Tuesday, February 13, 2018



The word ‘Alphabet’ has originated from the first two letters in Greek alphabet, Alpha and Beta, which were borrowed from the Hebrew alphabets aleph and beth. The letters of the English alphabet are borrowed from Latin or through one of the Romance languages, which itself were borrowed from the Greek. Ancient Rome was called Latium. The language spoken by its people was called Latin. The Romance languages, such as French, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, Romanian, Provencal, etc. came from Hebrew through Greek and Latin. Thus, Hebrew, which gave rise to Greek alphabet, is the mother language of Europe as Sanskrit is the mother language of all Indian languages except Tamil, which is a sister language of Sanskrit. This can be easily proved as follows.

The Greek adapted the alphabets of the Hebrew and the Arabs through Phoenicians sometime between the eighth century and the twelfth century BC. The Phoenicians learnt their script from the Semites, who borrowed the Egyptian hieroglyphic form for writing their alphabet. The Semitic language has three major categories:

a) North East Semitic, such as Akkadian, which was spoken by the Hittites of Babylonia.
b) North West Semitic, such as Hebrew, which was spoken by the people of Syria and Israel,
    Aramaic, the language spoken by Jesus Christ, and Eblaite etc.
c) Central and South Semitic, such as Arabic, South Arabian, and Ethiopian etc.

Hebrew is a dialect of Canaanite branch of North West Semitic language. In sound, it has characteristics of both Arabic and Aramaic. It is pronounced in various ways. However, the Ashkenazic (central European) and the Sephardic (Mediterranean) systems are most prominent. The main differences between the systems occur in the pronunciation of certain vowels and in the accent of various words. Since Greek alphabet was borrowed from the Semitic languages through the Phoenicians, there were two main forms of the ancient Greek alphabet; the Eastern and the Western. The Eastern alphabet with 24 letters is still used, but with a different pronunciation. It is the ancestor of the Cyrillic alphabet, which is used in the Russian, Bulgarian and Serbian languages. The Western alphabet spread to ancient Italy, where it gave rise to Etruscan, Oscan and Umbrian etc. The Etruscans, who moved to central Italy from the Eastern Mediterranean region around 1000 BC, subsequently gave rise to the Latin script with 23 alphabets, which is used in English today. The letters j, u and w were added to the English alphabet from other sources.

The modern concept of language families introduced by some European linguists is a myth because there is no scientific basis to accept this theory. In fact even a cursory examination would prove the contrary. This theory has been advocated by some on the ground that the words in certain languages have marked similarities signifying a common origin. They point out, for example, to the words like “maataa” or “maatrh” in Sanskrit, “meter” in Greek, “mater” in Latin, “madre” in Spanish, “mutter” in German, “mat” in Russian, “madä” in Digor, “mad” in Iron languages and “ma” in northern Chinese on a level tone. Similarly, the word “hamsa” is called chn in Greek, “ghans” in Indo-European, “anser (hanser)” in Latin, “gans” in German, “gös” in Anglo-Saxon, and goose in English. The word “brhsha” or “brhshabha” in Sanskrit is known as “bulle” in Middle Dutch, “bul” or “bol” in Dutch, “bole” or “boli” in Old Nordic, “bulle” in German, “bule” or “bulle” in Middle English, and bull or bullock in modern English. The Sanskrit word “pada” is called “pedis” in Latin, “podo’s” in Greek, “fotus” in Gothic and foot in modern English. The Sanskrit word “pancha” is called “pancha” in Zend, pegte in Greek, “quinque” in Latin, “penke” in Lithuanian, “fif” in Gothic, “fünf” in German, “fif” in Old English and “five” in English. Similarly, the word “ashta” in Sanskrit is called “οκτω” in Greek, “octo” in Latin, “ahto” in Old German, “ahte” in Middle German, “acht” in Modern German, “asztuni” in Lithuanian, “ahtau” in Gothic, “eahta” in Anglo-Saxon, and eight in English.

All these appear to hint at a common origin of these languages. However, no language other than Sanskrit could explain why the sound generated by such words has the meaning attributed to them. Only Sanskrit can provide the reason for the meaning attributed to the sound generated by the word “maataa”. According to Sanskrit grammar books, when we pronounce the word “ma”, our lips first close and then open. Thus, one of the meanings assigned to this letter is that which regenerates after initial destruction. Since life is believed to change the body on death and acquire a new body, the word “maa” means one that receives something, which grows. The letter “ta” stands for a strong and compact body as the tongue hammers the root of the tooth while uttering this letter. The word “taa” thus stands for the extension of an action in “ta”. Thus, the word “maataa” stands for the source of a body that grows, i.e., the mother. No other language in the world could explain the meaning of their words like this. Further, evolution of these languages show that the pronunciation of the words changes with time. This is never done in Sanskrit, where the pronunciation of the Vedas as it was in time immemorial is continuing even today. Thus, only Sanskrit could be the mother of all languages. Further, only the Indian languages are phonetic languages, i.e., they write as they pronounce. All other languages write something and pronounce something else. Thus, they could not belong to the same group.

The groupings of the language families also show the bias of European linguists. The Indo-European family is supposed to consist of the languages spoken by the people from North India to Western Europe, now extending up to Australia, New Zealand, North, Central and South America. It is supposed to consist of the following eight living branches:

1)  Albanian.
2)  Anatolic or Armenian, Ancient Phrygian, etc.
3)  Baltic and Slavic, which includes Old Prussian, Bulgarian, Czech, Latvian,
     Lithuanian, Polish, Russian, Serbo-Croatian, Slovak, Slovenian, and Ukrainian.
4)  Celtic, including Breton, Irish (Gaelic), Scots Gaelic, and Welsh.
5)  Germanic or Teutonic, which includes Dutch, English, Norse, German and the  
     Scandinavian tongues such as Danish, Icelandic, Norwegian, and Swedish.
6)  Greek.
7)  Indo-Iranian, which includes Afghan, Bengali, Hindi, Pashto, Persian, & Urdu.
8)  Romance or Latin-Romance, including Latin, French, Italian, Portuguese, Romanian and

Some linguists consider another branch called Indo-Aryan, which included the languages such as, Sanskrit, Pali, the modern Indian languages such as Hindi, Bengali, Oriya, Gujarati, Punjabi, Sindhi, etc. and the Romany or Gypsy languages. Others consider it to be part of the Indo-Iranian family.

As has been pointed out earlier, most of the European languages originated from Greek, which itself was borrowed from Bhaarata through the Arabs and the Semites. Further, at the same time as the so-called Aryan invasion of Bhaarata, the Achaeans were descending on Greece carrying the knowledge of Sanskrit from Bhaarata. This further influenced the language and alphabet structure. Thus, the classification puts great grandfather, grandfather, father, son, grandson and great grandson into a family of brothers! All for the sake of upholding European supremacy! Any unbiased tool of linguistics, such as internal reconstruction and comparative reconstruction would clearly reveal that Sanskrit is the mother of all languages of the world.

The other language families also show the same bias. The other families include:

a)  Sino-Tibetan family including all dialects of Chinese, Thai, Burmese and Tibetan, which languages consist of one-syllable words. The otherwise identical words express different meanings by different tones, i.e., by changes in the pitch of the voice.

b)  Afro-Asian family including Arabic and Hebrew, the Berber tongues of North, Near East and North East Africa, and the Amharic of Ethiopia.

c) Ural-Altaic family including Finnish, Estonian, Hungarian or Magyar, Turkish, and the languages of Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Mongolia and Siberia.

d)  Japanese and Korean family.

e)  Dravidian family, which includes Tamil, Telugu, Kannada, Malayalam and Sinhalese.

f)  Malayo-Polynesian family, which includes the languages of the people of Malaysia, Indonesia, the Philippines, Hawaii, New-Zealand, Madagascar, and most of the other islands of the Pacific and Indian oceans.

g)  Mon-Khmer or Austro-Asiatic family, which consists of the languages spoken in Cambodia (Kampuchea), Assam, parts of Burma, and Vietnam.

h)  Black African family, which includes the languages spoken south of Sahara and West of Sudan, Ethiopia, and Somalia such as Nilo-Saharan, Niger-Kordofanian, and Khoisan.

i)  American Indian languages numbering over 1000 spoken by aborigines of North, Central and South America.

j)  Unusual language family such as the Melanesian pidgin English of the people of Solomon Islands and Papua New Guinea, and the Haitian Creole based on French etc.

Without going into the details of these languages and confining these discussions only to Indian languages, it could be easily proved that the so-called language family is not a scientific or linguistic or historic classification. In the chapter, Origin of Tamil Language, I had conclusively shown that Tamil is a sister language of Sanskrit. Telugu, Kannada, Malayalam, other South Indian languages and Sinhalese are derivatives of Sanskrit. Just listening to these languages carefully would prove their Sanskrit base. Also earlier it has been proved quoting ancient sources that Arya is not a race or people of any geographic location, but an address like Sir, reserved for a cultured person. Dravida is not a race, but there are five Dravidas based on their geographical location south of the Vindhyas. The languages of all these places are of Sanskrit origin. The Assamese language is a sister language of Bengali and Oriya languages, which are of Sanskrit origin. Thus, the entire classification is contrary to linguistic scrutiny and has been advocated by someone who was ignorant of either Sanskrit or other Indian languages, but was writing solely for the purpose of establishing European supremacy by camouflaging the actual facts.

The other justification for the Indo-European language family is that, they have the same original structure, based on inflections. Inflection is a set of words that show different functions or meanings in a sentence. Case is a feature of nouns and pronouns that help show their relation to other parts of speech in a sentence. The case of a noun is shown by the inflectional ending attached to it. For example, boys, which is the common case plural form of boy is the inflected form of boy (common case singular). The set of inflations of a noun or pronoun is called declensions. The set of inflections of a verb is called conjugation. The set of inflations of an adjective or adverb are called comparison. Changes in the form of a verb can show changes in time, manner, kind of action, and the person acting.

The difference of Sanskrit and the European languages are most glaring here. While Sanskrit has inflations based on a scientific system advocated by Panini and exhaustively elaborated by Bharttrhhari in his monumental work “Vaakyapadiyam”, the European languages are devoid of any system. In Sanskrit, there are seven well-structured and precisely regulated declensions for seven cases for singular number, dual number and plural number for each gender. The seven declensions correspond to the nominative case, accusative case, instrumental case, dative case, ablative case, genitive case and locative case. Besides, there is also another case called the vocative case. However, since it is a separate address, and has no direct relationship with the verb, it is not treated as an absolute case. The declensions are done based on the words ending with different vowels or consonants. Sanskrit also has a number of indeclinable (avyaya), which have fixed meanings and used as such. Latin has six cases, nominative, vocative, genitive, dative, accusative and ablative. Old English had five cases. Modern English has only two cases, common and possessive. Some European languages like Hungarian have 25 or more cases.

The classical Greek was highly inflated. A fully inflated classical Greek verb may have more than 500 forms. None of these could be explained scientifically or methodically. The conjugation in Sanskrit is based on ten groups of roots, which are further conjugated into ten major divisions based on tense, mood, etc. They are further conjugated into nine divisions, based on person and numbers. Besides, there are causals (nijanta), which are used when action is induced by a different agency. There are some nominative verbs (naama dhaatu), where a noun is used as a verb by using some suffixes. From the roots, different nouns, adjectives and indeclinable are formed with different suffixes. There are seven types of primary suffixes (krhdanta), which impose the meaning of the root on the nouns etc. formed by such suffixes. The secondary suffixes (taddhita) change the meaning of the nouns etc. However, all the above transformations are regulated as per the laws laid down by Paanini, who followed his predecessors.
The European languages, on the other hand, often use inflations in an arbitrary manner. They do not have a scientifically well-structured grammar. While the plural of fox is foxes, the plural of ox is not oxes. Similarly, the plural of goose is geese, but the plural of moose is not meese. The plural of mouse is mice, but the plural of house is not hice. The plural of man is men, but the plural of pan is not pen. The plural of foot is feet, but the plural of root is not reet nor boot, beet. The plural of tooth is teeth, but the plural of booth is not beeth. The plural of that is those, but the plural of hat is not hose nor cat, cose. Similar confusion is prevalent in the case of gender. Men is masculine, whereas hen is feminine. The feminine form of men is women, but the feminine form of boys is not woboys. The feminine form of gentleman is lady, that of boy is girl, dog – bitch, horse - mare – all arbitrary. The feminine form of he is she, but the feminine form of his or him is not shis nor shim. The masculine form of lioness is lion and that of tigress, tiger. However, happiness is the adjective form of happy and sadness is the adjective form of sad. While writers write and cobblers cobble, fingers do not fing, grocers do not groce or hammers do not ham. Only in a language like English, people can recite at a play and play at a recital, ship cargo in truck and send cargo in ship, noses run and feet smells, slim chance and fat chance mean the same thing but wise man and wise guy mean opposite. Further, there are neither eggs in eggplant nor hams in hamburger. There is neither pine nor apple in pineapple. English muffins were not invented in England.

Punctuation and syntax had to be invented to remove the confusion in communication due to the unscientific grammar of European languages. But slight mistake in punctuation can bring in havoc. The sentence, “pandas eat bamboo shoots and leave explains the dietary habits of the creature. But a comma after the word “shoot” would change the meaning to imply after eating bamboo, the pandas fire a gun and depart. The sentence, “the convict said the judge is mad” implies the opinion of the convict about the mental health of the judge. But use of two commas after “convict” and “judge” would imply the opposite meaning. Similarly, the sentence, “woman without her man is nothing” can mean the opposite if two commas are put after “woman” and “her”. A child described the execution of King Charles I as follows: “Charles the First walked and talked half an hour after his head was cut off”. Unless a full stop is put after the word, “talked”, the sentence does not make any sense. The punctuation marks were invented from time to time. An Italian, Aldus Manutivus (1450-1515 AD) is supposed to have invented the question mark. Though the sequence of words changes if a statement is turned in to a question, it was invented to clear the confusion. No such aids are used in Sanskrit, which has inbuilt mechanisms to convey unambiguous meanings. The European languages, after translation and then retranslation, often express different meanings due to such inherent defects. But there is no such confusion in Sanskrit.

As has been explained, the West Asian languages write from right to left. The Greek started initially by writing from right to left, before changing to the modern system. Only Sanskrit used writing from left to right from the beginning. This shows that Sanskrit could not have developed from West Asian sources, but the European languages might have been developed after learning from Sanskrit. In fact the change of the name of Latium to Rome is important. The etymology of the name of its founder would provide the necessary proof to the above statement.

Syntax is a form of grammatical structure, which delineates the arrangement of words in a particular order. The other form of grammatical structure is called morphology, which uses a variation in the form of a word to show the function of the word in a group. In most European languages, change in the order of the word leads to a change in the meaning of the sentence. The Chinese use syntax only. Modern English uses a blend of syntax and morphology. However, Latin, and Anglo-Saxon or the Old English did not consider morphology as important, just like Sanskrit. Since only Sanskrit provides a specific formula based on a scientific classification and structure relating to the construction of words in a particular manner, it must be the mother of the other languages or at least would have borrowed its rules to the other languages.

Further, the Roman script used by the European languages has the individual letter as its basic unit, the Sanskrit based languages mostly have the basic unit in a whole syllable consisting of generally one or two consonants and a vowel, though rarely the consonants are used separately also. This proves the distinctive characteristic of Sanskrit based languages. Further, the Greek alphabet has 24 letters, Latin 23 letters, Arabic 28 letters, Phoenicians 22 letters, Etruscan 20 letters, Hebrew 22 letters, and German 29 letters. In contrast, all Sanskrit based languages have 63 letters and Tamil has 37 letters. If we take into account the syllables, then Sanskrit based languages have about 540 characters and Tamil has about 247 characters. Only Cypriots has 56 letters in its alphabet. However, by no stretch of imagination it could be said that Sanskrit originated from Cypriot. Thus, while other languages have comparable letters in their alphabet signifying a relationship, Sanskrit stands alone in its uniqueness.

The Phoenicians developed their system of 22 alphabetical signs structurally related to Hebrews and Egyptians. The Egyptians used a system of nearly seven hundred signs that stood for full words or for syllables. For example, they wrote “nefer” meaning “good” with a single sign or with three signs for the sounds n, f. and r. It was formally a picture writing and structurally a word and syllabic writing. In contrast, the Phoenicians writing consists of partly pictographic forms and partly geometric or diagrammatic signs, which, again, was borrowed from the Egyptians. However, they borrowed their twenty-two letters of the Alphabet from Hebrew.

Only Sanskrit has a scientifically developed script based on the pronunciation pattern and meaning associated with it due to the effect of the various forces that leads to such pronunciation pattern. However, its use in writing was limited as the Vedas are the ultimate manifestation of sound (Naada Brahman). Since sound could not be written, it was taught through the word of mouth. Since the basic purpose of writing was education, which was imparted by the word of mouth and in those societies writing was not essential for everyday transactions, writing was restricted only to chroniclers, the businessman or the copywriters.

The European linguists often confuse the development of language with the development of writing. In reality, these are two different aspects. For example, it is accepted by all that the Vedas are the oldest literature. It is also accepted that it was initially taught through the word of mouth. What is not widely known is that Sanskrit language came much after the Vedas to make a blend of the highly structured Vedic language and the loosely constructed local language for unambiguous communication. The language was developed to reform the spoken language. Thus, it is called Samskrhta (not Sanskrit), which literally means reformed. Also little known is the fact that the Vedic grammar and the other rules of phonetics contained in the vast collection of Shikshaa and Praatishaakhya literature were written based on the uses of words in the Vedas in various forms. The Vedas were not written based on the rules of grammar and the phonetics contained in those books.

A brief analysis of the Iranian language, which was spoken in between the Arab mainland and the Indian peninsula, would further demolish the modern linguistic family classification. Of the ancient Iranian languages dating to the 6th Century BC, only two, Avestan and Old Persian, are known from texts and inscriptions. Old Iranian, which is closely related to Sanskrit, is known from the Avesta the sacred book of the Zoroastrianism, and Old Persian cuneiform inscriptions of the Achaemenid Kings. The middle Iranian stage stretching from the 3rd Century BC to the 10th Century AD, was characterized by a significant simplification of the verbal system and reduction in noun inflection. Prominent among these languages are Parthian, Pahlavi, and Sogdian etc. The Middle Persian was known in three forms, inscriptional Middle Persian, Book Pahlavi, and Manichaean Middle Persian. It was spoken mostly in the southwestern Iran. Parthian was spoken in northeast and northwest Iran. While these languages are mutually intelligible, they differ greatly from the Middle Iranian eastern group of languages such as Khwarezmian (Chorasmia), Sogdian, and Saka and their dialects such as Old Ossetic (Scytho-Sarmatian), Bactrian, Khotanese and Tumshuq or Maralbashi.

The modern Iranian languages are Persian, the Kurdish dialect, Pashto, the language of Afghanistan, Tajik, the language of Tajikistan, and Ossetic, the Eastern Iranian language spoken in the northern Caucasus by the Ossetes. The Ossetic language has two major dialects, the eastern dialect called Iron and the Western dialect called Digor. The subgroups of the Iranian languages are spoken in Iran, Afghanistan, Tajikistan, and parts of Iraq, Turkey, Pakistan, and scattered areas of the Caucasus Mountains.

Iranian languages have scarcely been influenced by unrelated languages, with the notable exception of Ossetic, which has been influenced by the neighboring Caucasian languages. Some dialects of Tajik have been very receptive to Uzbek elements. However, the influence of Sanskrit on the Iranian languages are very clear. The most prominent of these influences are in the series of retroflex sounds.

Some linguists try to distance Iranian language from Sanskrit by bringing in the similarities with Greek. For example, they say that various fricative sounds indicated in phonetic symbols such as x, f, q, and later γ, β, [eth], and of the voiced sibilant sounds z and z distinguish the Iranian phonological system from the Indo-Aryan system. On closer examination it would be revealed that, even in Iran, these sounds are not used universally. For example, in Western Middle Iranian, the θ sound is not found. It is also rare in modern Iranian languages. In Pashto, the inherited f sound is discarded.  Baluchi, except in the extreme east, is entirely without fricatives. The voiced bilabials and dental fricative sounds such as β and [eth] were seen in some early manuscripts of Modern Persian, but by the end of Middle Iranian period, they became b and d respectively. In any case, since the Greek language was inherited from the Semites, it is possible that the same influence had traveled east to influence the Iranian languages.

Some linguists point out two negative features to distinguish the Iranian languages from the Indo-Aryan languages. They point out to the coalescence of aspirates and unaspirated voice stops in Proto-Iranian languages. Thus, they say that in the Iranian language, the Indo-European *b and *bh are maintained in contrast to the Indo-Aryan b and bh, but they fell together in Iranian as b. Similarly, the absence of the retroflex consonants from Iranian languages except as a later importation from contiguous regions makes it different from the Indo-Aryan languages. Further, change of an s sound to h in Iranian brought about a difference in distribution rather than in structure because h, according to them, is developed also in Indo-Aryan, but from Indo-Iranian *zh and gh before front vowels (e.g., e and i). The above view only shows the ignorance of the authors about the Sanskrit language. The books of Paanini and other grammarians as well as the abundant Shikshaa and Praatishaakhya literature clearly shows the theory of origin of the sound of each and every letter based on the force internally applied and the point inside the mouth, which direct the outgoing vibration to cause different sounds. Thus the statement that the Indo-European *b and *bh are maintained in contrast to the Indo-Aryan b and bh but they fell together in Iranian as b is not correct as in Oriya, a Sanskrit based language, both b and bh fall together to make only b as in Iranian. Similarly, in Assamese, a Sanskrit based language, s is pronounced as h. Further, in Old Iranian, the stress lay on the next to the last syllable if it was heavy (i.e., contained a long vowel or was closed by a consonant), otherwise on the preceding syllable, just like the “laghu”, “guru” system of Sanskrit language. With the loss of final unstressed vowels in the development of many Iranian languages, the stress often came to be on the final syllable, which is a characteristic of Modern Persian. But the theory regarding such stress is contained in the book “Chhanda Shaastra” written by Pingala Naaga, who dates back to several millenniums BC. Thus, the influence of Sanskrit on the Iranian languages is unmistakable. The denial of this link and construction of a link between the Iranian languages and the so-called Indo-European languages is untenable.

Before introduction of the Arabic element, most loan words were used to be from other Iranian languages. Old Persian borrowed extensively from Median. Sogdian and Khotanese borrowed extensively from Sanskrit and Prakrit. Northwest Indian languages such as Lahnda and Sindhi influence the vocabulary of the modern Iranian languages to a considerable extent. Also the influence of Dardic language is considerable on modern Iranian languages. Baluchi was borrowed from Brahui, which is a branch of Brahmi. People of Monjan, a very remote valley located in Northern Afghanistan and separated by a mountain pass from the Sanglechi speaking region, speak Yidgha-Munji, a distorted form of Siddha-Muni. It is also spoken in the valley of the Lutkho River and in the nearby city of Chitral, a region now in Pakistan. Yidgha-Munji is closely related to Pashto. It is well known that the Siddha-Muni of ancient India used in inaccessible mountain ranges and spoke Sanskrit language. Thus, the influence of Sanskrit on Pashto cannot be denied. Similarly, Parachi (a distorted form of Paishaachee of northern India) spoken in the Hindu Kush, north of Kabul, has features closely associating them with Western Iranian. Similarly, Rakhshani, (a distorted form of Raakshasee of northern India) is a Baluchi dialect, which is widely spoken and used in Broadcasting in Pakistan and Afghanistan. It has Western Iranian features implying the influence of Indian languages on the Iranian languages.

Because of the wrong notion of juxtaposing the development of language with the development of script, the European linguists believe that the Sumerian word picture of 3500 BC is the earliest recorded proof of writing. This is supposed to have followed by the Egyptian hieroglyphics of 3000BC. The Chinese script is believed to have started around 1500 BC and the Greek script around 1400 BC. The Latin script is believed to have originated around 500 BC. According to these linguists, migrant people from Northwest used Sanskrit in North Bhaarata sometime before 1000 BC. Subsequently Prakrit and Pali developed from Sanskrit around 250 BC. The later forms of Prakrit are supposed to have given rise to Apabhramsha, which is supposed to have given rise to the regional languages. This can be proved wrong based on documentary evidence.
The historicity of the above views can be challenged easily based on co-lateral history, diachronic linguistics and linguistic typology. Firstly, the above timetable shows that the language traveled from East to West except for Bhaarata. There is no reason to assume that it traveled from Central Asia to East. The recorded history shows that knowledge, particularly in the field of astronomy and mathematics has traveled from Bhaarata to China through the Buddhist monks and to Europe through the Arabs. The number system was developed in Bhaarata and traveled to all over the world. Then why should it be assumed that language, which is a vehicle of knowledge traveled in the opposite direction? It is more probable that the language traveled from East to West continuously, i.e., like the other branches of knowledge, language traveled from Bhaarata through the Arabs to the West. Both Buddha and Mahavir were born before 500 BC. Mahavir is the twenty-fourth in a long lineage of Saints in Jainism. His predecessor, Paarshwanaatha (872-772 BC) was thought to be a mythological figure in spite of Jain tradition and historical evidence to the contrary. Subsequent scholars like Dr. Heinrich Zimmer and others have accepted the historicity of Paarshwanaatha. Further studies would reveal the historicity of the previous 22 Tirthankaras. The books of Buddhism and Jainism are mostly in Prakrit and Pali.  Their languages could not have developed several centuries after their birth?

Initially, there were two types of language called Vaidic and Loukik or popular language by Mahaabhaashya of Patanjali. The Vaidic language was called Divyaa or Chhandas and its grammar was written by examining the style of the Vedas. This is evident from Taittiriya Samhitaa and Taittiriya Praatishaaksha. There was no grammar for the Loukik or popular languages. Bharata in his Naatya Shaastram says, initially, a grammar was created for the Loukik or popular language by suitably modifying and simplifying the Vaidic language. Bharata calls it Viparyasta Samskaara. Since it was the first written grammar, it was called Prakrit. Many languages invluding Pali came from this. Starting from Ravan, many Rishis have written grammar of Praakrit. Vararuchi’s Prakrita Prakaashah was the last authoritative book on it. This was written just before Panini wrote Ashtadhyaayi. When other languages developed with local variations, another reformation was done. Bharata calls it Viparyasta Samskaara. Because of this, the language was called Sanskrit. Tamil was a sister language of Sanskrit. We have written about its history separately.

The theory of Aryan invasion has been proved to be a hoax. Had there been large-scale invasion, there would have been large-scale destruction. But the diggings in the ancient sites have not provided any evidence to support this fact. In fact it gives evidence of desertion due to some reason as the entire cities were found intact. The fact that the river Saraswati, on whose banks the settlements grew up, changed course and disappeared proves that there was large-scale migration due to shortage of water and not due to invading Aryans.

Further, the Central Asian people are supposed to have come to Bhaarata on horseback during 2000-1000 BC. The Vedas and the Braahmanas are supposed to have been written in between 1500-800 BC. That means, the Aryans must have started writing the Vedas within a few hundred years of their initial invasion and continued to write while the process of invasion and settlement was still going on. They completed writing these scriptures almost simultaneous with their last victory. Is it possible that those marauding invaders on horseback, who were cattle breeders in their homeland, could have written all those highly structured language books in Sanskrit espousing the highest human values and a science to be marveled at! If it is so, why is it that they did not write even one comparable book in their original homeland? Further, this would imply that Sanskrit was the language of the pre-Aryan Bhaarata as the language of the invaders was either Hebrew or Arabic or one of the dialects of these languages. No book in Sanskrit has been written by any West Asian, whereas many Sanskrit books have been translated into these languages by many scholars. Thus, if pre-Aryan Indian spoke Sanskrit, they must be credited with the writing of the Vedas and Braahmanas. This credit can in no way go to the West Asian invaders.

In case it is argued that the so-called Aryans were continuing to evolve their language and the evolution became complete only in Bhaarata, then Bhaarata is something to be revered. Because, according to these linguists the gap between the earliest Sumerian writing and the development of Sanskrit is only 2500 years. The human evolution has been estimated to be tens of thousands of years, if not more. Then it has to be assumed that the Central Asians developed in Bhaarata to great heights within a short span of less than a thousand years, which they could not do in tens of thousands of years in their own original homeland. If Bhaarata could transform them to such an extent, then the whole world should bow before the great country that is Bhaarata!

Further, if the eastward Central Asian migration to Bhaarata did take place, the migrants should have moved towards China, which formed one end of the ancient “silk route”. Chinese language does not have an alphabetical system of writing. Instead, they use about 50,000 characters that stand for words. Out of these about 5000 are frequently used. Most of the characters are derived from pictographs of objects they represented. Others are combinations of pictographs used to form abstract words. Yet others have no pictographic background at all. Some Chinese characters can be used in expressing the syllables of proper names or foreign words. The Chinese also used character borrowing, i.e., borrowing the character of one word to represent another word that has a similar pronunciation. They also use ideographs, which represent ideas rather than objects. Thus, it appears that the Egyptians and the Semites developed their languages based on a mixture of both Sanskrit and Chinese. This view would be harmonious with the directional flow of other branches of knowledge and merchandise as has been proved by history.

A few examples to prove the above point can be cited here. Panchatantra is a Sanskrit work, which has been translated in more than 50 languages. The total numbers of translations in different languages are more than 250. The first translation from Sanskrit of this book appears to have been done during the reign of Khusro Ansher Khan (531 AD to 579 AD) of Persia by Hakim Burjoi in Pehlavi. Around 570 AD, Bud made a Syrian translation of that book. Around 750 AD, Abdullah-ibn-al-Mokaffa translated this book in Arabic. These two books are still available in the archives and clearly show that they were translated from the Pehlavi version. During the 11th Century, Rabbi Joel translated this book from Arabic to Hebrew. Towards the end of the 11th century, Simeon translated this book to Greek. John of Capua translated this book to Latin between 1263 AD and 1278 AD. Two editions of this book were published during 1480 AD. Another Arabic translation of this book was done in 1142 AD by Moali Nusrullah. It was translated into Persian between 1470 AD and 1505 AD by Anwar-e-Suheli. During 1483 AD, Anthodium von Pforr translated it in German. Then Danish, Icelandic and Dutch translations followed. In 1493 AD, it was translated in Spanish. In 1546, Agnolo Firenjuola translated it in Italian. In 1552 AD, A Dono translated it in Italian in two parts. The first part was translated by Sir Thomas North in to English. Another translation in Italian was done by Giulio Nuti in 1583 AD. During 1644 AD, it was translated by David Sahid and Goulmin into French. This book was translated into English, German and Swedish. Between 1512 AD and 1520 AD, the Persian copy was translated by Ali bin Sahid in Turkish. This was translated by Gallant and Cardonne in French. The entire history of translation shows the directional flow of knowledge. Interestingly, in Thailand and Laos, which had regular interaction with Bhaarata, it is known as “Tantropaakhyaanam” – showing direct translation from Sanskrit.

The Westward flow of knowledge from India was not confined to mathematics and astronomy. It covered other areas also. The Bible refers to many incidents from ancient Sumerian epics. According to the Sumerian tradition, God Ea approached the Sumerian patriarch Utu-napishtim and warned of the great flood of 3000 BC. The God advised him to build a boat and fill it up with his family and all species of animals and crafts persons. He did so. The cyclone wrought havoc on earth for seven days. On the eighth day, he let first one dove, then a raven to go free. When they did not return, the King emerged from the ship and reclaimed the land. This is the origin of the story of the Noah’s Ark in the Bible. We know that Kali Yuga began on 18th February 3102 BC. This was preceded by lots of turbulence. The Sumerian tradition refers to this period. The epic of Utu-napishtim was modeled on the sojourn of Manu on a boat at the end of a Manwantara, when the energy equation of the galaxy changes accompanied by a change in the constellation Ursa Major. The episode of Manu is a cosmological event described in allegory, while the episode of Utu-napishtim is pre-Biblical legend based on the above. This can be proved by the following reasoning.

Soorya Siddhaanta is a book of mathematics and astronomy. Its calculations of astronomical events are accurate even today. Though some minor discrepancy is seen in the results based on Soorya Siddhaanta and modern calculations, this can be easily reconciled. The results differ as some concepts of this book and that in modern astronomy differ. For example, the concept of zodiac is not the same as the concept of Raashi chakra. The later is a much more scientific concept, which has been upheld by recent findings in the galaxy. The same is true for difference in meaning attributed to a planet or a star and graha. These are two different concepts based on different classifications. Once the mathematical validity of Soorya Siddhaanta is accepted, its concepts are to be accepted unless there is contrary evidence to disprove it. There are some differences on the stellar evolutionary cycles and theories described in Soorya Siddhaanta and modern astronomy. Here again, the Soorya Siddhaanta is correct as the HR-diagram, the basis on which the modern theories on stellar evolution is based, is prepared on misleading premises. The HR diagram is based on computations using log tables. We know that the log tables give only an approximate result. We also know that a small difference in initial conditions would lead to major differences as it evolves. The distances used in Astronomy are the biggest number used in any branch of science. Thus, the results derived using a log table in astronomical calculations would give misleading results. Secondly, the history of modern astronomy is only about 500 years, too small for astronomical observation purposes. More research in astronomy would prove the superiority of Soorya Siddhaanta over modern methods. For further details, please refer to my book, “Vedic Physics”. The Puraanas, which are the source of the episode of Manu, describe the same theory of stellar evolution as Soorya Siddhaanta. Thus, there is no reason to disbelieve that it refers to an ancient astrological or cosmological event, though in allegory.

Sumerian tablets depict an elaborate pantheon of deities such as the Enlil with the Biblical tablets, the Virgin Mother and Dumuzi, associated with death and resurrection etc. They also depict Istar, who is comparable to Durgaa and Enki, who is comparable to Vishnu. The Arabs, who took over Sumeria and by intermarriage with the ladies of Sumeria converted it to an Arab state, had links with both Bhaarata and Europe. They spread these themes to the Greeks. The deeply ingrained psychology of that ancient civilization is expressed through the behavior of the Muslims visiting different Durgahs and seeking blessings of the Saints, even though the Koran propagates the glory of one God only. All these points to the flow of influence and culture from East to West and not in the reverse direction.

The Achaeans took the knowledge of Sanskrit to Greece. Thus, the influence of Bhaaratiya culture is seen in most of the epics of ancient Greece. Similarly, they had borrowed the concept of different Gods from Bhaarata. For example, the God Mother Aditi is portrayed as Rhea, mother of the Greek Olympians. Indra, the King of Gods was transformed as the Greco-Roman lord of the Gods, Zeus-Jove. Varuna was transformed as the Greek God Ouranos. The Son God Surya was transformed to the Greco-Roman Phoebus-Apollo.

The reality is that the Aryan invasion is a myth. Sanskrit developed in Bhaarata from the Vedic language. Even Ravana, who is a Dravid, wrote all his great works only in Sanskrit. Kaatyaayana, one of the two greatest commentators of the work of Panini, was a Dravid. One of the branches of Sanskrit called Apabhramsha gave rise to North Indian languages. The Egyptians, through the Arabs, borrowed their script from the Paishachi script of North Bhaarata, which is the source of the Kashmiri language and which was written from right to left. Since Greeks learnt their scripts from West Asian sources, initially their script was written from right to left. Subsequently the Greeks started writing one line from right to left and the next line from left to right in a form called boustrophedon, which means turning like oxen in ploughing. Later, as the interaction of Greeks with India increased and the knowledge of Sanskrit spread, the Greeks started writing their script from left to right.

The so called Indo-European family of languages are a myth as can be proved from a cursory look at the origin of the language and grammatical patterns of Sanskrit and other members of the Indo-European family. For example, according to the European theory of linguistics, language developed slowly from sounds such as grunts, barks, and hoots made by pre-human creatures. This simple system of vocal communication became more coordinated and became language as the human brain and speech organs developed. This theory is based on the theory of evolution of intelligence, which has not been proved. In fact, there are proofs to the contrary. Even the theory of Evolution has not been proved scientifically. It is still a hypothesis.

On the contrary, Indian linguists accept the gradual evolution of species in a natural sequential manner from the simplest to the complicated life forms due to increasing combinations of different materials that constitute the body. Man being the most evolved of all species came last. Just as the hydrogen atoms combine to form helium atoms and so on but stop at iron, similarly, the evolution of life form stopped at man as it is the most balanced of all species. While food, sleep, fear and reproduction are common to man and other life forms, language based on intelligence is the only difference that separates human beings from animals. Language is not a mere collection of sounds in a proper sequence, but has a scientific base on which the meaning assigned to it is built. Panini starts his book on grammar with “a” in Sanskrit as it is the only sound which is generated when the vocal chords are in their natural position and the air heated up with the desire to communicate rises up and comes out through the vocal chords without touching any other part inside the mouth. In the case of other letters, the vocal chords are contracted/strained and the resultant air changes direction to touch various body parts inside the mouth including the nose. He has shown how the other letters are a modification of the letter “a” in Sanskrit. Thus, he has proved the pivotal position of this letter. The mouth opens up with the lips in a circular fashion while uttering the letter “a” in Sanskrit. Thus, the script of “a” in Sanskrit as well as in all Indian languages has a circle with a staff as symbolic of the letter. Similarly, since the circle is endless, the letter symbolizes infinite, endlessness etc. Since every letter is derived from it, there is nothing before it. Hence, wherever any word is preceded by this letter, it conveys the negation of that word or the opposite meaning. He goes on to describe the construction of each and every word and sentences in Sanskrit based on the same scientific logic. Such scientific language can be conveyed only by human beings. Thus the European linguists, either knowingly or unknowingly ignored Sanskrit grammar to expose their ignorance.

The similar hypocrisy or ignorant boast also runs in the classification of other language families. For example, it is universally accepted that the Greeks accepted the Semitic script through the Phoenicians. Then, there would have been more interaction between the two languages. The Hebrew and the Yiddish languages would have influenced the Greek language, as its influence over European languages is still perceptible. The Biblical poem “The Song of Deborah” (Judg.5) is a song in Hebrew language dating back to the twelfth Century BC. The accounts of such travelers as Eldad the Danite and Benjamin of Tudela speak much about the influence of the Hebrews. The Yosippon and other anonymous works combine Jewish history with thrilling legends. Talmud, a collection of Jewish oral laws with the interpretation of the scholars and Piyyutim, Jewish prayers composed for religious services have its indelible imprint on European and Christian culture. Then how is it that Arabic and Hebrew has been classified as belonging to Afro-Asian family and not Indo-European family? Only to separate it so that the theory of European supremacy could be manipulated?

Stark ignorance is the cause for the classification of Malayo-Polynesian family and Japanese and Korean family. The former developed as a mixture of South Indian and Chinese languages as people from these areas settled in those countries, first for trade and commerce and subsequently for permanent settlement. The so-called Japanese and Korean family of languages is a derivative Chinese and not a separate Family. Possibly it was classified as a family not due to linguistic reasons, but due to the international importance of Japan.

The history of the origin of the present English alphabet is presented below:

A-    This is the third most used letter in English alphabet. The first letter of the North West branch of Semites, who lived in Syria and Palestine and spoke Hebrew language, was called -aleph, meaning Ox. They used the Egyptian hieroglyphic form for an Ox to represent this letter. The ancient Greeks later used this symbol and called it a - alpha. The Roman’s gave the letter its present form.

 B- This is the 20th most used letter in English alphabet. It was the second letter of Hebrew speaking Semites, who called it -beth, meaning house. The Greeks borrowed the letter from the Phoenicians and called it b - Beta.

C-    This is the 13th most used letter in English alphabet. The third letter of the Hebrew speaking Semites was called -gimel meaning a throwing stick. The Greeks borrowed it and called g - gamma. The Romans changed the boomerang shape of the letter to the capital C form and used to indicate two words, g and k with it. Finally they made it two words by adding a stroke to C to make it G.

D-    This is the 10th most used letter in English alphabet. The fourth letter of the Hebrew speaking Semites was called -daleth, meaning door. The Greeks and Romans used it as d - delta, which became d.

E-    This is the most used letter in English alphabet. The fifth letter of the Hebrew speaking Semites was called -he, which was written with the Egyptian picture symbol of a man rejoicing beginning a shout of hallelujah (Praise Ye the Lord!) The Greeks named it e - epsilon and gave the sound of e. The Romans gave the E its present form.

F-    This is the 15th most used letter in English alphabet. Some hold the view that it came from the sixth letter meaning hook of the Hebrew speaking Semites called -vav, and the 27th letter of the Central and South branch of Semites speaking Arabic called و -waw. However, it is more likely that it has come from the 20th letter of the Arabic script ف fa. The ancient Greeks called it digamma to sound as w in present English. The Romans made it the present f.

G-    This is the 16th most used letter in English alphabet. One view of its origin has been explained while explaining the origin of C. However, it is more likely that it has come from the 19th letter of the Central and South branch of Semites speaking Arabic غghain. The Romans gave it the present form.

H-   This is the 9th most used letter in English alphabet. The Hebrew speaking Semites named their eighth letter ח-cheth by adopting a picture symbol for a twisted hank of rope to represent the letter. The Greeks borrowed it and called h - eta by giving the sound of long e. The Romans gave it the present capital form and sound of H.

I-    This is the 7th most used letter in English alphabet. The tenth letter of the Hebrew speaking Semites and the Phoenicians was called י -yod representing hand. The Greeks called it ι-iota. This became the English i.

J-    This is the 24th most used letter in English alphabet. There are two versions of the origin of this letter. According to one version, the tenth letter of the Hebrew speaking Semites was י -yod. The Greeks borrowed the word and passed on to Romans. In the late middle ages, when two or more י -yods were written together, scribes often added a long tail to the last one. Later the tail was used to indicate an initial l. During the seventeenth century, an i at the beginning of a word was written with a tail. The present j developed from these forms. However, the above version is not correct. The letter originated from the fifth letter of the Arabic script ج – jim.

K-    This is the 22nd most used letter in English language. The letter of the Hebrew speaking Semites for palm of the hand was called כ or ך (at the end of the word) kaph. The ancient Greeks called it k - Kappa and gave it the present form. The Romans borrowed it from the Greeks.

L-    This is the 11th most used letter in English language. The Hebrew speaking Semites word for goad or crooked staff was called ל - lamed. The ancient Greeks took it and called it λ - lambda. Later the Romans gave it the present form. 

M-    This is the 14th most used letter in English alphabet. The 13th letter of the Hebrew speaking Semites was ם (at the end of the word) or מ mem, meaning water. The Greeks called it m - Mu. The Romans gave it the present form.

N-    This is the 5th most used letter in English alphabet. The 14th letter of the Hebrew speaking Semites was called ן (at the end of the word) or נ - nun meaning fish. The Greeks took the letter from Phoenicians and called it ν - nu. The Romans gave it the present form.

O-    This is the 4th most used letter in English alphabet. The sixteenth letter of the Semites for eye was called ע - ayin. The Phoenicians borrowed the stylized eye from the Semites. The Greeks borrowed it from Phoenicians and called it ο - micron. The Romans borrowed it from the Greeks.

P-    This is the 18th most used letter in English alphabet. The letter ף (at the end of the word) or פ pe in the alphabet of the Hebrew speaking Semites meant mouth. The Greeks borrowed it and called p - pi. The Romans changed it to the present form.

Q-    This is the 25th most used letter in English alphabet. The nineteenth letter ק -qoph in the alphabet of the Hebrew speaking Semites meaning ape or monkey and the 21st letter of the Arabic script ق - qaf were borrowed by the Greeks, who called it κ Kappa. The Romans gave it the present shape and introduced the usage of u after q.

R-    This is the 6th most used letter in English alphabet. The twentieth letter ר - resh in the alphabet of the Hebrew speaking Semites meaning head was borrowed by the Greeks, who called it r - rho. The Romans gave it the present form.

S-    This is the 8th most used letter in English alphabet. The twenty-first letter ש -‘shin’ in the alphabet of the Hebrew speaking Semites meaning tooth was borrowed by the Phoenicians, who gave it a regular shape. The Greeks turned it on its side to bring in the present shape.

T-    This is the 2nd most used letter in English alphabet. The last letter ת -‘tav’ in the alphabet of the Hebrew speaking Semites meaning mark was borrowed by the Greeks through Phoenicians. They changed the cross-shaped mark by moving the cross bar to the top of the vertical stroke and called it τ - tau. The Romans borrowed it from

U-    This is the 12th most used letter in English alphabet. Some hold the view that the Hebrew speaking Semites letter waw is the source of the letters F, U, V, W and Y. The Greeks gave it a Y-shape. The Romans dropped the bottom stroke and wrote it as V. They used it for the vowel sound U and consonant sound V. During tenth century, U and V were used to be written in the middle and the beginning respectively. During Renaissance, it became customary to use U as a vowel and V as a consonant.

V-    This is the 21st most used letter in English alphabet. One view on the origin of this letter has been explained above and is the same as for U. However, there are contrary views, as these changes were not accepted for several hundred years. It is more likely that it came from the sixth letter of the Hebrew speaking Semites called -vav meaning hook or the 27th letter of the Arabic alphabet وwaw.

W -   This is the 19th most used letter in English alphabet. The origin of this letter is explained as the same as for V. One view is that during the eleventh century, the French scribes doubled the V as VV, in order to write the Anglo-Saxon letter ‘wen’ as they did not have an alphabet for it. The VV was also written in a rounded form UU. This came to be known as ‘double U’ and was written as W in English.

X-    This is the 23rd most used letter in English alphabet. The Hebrew speaking Semites letter ‘samekh’ was borrowed by the Phoenicians, who used a symbol signifying a support. The Greeks borrowed this letter and used it to sound like kh or ks. The Romans gave it the present form.

Y-    This is the 17th most used letter in English alphabet. The origin of this letter is the same as U. The Greeks called it υ - upsilon.

Z-    This is the 26th most used letter in English alphabet. The seventh letter ז - zayin in the Hebrew speaking Semites alphabet and the seventeenth letter of the Arabic alphabet ظza were written like an arrow-like symbol. The Greeks borrowed it to make their sixth letter ζ - zeta and gave it the present capital form. The Romans used z only and moved it to the end of the alphabet. It became to be pronounced as zed in English and zee in American English.

No comments:

Post a Comment

let noble thoughts come to us from all around