs, it has been assumed that there was not evolved at that time the art of writing as an aid to memory and education, nor the conception of letters or alphabets as the basis of writing. It has been believed that *Śruti* or Veda should appeal to the ear and not to the eye, and was not to be reduced to writing. No doubt, the tradition of Vedic learning was to impart it to the ear as a secret doctrine to be contemplated and realized, and not to make it a visible object available to all, irrespective of their fitness, and this tradition has been continuing through the ages, even up to the time of Kumārila Bhaṭṭa (of about eighth century A.D.) who has described the writing of Veda as sacrilege. The *Mahābhārata* condemns to hell those who write the Veda (*Vedānām lekhakāḥ*). Kumārila [*Tantra Vārttika*, i, 3, p. 86] states: "That knowledge of the truth is worthless which has been acquired from the Veda, if the Veda has not been rightly comprehended or if it has been learnt from writing." But even if such learning had passed from ear to ear directly under a system of oral tradition and banned the individual method of its transmission through writing, it does not follow that a knowledge of writing or alphabets for use even for secular purposes was not then achieved. Several passages of the Rigveda have been already cited, showing definite reference to *Akshara* as the root¹ of the Rigveda as explained by Sāyaṇa (who considers this verse as intended to be *akshara-praśaṁsā*, stressing the importance of the letter to learning); or i, 164, 41 which refers to the expansion of speech in a thousand (i.e. innumerable) letters (sahasrākshara). Again, the verses vi, 53, 5-8 use metaphors which can only be suggested by the practice of writing then in vogue. In the first two, there is mentioned an instrument of writing called *ārā* which Sāyaṇa explains as a fine-pointed iron-tipped pencil or stylo (*sūkshmalohāgro daṇḍaḥ*) with which hard hearts may be pierced (*paritṛindhi* = *parividhya*). In the third verse, the god is asked to "write" (*ārikha* = *ālikha*) on such hard hearts, while in the fourth, the instrument of such "writing" is called again *ārā* or goad. Again, the verse x, 13, 3 refers to the utterance of *Akshara* (known as *Oṁkāra* or Praṇava) required in the performance of sacrifice, while x, 71, 4 refers to both the methods of learning, by seeing and hearing (Uta tvaḥ paśyanna dadarśa vācham uta tvaḥ śṛiṇvanna śṛiṇoti enām). Again, a Yajus is defined to be "that in which the number of letters is not fixed" by any metre (aniyata-aksharāvasāno yajuḥ). The evolution of letters, alphabets, and writing may, therefore, be assumed as an aid to learning for an age which had paid so much attention to the purity and rules of pronunciation of the texts taught.