Conversation in Prakrita in Sanskrit plays

[shankara]

Namaste,

We find that in plays of Kalidasa and other Sanskrit poets some characters speak Prakrit and not Sanskrit (though the translation of their conversation in Sanskrit is given in brackets). Why do some characters speak in Prakrit, is it because they are illiterate? I would also like to know the relevance of retaining the Prakrit portion in the modern editions of these works. Is it required only to retain the originality of the work?

I am asking this question because some of my friends are digitising the plays of Kalidasa in Malayalam (We are typing the complete Sanskrit texts with Malayalam translation taken from books now in open domain. Typing of Vikramorvasiyam, Malavikagnimitram and Sakuntalam is almost complete). Is it necessary to retain Prakrit portion of the conversation? We find it very difficult to do the proof-reading of Prakrit.

I request you all you give your learned opinion on this matter.

 

regards
shankara

[Nityanand Misra]

Not the characters per se but it probably reflects the fact that in Kalidasa's times, the corresponding people in the society spoke Prakrit. For example, in the Uttararaamacarita, mother Sita speaks to Ashtavakra in Prakrit. This does not mean mother Sita is illiterate (in fact for the Ramanandis, she is first Guru and the source of many Sarasvatis). More likely, queens in Kalidasa's times spoke in Prakrit, so the plays have this anachronism to reflect the society of the day, if we may. The same characters in Valmiki's Ramayana or Mahabharata speak in Sanskrit, even though Valmiki's Ramayana knows of Prakrit - Hanuman thinks whether he is to speak to mother Sita in Prakrit or Sanskrit in Sundarakandam.

I have seen that in these plays, as a general rule, queens, women (even those in an Ashram), foot soldiers, servants, et cetera speak in Prakrit. The king, commander, Vidushaka, Rishis, Brahmins, speak in Sanskrit. But the two seem to understand each other seamlessly. Toe me this shows the people in the society in Kalidasa's or Bhavabhuti's times who were fluent in Sanskrit (which requires learning grammar over 12 years) included kings, commanders, et cetera. While queens, foot soldiers, et cetera understood Sanskrit but could not speak it fluently hence spoke in Prakrit.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "samskrita" group.
To post to this group, send email to sams...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to samskrita+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/samskrita?hl=en.

--
Nityānanda Miśra
http://nmisra.googlepages.com

|| आत्मा तत्त्वमसि श्वेतकेतो ||
(Thou art from/for/of/in That Ātman, O Śvetaketu)
     - Ṛṣi Uddālaka to his son, Chāndogyopaniṣad 6.8.7, The Sāma Veda

[Vidya R]

il·lit·er·ate

   [ih-lit-er-it]  Show IPA

adjective

1.

unable to read and write: an illiterate group.

2.

having or demonstrating very little or no education.

3.

showing lack of culture, especially in language and literature.

4.

displaying a marked lack of knowledge in a particular field: Heis musically illiterate.

'Illiterate' is probably not the right word to use.

NamassarvebhyaH !

Vishva Samskrita Dina Greetings!

If one is translating into any language (from Sanskrit), then, the reason for the Prakrit does not exist in the translation.  Just as we already have texts with original Sanskrit (with embedded Prakrit) and English Translations (as I am sure exist for many Indian languages).

But should it exist in the reprints of today?  Yes, the 'original' should be retained with the embedded Prakrit.  In all the prints that I have seen (and I have not seen any original), the 

'kavi' has laboriously given us the 2-language versions 'prakrit' and Sanskrit for the 'lesser mortals'.

Women and other lesser mortals (part of the general public) do read the Sanskrit.  The text was not provided to them with Prakrit translations for the elite Sanskrit dialog.  And, as Shri Nityanand has observed, the lesser mortals understood the dialogue spoken in Sanskrit.  Moreover, I am sure the plays enacted were witnessed by a mixed audience.  I doubt that the women had personal translators whispering into their ear about what is going on.

If any adaptation needs to be done for modern day, I would think it is in the 'thinking' that those who spoke Prakrit were / are lesser mortals.  Again, as Shri Nityanand has observed, we should look at it as a dramatic convention that women, children and people-in-service used Prakrit.  Moreover, even the Vidushaka slips into Prakrit on occasion (The Vidushaka's monologue in Shakuntalam, 2nd chapter).

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

The above discussion is for 'translation'.  If the intent was to use a script other than Devanagari to write the Sanskrit material, then the script being used to write in should device a means of 'transliterating' the Prakrit, too!

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

I wonder if modern 'kavi's continue the tradition of embedding Prakrit for those entitled to speaking in Prakrit.

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

Warm Regards,

Vidya

---

From: Nityanand Misra <nmi...@gmail.com>
To: sams...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Saturday, August 13, 2011 8:22 PM
Subject: Re: [Samskrita] Conversation in Prakrita in Sanskrit plays

[shankara]

Mishraji,

Thanks for the valuable information.

I would like to know if there are any regional language editions of Sanskrit plays of Kalidasa, etc, in which the Prakrit portion is not retained.

 

regards
shankara

---

From: Nityanand Misra <nmi...@gmail.com>
To: sams...@googlegroups.com

Sent: Sunday, 14 August 2011 5:52 AM

Subject: Re: [Samskrita] Conversation in Prakrita in Sanskrit plays

[hnbhat B.R.]

I think the question has been analyzed from different angles answered in detail.

I am not going to presume something why Prakrit was used in Sanskrit plays and why certain class of people used it in society of Kalidasa's time or AshvaghoSha-s time. 

As I know the plays are supposed to represent the contemporary life people of the society as the literature in general is supposed to be. Natyashastra deals with at length on the different languages in different regions and assigns to certain class of characters certain languages (dialects of Prakrit) other than Sanskrit. It might have been laid down the rules to retain closer representation of the contemporary life (including the spoken language) and no other purpose seems to exist to use a hybrid language in a Sanskrit Play.

But the Prakrit dialogues are available in manuscripts with or without Sanskrit translation, but Sanskrit translation is not available in all the manuscripts. Hence in scholarly editions, they keep the Prakrit text only and putting the Sanskrit translation to notes or within brackets to show that they are later additions. The Sanskrit translation is added to facilitate the readers to understand the Prakrit text and not part of the original text if we take Natyashastra as an authority on dramaturgy.

As Vidya suggested, if the intention is to provide a public, the content of Sanskrit Plays understandable to common people (if many are there) it need not retain the Prakrit dialogues. If it is retained, it should be accompanied with Sanskrit Translation too which would reproduce the edition used for the purpose.

For translation purpose, whether it is translated from Sanskrit or Prakrit, it doesn't matter as the object is to convey the idea of the text lines in another language. It may not be necessary to keep the Prakrit text. It is left to the choice of the editor whether to retain the original text of the play in tact or not.

--
Dr. Hari Narayana Bhat B.R. M.A., Ph.D.,
Research Scholar,

Ecole française d'Extrême-OrientCentre de Pondichéry

16 & 19, Rue Dumas

Pondichéry - 605 001

[shankara]

Bhat Sir,

Thank you for your kind reply. You have answered another question I was about to ask - that is whether the Sanskrit translations of Prakirt portion is a later addition.

The Malayalam digitisation that we are doing contains both the Sanskrit text and Malayalam translation in Malayalam script. I was just wondering whether we should retain the Prakrit portion or not (at present both Prakrit and Sanskrit texts are completely typed). I wished to know how important it is to retain the Prakrit portion.

Now, after reading your mail, I feel that it is necessary to retain Prakrit text as it is part of the original (where as its Sanskrit translation is not part of the original). I thank all the members who kindly answered my query.

 

regards
shankara

---

From: hnbhat B.R. <hnbh...@gmail.com>
To: sams...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sunday, 14 August 2011 7:31 AM

Subject: Re: [Samskrita] Conversation in Prakrita in Sanskrit plays

[Vidya R]

Shri Bhat!  Thank you for the note on the authorship of the Sanskrit version of the Prakrit dialogues / verses.  I will now have to pay closer attention to Sanskrit version of Prakrit verses before attributing language beauty to the play's author.  While the sentiment conveyed is still attributable to him, credit for that language could belong to some anonymous and unsung poet.

I should also add that in the same Shaakuntalam (mentioned earlier), there is a verse that Priyamvada speaks directly in Sanskrit Act IV (verse 4), and within parenthesis, it says "saMskRtamAshritya" (resorting to Samskritam), noting the exception.

Vidya

---

From: hnbhat B.R. <hnbh...@gmail.com>

To: sams...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Saturday, August 13, 2011 10:01 PM

Subject: Re: [Samskrita] Conversation in Prakrita in Sanskrit plays

[hnbhat B.R.]

On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 8:17 AM, Vidya R <imar...@yahoo.com> wrote:

Shri Bhat!  Thank you for the note on the authorship of the Sanskrit version of the Prakrit dialogues / verses.  I will now have to pay closer attention to Sanskrit version of Prakrit verses before attributing language beauty to the play's author.  While the sentiment conveyed is still attributable to him, credit for that language could belong to some anonymous and unsung poet.

 

But as I have noticed, in most cases, the Sanskrit rendering does not necessarily represent the Prakrit text. It might be added by any reader having some knowledge of phonetic changes of Prakrit or picked up from some earlier commentaries which usually give the Sanskrit translation (which text might have been to the corresponding to the Prakrit texts they had before them).  

 

I should also add that in the same Shaakuntalam (mentioned earlier), there is a verse that Priyamvada speaks directly in Sanskrit Act IV (verse 4), and within parenthesis, it says "saMskRtamAshritya" (resorting to Samskritam), noting the exception.

 

There are exceptions to the general rules, as if to say something to secret, one will have to change his language: (this applies to the appropriation of Prakrit language assigned to the characters). But Sanskrit speaking characters do not change their language for this purpose, but only by gesture (कर्णे एवमिव) just act. Prakrit speaking characters, change their language, means they speak in Sanskrit occasionally as in the above case. The reason seems to suppose the others do not know Sanskrit (with which they were conversing togather, but only those characters know Sanskrit who converse secret thing in a code language unknown to others  of the group).

 

As noticed in the earlier post, malayalam characters will have to strive hard to real forms of Prakrit without error, if the objective is to present a error free Prakrit text (which even the editors of Sanskrit Plays too do not mind them, but replace them in many modern editions, the sanskrit translations with the Prakrit text given in the notes). Mostly there won't be correspondence between them, if one knowing Prakrit and Sanskrit happens to have a look at the text in Prakrit and Sanskrit and then to the translation. This is in addition to the readability of the Prakrit text presentable in Malayalam characters. In manuscripts, they use a special convention to economise writing the repeated characters (due to phonetic changes) in South INdian scripts including "grantha" script.

[murthy]

I believe neither Sanskrit nor Prakrit employed in plays was a spoken language at the time of Kalidasa or Bhavabhuti. They would have simply followed the convention of making certain categories or classes of people speak Prakrut in plays.

Besides, it seems possible that the same Prakrit text could be recast in Sanskriit in more than one way. As I go through "Setubandham" of Pravarasena, the commentator often gives different interpretations depending on how parkrit is recast in Sanskrit.

Regards

Murthy

----- Original Message -----

From: hnbhat B.R.

To: sams...@googlegroups.com

Sent: Sunday, August 14, 2011 8:54 AM

Subject: Re: [Samskrita] Conversation in Prakrita in Sanskrit plays

[shankara]

Murthyji,

Thanks for sharing your views.

Could you kindly explain it with a few examples?

 

regards
shankara

---

From: murthy <murt...@gmail.com>
To: sams...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sunday, 14 August 2011 11:05 AM

[Arvind_Kolhatkar]

Shankara,

Please peruse the discussion under the thread 'Sanskrita vs Prakrita
as spoken language' (December 2010) in this Group, where various
aspects of this question have received attention.

Briefly, my own view there was that use of Sanskrit in literature,
statecraft, fields of knowledge, was more indicative as an expression
of belonging to the elite group, than of the fact that classical
Sanskrit was a spoken language, which, I think, it never was. The
elite group wrote for the other members of the elite group and you
would not be counted as a member of the elite unless you followed
their accepted conventions, one of which was that Brahmans, Kings and
suchlike spoke in Sanskrit while others spoke in Prakrit.

To give a contemporary example, if you are an ordinary well-to-do
person (not out to make a point ) and go to the Taj Mahal Hotel in
Mumbai for a good time, you would mostly hear English spoken around
you and you would be expected to speak in English. If you tried to
speak in your native tongue, you fear that you may be missed for a
country yokel. So, if you want good service from the hotel staff, you
would 'choose' to speak in English, though in your own house you may
be very comfortable in your native tongue.

Coming to rendering Sanskrit plays in a non-Devanagari script, if you
wish to remain faithful to the original, you should reproduce Prakrit
dialogues in Prakrit and provide in brackets a Sanskrit 'chhaya' as is
done in Devanagari books. As to the question how to reproduce the
Prakrit correctly, the only answer that I can think of is that you
just have to manage that somehow.

Arvind Kolhatkar, Toronto, August 14, 2011.

[shankara]

Kolhatkarji,

I was not aware of the discussion on Prakrit that took place in Dec 2100. I joined the group later and had not browsed all the earlier discussions. I will read it now.

As you said, I have decided to retain the Prakrit conversations as they are part of the original and to give their Sanskrit translation in brackets. There are many books of Kalidasa's plays in Malayalam with Prakrit text, so it is not difficult to render them in Malayalam script. I will just follow what others had done.

 

regards
shankara

---

From: Arvind_Kolhatkar <kolhat...@gmail.com>
To: samskrita <sams...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Monday, 15 August 2011 9:07 AM
Subject: [Samskrita] Re: Conversation in Prakrita in Sanskrit plays

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "samskrita" group.
To post to this group, send email to sams...@googlegroups.com.

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to samskrita+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

[Vidya R]

"Briefly, my own view there was that use of Sanskrit in literature,
statecraft, fields of knowledge, was more indicative as an expression
of belonging to the elite group, than of the fact that classical
Sanskrit was a spoken language, which, I think, it never was."

With all due respects :

Two aspects have got mixed up -> 

1.  Sanskrit as a language belonging to the elite, (Who are considered as belonging to the elite?) 

2.  Sanskrit as a spoken language (referring to impromptu oral communication between two or more people)

If Sanskrit represented in Drama (the dialogue aspects) carries any literary merit, it can only be a reflection of something that had been practiced and perfected prior to getting 'scribe'd.

Need for / development of 'saMbodhana-prathamA', 'bhoH', ...  must have come out of regular use ...  Panini is reported to have observed prevalent usage, and not drafted the rules.  And he has a rule for 'abhivAdaye' not being addressable to women and people of lower caste - again, must be observation from what was current ...

....

Today, once a person starts speaking in Sanskrit, or, more importantly starts listening to people speak in Sanskrit / deliver lectures in Sanskrit, he / she can have no difficulty in seeing that the language can be (and is) a spoken language, and a thinking language ...

Vidya

---

From: Arvind_Kolhatkar <kolhat...@gmail.com>
To: samskrita <sams...@googlegroups.com>

Sent: Sunday, August 14, 2011 11:37 PM

Subject: [Samskrita] Re: Conversation in Prakrita in Sanskrit plays

[murthy]

You are right. Samskrit would have been a spoken language around Panini's time circa 500BC. What percentage of population really used it for day to day speech is hard to guess. Perhaps priestly classes used it. Prakrit including Pali was used by the common folk.

But Kalidasa and Bhavabhuti came at least 800-1000 years after Panini, by which time Sanskrit was what Latin was at the time of Newton.Newton wrote his works in Latin although he spoke English.Sanskrit had become a frozen language. 

Regards

Murthy

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to samskrita+...@googlegroups.com.

[Vinodh Rajan]

On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 10:42 AM, murthy <murt...@gmail.com> wrote:

priestly classes used it. Prakrit including Pali was used by the common folk.

FWIW AFAIK Pali was never a spoken language. It was just a late Buddhist register of the Magadhi dialect. 

Though the Theravadin-s did consider (and still consider) that the the language of their version of Tripitaka was same as the Magadhi dialect spoken by the Tathagata Himself.

V

--
http://www.virtualvinodh.com