PDA

View Full Version : Age of Sanskrit



IcyCosmic
02 August 2014, 07:01 PM
Namaste,

We all know Sanskrit is very old. Possibly the oldest language of India. (I won't say the oldest incase a Tamil-shield bearer enters the thread :P)

I was speaking to someone today and they said Sanskrit is in fact the oldest period, even older than sumerian. Is this true? If so can someone elaborate.

Thanks.

Samraat Bhismadeva Maurya
03 August 2014, 03:44 AM
Hari Bol!
All Glories to Sri Guru and Gauranga

You're question is not an easy one as there is not much pursuit for archaeology in India.


Anyway, lets see what i can do.

Sanskrit is a very old language, the oldest in the Indo-European branch, Possibly older than Tamil, :P

The Vedas, the worlds oldest work was written around 3500BC as per contemporary findings, however, some believe the date to be pushed back to 10,000 BC, The Vedas describe the river Saraswati in it's full glory, this is dated to 30,000 BC, however, the river saraswati dried around 7,000 BC and began to dry after 10,000 BC.

The Indus Valley civ dates from 7000 BC to around 3500 BC, the remains of this civilization are littered with coins, marked with ancient Yogic meditative positions vividly described in the Vedas (Fig 1) and also describe Manu as a horned yogi (Fig 2)

Perhaps, the symbols that we see on the Indus Valley Coins are those of a very ancient Sanskrit.

Fig 1.

http://www.yogaheartcardiff.co.uk/attachments/Image/DSC00733.JPG?template=generic

Fig 2.

http://media.web.britannica.com/eb-media/96/91396-004-134728CE.jpg

Sumerian civilization started lets say at earliest 4000 BC; The Bhagavatam Written by Vyasa in the Himalayas written around 5000 BC describe the city of Dwarka and Krishna's departure flooding the great city, well, people were led to believe, they were only myths and not to be taken seriously, but not any more. Artefacts at Dwaraka dates as far back as 32,000 BC.

If you have time, watch this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQZFS9Hij0M

If you don't have much time watch this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1sE-29iXNA

Sorry for bad quality, i couldn't find better.

Hopefully i have helped

By the way, nice sig, icy supreme

Another thing i would like to say is that Sanskrit for long time has been oral, it has also been written, but on degradable items, so not much hope finding ancient sanskrit documents, Vyasa Deva put the Vedas and Bhagavatam in writing for the first time and this has been dated to around 5000 BC, but there could be much older versions by much older authors, however.

Jai Sri Radhe-Syam!

Viraja
03 August 2014, 05:57 PM
Namaste,

I think the language 'Chandas' in which the Vedas are supposedly written is perhaps the oldest...

But it is said that Sanskrit is infact the language of the devas, in which case I do not know if Chandas precedes Sanskrit or not.

Regards.

Sahasranama
03 August 2014, 06:28 PM
I was speaking to someone today and they said Sanskrit is in fact the oldest period, even older than sumerian. Is this true? If so can someone elaborate.
This is in fact what Hindus believe. Historians may not agree, but remember that historians are like anyone else and don't have complete information on the past. Scientists only use evidence that can be obtained through the jnanendriyas and there is a limitation to what this type of knowing can give us.

In ancient times Sanskrit was mostly a spoken language and writing was mainly done on easily degradable materials like leaves. This in contrast to other cultures that have preserved more writings on clay tablets, stone walls and animal skin. There is not much chance that archeologists will dig up 10 million year old Sanskrit documents, but the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence.

On top of the limitations of physical science, we must also remember that for a long time western historians have been operating under the assumption that the world is only 5000 years old. Max Muller has dated the Vedic scriptures based on this assumption and Muller's datings have stuck to people's head.

When the western world came into contact with the grammatical science of the Sanskrit language it completely changed the way people looked at linguistics. Instead of recognizing Sanskrit for its pivotal role in understanding human language, theoreticians have mentally conceived of a language they called proto-Indo-European. The idea of this language that supposedly preceded Sanskrit is purely a concept of the imagination. There is exactly zero evidence that such a language has ever existed.

satay
03 August 2014, 10:22 PM
Namaste shas,
I did not know that re prot indo European language. How do you know there is no evidence? I am not disagreeing with you just wondering.




When the western world came into contact with the grammatical science of the Sanskrit language it completely changed the way people looked at linguistics. Instead of recognizing Sanskrit for its pivotal role in understanding human language, theoreticians have mentally conceived of a language they called proto-Indo-European. The idea of this language that supposedly preceded Sanskrit is purely a concept of the imagination. There is exactly zero evidence that such a language has ever existed.

Sahasranama
03 August 2014, 11:47 PM
PIE is not an actual language of which there is any literature, archeological evidence or historical reference in another language. It is a conceptual construct created by historical linguists to explain the connection between Sanskrit, Indo-Iranian and the European languages. It's an idealized abstraction based on assumptions and inferences. PIE has never been spoken by real people, but it is an academic construct.

The idea of PIE was first proposed by Sir William Jones and has been refined and constructed ever since based on the structure, discovery and assumed development of the languages which are grouped as Indo-european. The arrogance of academic researchers does not allow them to see that this mental model is not the same as actual physical reality.

Amrut
04 August 2014, 06:20 AM
PIE is not an actual language of which there is any literature, archeological evidence or historical reference in another language. It is a conceptual construct created by historical linguists to explain the connection between Sanskrit, Indo-Iranian and the European languages. It's an idealized abstraction based on assumptions and inferences. PIE has never been spoken by real people, but it is an academic construct.

The idea of PIE was first proposed by Sir William Jones and has been refined and constructed ever since based on the structure, discovery and assumed development of the languages which are grouped as Indo-european. The arrogance of academic researchers does not allow them to see that this mental model is not the same as actual physical reality.

Namaste,

I agree

This was a conspiracy by British East India Company.

There is a lot of talk which was initiated by (so-called) western scholars with evil intention to demean our shastras, our dev bhASa sanskrit, our purANas, smritis and grihya sUtra. This was not the work of one man or a few bunch of ontologists.

This page is intended to expose their evil intentions. The extracts are taken from the book "The True History and the Religion of India: An Encyclopedia of Authentic Hinduism" by dharm Chakravarti H. D. Swami Prakashanand Saraswati (Read more about author) (http://encyclopediaofauthentichinduism.org/author.htm)

This is a *must read* book for every sincere seeker, specially bhArtiya brothers and sisters.

There began a period of collecting manuscripts and then interpret them in derogatory way. They also paidlofty amount to Max Muller, a german philologist, who is often credited of interpreting veda-s and bringing them to west and general public. MAx Muller was also one of them who purposefully interpreted our shastra-s in derogatory way. Other members of Asiatic Society were


Max Muller - Translation of rg veda in demeaning way and other articles tragetting our shastras to degrade them.
Sir William Jones
J. D. Peterson
F. Wilford
H.H. Wilson - Translation of Vishnu PurANa in demeaning way
F.E. Partiger - Critical analysis of purANas and veda-s in demeaning way
Sir Monier-Williams
Colonel Colin Mackenzie
Franz Bopp
Pandit Taranath (Indian writer hired to write on Hinduism in derogatory way)


(the list extends to 34 names).


The list also includes Britannica encyclopedia, who added Hindu words and explained their meanings in demeaning way.


They influenced Hindu writers like


Surendradas Gupta
Dr. R.G. Bhandarkar - highly influenced by Max Muller's works and his research
Bal Gandhar Tilak - who dated vedas to 1500-200 BC
S. Radhakrishnan - whose works are used for post graduation in History and religion of India


Please refer to these links articles (22) and (23)

http://encyclopediaofauthentichinduism.org/articles.htm

Most of the research done by westerners in 18-19th century was influenced by church and any attempts of whistle-blowing was crushed and the person ex-communicated.

As Viraja di says, Kanchi Paramacharya also says that it was chandas in which vedas were written, however I think that both chandas and sanskrit had much in common.

Hari OM