GRAMMATICAL ANALYSIS OF VANAPARAVA OF MAHĀBHĀRATA

A DISSERTAION SUBMITTED
TO THE
UNIVERSITY OF MUMBAI
FOR THE
MA DEGREE IN SANSKRIT (SEM 4)

SUBMITTED BY
PRAVIN SASIDHARAN NAIR

UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF

MS HARSHADA SAWARKAR

DEPARTMENT OF SANSKRIT
UNIVERSITY OF MUMBAI
APRIL 2018
 INDEX

1. Introduction
2. Taddhita of Vanaparva of Mahabharata
3. Treatment of Nominals in Vanaparva
4. Conclusion and Observation
5. IPA guide
6. Bibliography
 1.Introduction

A study of Epic Sanskrit is one of those areas of Sanskrit that has the potential of
unlocking a whole new yet to be explored dimension of Sanskrit literature. The
study of Epic Sanskrit will not only enlighten the seekers of truth but will also
provide various clues and missing links regarding the existence of a pre-Vedic-pre-
Sanskrit heritage of India that, if it can be substantially proved, can complete the
puzzle of Indus Valley Civilisation. This is because Epics of India (Rāmāyaṇa and
Mahābhārata) covers multiple dimensions of Indian literary heritage. Epic Sanskrit
is a bridge connecting Vedic Sanskrit with Classical Sanskrit and since they are not
Vedic texts they don’t need to follow the strict rules of protection and propagation
of Vedic hymns and hence various legends, tales, allegories, facts and symbolisms
of myriad sections of ancient India were able to merge with the Epic literature.
The Epic literature of Sanskrit has been analysed and studied by scholars
covering various aspects of knowledge but excluding grammatical and lingual
aspects. Since the Epic literature has diverse features, it surely contains elements to
reconstruct our understanding of Indian history and heritage. The study of
Rāmāyaṇa and Mahābhārata from the point of view of grammar surely throws light
on the logic behind the use of “aberrant” forms that are found in large numbers in
Epic literature. The presence of these forms does not indicate that the language of
Epics is flawed; in fact it highlights the fact that the core legend of Epics has a very
ancient history which is related to Proto-Indo European mythology.
One the basis of grammatical analysis of Epic Sanskrit we do enter the realm
of Proto-Indo European World, its language, society, religion and myths which is
in turn can be comarped with Semitic myths. Creation myths of Proto-Indo
European World and Proto-Semitic world are similar. There are Indus seals that
depict some themes of Epic of Gilgamesh and Egypt had a strong trade relationship
with Indus valley merchants who exported precious and semi-precious stones to
ancient Egyptian nobility and Royalty. The presence of Mitanni blood in later
Egyptian ancestry by matrimonial alliances also indicates the continuous contact of
Semitic, Egyptian and Aryan races. There are many words in Proto-Indo European
and Semitic languages that have common roots and also the mention of ten-kings
in Ṛg Veda and in Old Testament needs to be analysed with minutely since the
legend of ten-kings of Ṛg Veda is the nucleus of Mahābhārata.
 Myths, religion, trade and language followed by archaeological artefacts
help to point out the connection between various diverse cultures; they help us to
pinpoint the different threads connecting different civilizations. Such a global
understanding of different cultures, in the long-run, will help to reduce and remove
fanaticism. The ancient religions of Egypt, Persia, Iraq, Greece and Rome were
toppled by Christian and Islamic fanaticism which continues to plague global
peace even now. Due to the emergence of fanatic monotheistic faiths the common
threads connecting the diverse races of earth were damaged. But religions don’t
die, they mutate, transform and metamorphosize to form a skeleton of the new
religions that are created. Thus when we analyse the grammatical aspects of Epic
Sanskrit we are able to understand these subtle aspects.
In this paper the various features of Epic Sanskrit will be analysed with
respect to Vedic Sanskrit, Classical Sanskrit and Proto-Indo European Grammar.
The analysis will be done on the basis of Vanaparava of Mahābhārata.

Mahābhārata
The Mahābhārata began its existence as a simple epic narrative probably the
continuation of the aftermath of the Battle of Ten Kings. The Battle of the Ten
Kings (dāśarājñá) is a battle alluded to in the Ṛg Veda (Book 7, hymns 18, 33 and
83.4-8), the ancient Indian sacred collection of Vedic Sanskrit hymns. The battle
took place during the middle or main Ṛg Vedic period, near the Ravi
River in Punjab. It was a battle between the Puru Vedic Aryan tribal kingdoms of
the Bharatas, allied with other tribes of the north west India, guided by the royal
sage Viśvāmitra, and the Tṛtsu -Bharata (Puru) king Sudāsa, who defeats other
Vedic tribes. He led his tribe to victory in the Battle of the Ten Kings near the
Paruṣṇī (modern Ravi River) in Punjab, defeating an alliance of the
powerful Puru tribe with other tribes, for which he was eulogised by
his purohita Vasiṣṭha in a hymn of the Ṛg Veda. His victory established the
ascendency of the Bhārata clan, allowing them to move eastwards and settle
in Kurukṣetra, paving the way for the emergence of the Kuru "super-tribe" or tribal
union, which dominated northern India in the subsequent period. The core legend
of Mahābhārata became lost due to the progressive interpolations as the legend
became more and more popular over the centuries. Every generation of poets had
something to add; every distant kingdom of ancient India was anxious to
interpolate some account of its deeds in the old record of the international war;
every preacher of a new creed desired to have in the Epic some sanction for the
new truths he inculcated. Passages from legal and moral codes were incorporated
in the work which appealed to the nation much more effectively than dry codes;
and rules about the different castes and about the different human stages of the
human life were included for the same purpose. All the floating mass of tales,
legends and myths found a shelter under the expanding wings of this wonderful
Epic.
Traditionally it is believed that Mahābhārata was written by Veda Vyāsa
with Lord Gaṇeśa as his amanuensis in span of three years. Initially it had 8800
verses and was called Jaya and then it expanded to include 24000 ślokas which
came to be called as Bhārata. Finally at the time of the sacrifice at Janamejaya
when it was recited by Vaiśaṁpāyana and by Sauti it assumed the megalomaniac
proportion of 1,00,000 verses-
अष्टौ श्लोकसहस्राणि अष्टौ श्लोकशतानि च।

अहं वेद्मी शक
ु ो वेत्तत संजयो वेत्तत वा ि वा।।
aṣṭau ślokasahasrāṇi aṣṭau ślokaśatāni ca.
ahaṁ vedmi śuko vetti sañjayo vetti vā na vā.
“In this text there are 8800 verses which I (Sauti) know, Śuka knows, Saṁjaya
may or may not know”
एकं शतसहस्रं तु मािष
ु ष
े ु प्रनतत्ष्ितम ्। ekaṁ śataṁ sahasraṁ tu mānuṣeṣu
pratiṣṭhitam
“In the world of humans there is ‘hundred-thousand verse’ Mahābhārata text”
As mentioned earlier Mahābhārata originally composed by Vyāsa and later
narrated by Vaiśaṁpāyana to Janamejaya has come down to us not in original form
but with many additions and interpolations by reciters and later by writers of
manuscripts at different places and different times. The number of passages added
to the Mahābhārata text is quite large. This kind of large scale fluctuation of the
text is not witnessed in any other Sanskrit text, except perhaps Rāmāyaṇa. This
was because of the immense popularity of the epic in the subcontinent and beyond.
However according to modern scholars Mahābhārata was certainly not
composed by one person but it was subjected to many additions, retellings and
interpolations. Whatsoever the truth is, one fact is for certain that Mahābhārata is
an encyclopaedia of knowledge and it must be analysed in all possible ways. Next
to the Vedas, it is the most valuable product of the entire literature of ancient India.
Venerable for its antiquity, it is one of the most inspiring monuments of the world
and an inexhaustible mine for the investigation of the religion, mythology, legend,
philosophy, law, custom and political and social institutions of ancient India.
Indeed Mahābhārata is a mine of knowledge however in this paper the
grammatical aspect of Mahābhārata will be analysed based on Vanaparva. There
are 18 parvas in Mahābhārata which are given below:
1. Ādi
2. Sabhā
3. Vana
4. Virāṭa
5. Udyoga
6. Bhīṣma
7. Droṇa
8. Karṇa
9. Śalya
10.Sauptika
11.Strī
12.Śānti
13.Anuśāsana
14.Aśvamedha
15.Āśramavāsika
16.Mausala
17.Mahāprasthānika
18.Svargārohaṇa
Among these 18 parvas or books Vanaparva is one of the longest parvas in
Mahābhārata with many sub-stories including Rāmopākhyāna, an abridged version
of Rāmāyaṇa. The longest parva is Śāntiparva. Vanaparva is the ideal specimen to
analyse the subtle aspects of Mahābhārata which covers not only the linguistic
features but also various socio-political factors of ancient India. According to
scholars Vanaparva of Mahābhārata and Āraṇyakāṇḍa of Rāmāyaṇa hints at the
gradual urbanisation of various forest tribal kingdoms and races. Vanaparva is also
significant because it highlights peculiar grammatical features like the frequent use
of taddhitas and irregular nominal stems. From this stems the quest to know the
specific features of Sanskrit of the Epics. According to later day Sanskrit
rhetoricians any Sanskrit literature or text can be considered as legitimate if they
have no errors including grammatical errors. However the Sanskrit of Epics
deviates completely from the established standards of grammar. But the truth is
grammar follows language. The deviations found in the Epics indicate that the
language used was spoken language and not frozen language. Also due to the
absence of non- Pāṇinian grammatical texts one cannot be sure whether the
‘deviant’ forms found in epics are correct or otherwise. The grammatical traditions
of Sanskrit always stress on the existence of various branches of grammar going
back to Indra and Bṛhaspati (Vedic era). This is also attested in Buddhist and Jain
literature as well. These aberrant forms also point out to the antiquity of the epics.
The sages of Vedic era were polytheists and as the Aryans became a settled
race the need for chronicles and legends led to the emergence of bards and settled
civilisation provided ample of time to ponder the supernatural and spiritual facets
of human existence. As a result bards and philosophers proliferated and many
spiritual, social and historical texts were composed. As and when new texts were
being composed the language also underwent many changes. Thus by the time of
Pāṇini the language had underwent considerable changes and Vedic Sanskrit was
already archaic and difficult.
In order to protect Vedic texts, Nirukta and Prātiśākhyas were composed and
thus Vedic hymns became sacrosanct and beyond any interpolation. However the
language of the epics were free from such restrictions and hence absorbed all the
dynamic changes of Sanskrit as exhibited in the ancient ages. Epic Sanskrit is the
twilight phase of Sanskrit language, it is not Vedic but at the same time it is not
Pāṇinian either. It shows a link between old, new and ancient Sanskrit.
The flexibility and adaptability of Sanskrit was arrested by Pāṇini by his
Sūtras and gave rise to classical Sanskrit. The initial origin of classical Sanskrit are
found in Kaṭha, Kena, Praśna, Muṇḍaka, Māṇḍukya and Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣads
they also have archaic Vedic forms too. This pattern of Sanskrit is then observed in
Āśvalāyana Gṛhyasūtra, Āśvalāyana Śrautasūtra, Āpastamba Dharmasūtra, Gobhila
Gṛhyasūtra, Bodhāyana Dharmasūtra, etc for eg. Saptadaśāni ( सप्तदशानि),
praskandayitvā -praskandya (प्रस्कन्दनयतवा (प्रस्कन््य),darpati-(dṛpyati) दर्पनत
(दृप्यनत), lunoti -(lunāti)लि
ु ोनत (लि
ु ानत) are found in these texts. Such forms are
found in Epic Sanskrit too. Metrical varieties are not found in Epics, the ancient
Vedic meters are found in Epics. Mahābhārata and Rāmāyaṇa are based on śloka
(anuṣṭup) meter and at times triṣṭup meter is also employed. Metrical variety is
found in Bhāgavata and Matsya Purāṇas. In the phalaśruti of the fifth chapter of
Svargārohaṇa parva we can find vasantatālikā meter which was a later
interpolation. Thus Mahābhārata offers variety of grammatical peculiarities and
these shall be studied in the paper.

Aṣṭādhyāyī

Vedas are the monumental and foundational texts of Indian literature. All the
sacred and secular texts have their base in the Vedas. In order to know the Vedic
knowledge as it is, the study of auxiliary texts (six limbs) is mandatory. Among the
six auxiliary texts grammar is the most important limb of the Vedas. In fact it is
ancient India that had carried absolutely phenomenal research in the field of
grammar and linguistics.
The importance of grammar can be understood from the below verse:
छन्दः र्ादौ तु वेदस्य हस्तौ कल्र्ोऽथ र्ठ्यते
ज्योनतषामयिं चक्षुनिपरुक्तं श्रोत्रमच्
ु यते।
शशक्षा घ्रािं तु वेदस्य मख
ु ं व्याकरिं स्मत
ृ म्
तस्मातसाङ्गमधीतयैव ब्रह्मलोके महीयते॥
“Chandas is feet of Vedas, Kalpa is the arm, Jyotiṣa is the eyes and Nirukta is the
ears of Vedas. Śikṣā is the nose and Vyākaraṇa is the head of Vedas. He who
studies the Vedas along with these auxiliary texts will attain the supreme merit”
य्यपर् बहु िाधीषे तथापर् र्ि र्त्र
ु व्याकरिम ्।
स्वजिो श्वजिो माऽभतू सकलं शकलं सकृतशकृत ्॥
“Even if you don’t study many texts but O child study grammar, (so that) you may
not mistake relative (स्वजि) for dog (श्वजि), complete (सकल) for part (शकल)
and once (सकृत ्) for faeces (शकृत ्)”
Thus the study of grammar is one of the most important disciplines of
Sanskrit literature. Sanskrit is called ‘devabhāṣā’ or the language of Gods. Ancient
civilisations across the world considered language as a sacred and divine feature.
Language was viewed more as metaphysical concept. Ancient Egypt, Greece and
Semites considered language as a divine and powerful tool to communicate with
the higher spiritual forces and often language was classified as sacred and profane
or vulgar. The sacred part of language was reserved for the priests, mystics,
philosophers and kings, which was zealously guarded and transmitted to future
generations with utmost secrecy. However none of the ancient sages of these
civilisations could cover the aspect of language like the sages of ancient India.
In Indian philosophy the study of language developed and expanded to cover
all the aspects of human knowledge consisting of spiritual and material planes. The
study of grammar developed to form a distinct philosophy. Thus grammar was
studied in depth and many branches of learning were formed. The first grammarian
was Indra whose Aindra school of grammar was quite popular and studied
throughout the subcontinent. It is believed that the Tamil grammar treatise named
Tolkāppiyaṃ was influenced by Aindra vyākaraṇa. Tibetan Buddhist sources also
mention about Aindra vyākaraṇa.
However all the various schools of grammar were eclipsed by the
Aṣṭādhyāyī of Pāṇini. This was because the treatise of Pāṇini is a complete text
which covers all the important aspects of grammar. Aṣṭādhyāyī was composed by
Pāṇini around 600-500 BC with 3995 sutras arranged in eight chapters. Later the
sutras were updated by Kātyāyana and then the authority of Pāṇini was established
by Patañjali around 150 BC. Aṣṭādhyāyī is a very significant text because it also
provides various historical and social information about ancient India. Pāṇini has
also mentioned his predecessors/contemporaries in his text, they are: Śākaṭāyana,
Śākalya, Āpiśali, Gārgya, Gālava, Bhāradvāja, Kāśyapa, Senaka, Sphoṭāyana and
Cākravarmaṇa. Pāṇini has also included the rules regarding Vedic words too in his
treatise hence Aṣṭādhyāyī is considered to be the most authoritative text on
grammar. Aṣṭādhyāyī is a text in which Pāṇini has used many devices which were
available during his era as well as he created various devices by himself which
made the Aṣṭādhyāyī a highly sophisticated text whose sutras can be used to not
only understand the current structure of Sanskrit but also to create more new
words. Thus Aṣṭādhyāyī became the standard text for Sanskrit language since then
till now. Aṣṭādhyāyī covers nominals, absolutives, secondary derivatives, verbal
roots, prefixes, prepositions, indeclinable, suffixes and tense-terminations.
Aṣṭādhyāyī calcified Sanskrit. Since Epics are more ancient than Aṣṭādhyāyī we
can find various aberrant forms which will be dealt in this paper.

Epic Sanskrit

Classical Sanskrit is, apart from some dialectal differences, is essentially a

later form of the language. Grammatically the wealth of Vedic forms is cut down
considerably. The language of Mahābhārata and Rāmāyaṇa is indeed Sanskrit
which continually deviates from the norms codified by Pāṇini because it was a
spoken language used by the poets and bards. The beginnings of this popular
Sanskrit go back to Ṛg Veda. Its hymns are composed in an archaic and at the
same time, deliberately archaizing language which lagged behind linguistic
evolution. Out of the contemporary ‘spoken’ Sanskrit, however, a few forms
penetrated into its hieratic language for eg:
cakṣoḥ Ṛg Veda 10.90.13 (abl of cakṣu, eye, cakṣus)
nāvayā Ṛg Veda 1.97.8 (instr of nāvā, boat, nau)
imasya Ṛg Veda 8.13.21 (gen sg of idaṁ).
The next linguistic stages- the mantra language, saṁhitā prose, the brāhmaṇa
prose and the sutra language- show a much advanced vernacular from which quite
a number of colloquial forms intruded into the hieratic language of the ritual texts.
The main features which it shares with Epic Sanskrit are as follows:
1. Non sandhi of ‘a and ṛ’
2. Double sandhi and sandhi of pragṛhya vowels
3. Shortening of long vowels at the seams of compounds
4. Confusion of nominative and accusative plural of feminine ‘i-stems’,
ī-stems, ū-stems and of the ‘ap-stems’
5. Transfer of stems
6. Aberrant inflexion of pronouns
7. Irregular numerals
8. Inverted order of the members of compounds
9. rājan instead of rājā in tatpuruṣa compounds
10.Misplaced augments
11.Mā with augmented aorist, future, imperative and optative
12.Crossing of parasmaipadī and ātmanepadī
13.Crossing of desiderative and future
14.Casuatives without causal meaning
15.The use of genitive instead of dative
It will be observed that the aberrant forms in Epic Sanskrit have its roots in Vedic
Sanskrit. Epic Sanskrit is not to be considered as inferior form of Sanskrit but it is
a language in its own right. Quite a number of its coinages are logical and
consistent realisations of linguistic facts. The use of the first person of the
indicative in imperative function led to a crossing of indicative and imperative
which led to the building of forms such as karavāmahe (kurmahe + karavāmahai).
The imperative function of the future led to the establishment of a new verbal
category the imperativus futuri. The most conspicuous features of Epic Sanskrit,
however, are the strong influence the difference forms of the nominal and of the
verbal system exercised on each other on the one hand and its economy on the
other. The determining catalyst for creating up new forms and paradigms is often
analogy. It eliminates alterations created, in the first place, by ablaut. Although
there is a great variety of a process involved, they all tend towards like goals,
1. The conformity of the individual paradigms and
2. The coordination of different paradigms
A lot of irregular nominal forms owe their existence to paradigmatic levelling, as
may be seen from the following chart:
Classical Sanskrit Epic Sanskrit
Acc sg kanīyāṃsam kanīyasam
vidvāṃsam viduṣam
Gen sg kanīyasaḥ kanīyasaḥ
viduṣaḥ viduṣaḥ
Nom du kanīyāṃsau kanīyasau
vidvāṃsau viduṣau
Nom pl kanīyāṃsaḥ kanīyasaḥ
vidvāṃsaḥ viduṣaḥ

Since the ‘ā-stems’ absorb such words as apsarā, duhitā, mahimā and svasā, a large
group is formed whose inflexion might if metrically required- be the model for all
vocalic feminine stems. Such regrouping and systematization can be seen in verbal
stems as well. The simplex and causative are joined in such a way that a causative
with -ā- belongs to a present with the stem vowel -a-. Another prominent feature of
Epic Sanskrit is its economy. Also here a few examples may suffice to make this
point plain: since the passive has a stem distinctly different from that of the
present, active endings can also be added to it, the augment may be dropped from
imperfect forms as they are characterized by special endings, the reduplication of
the perfect may- under special conditions- be dispensed with as already
distinguished by particular endings.
 The vocabulary of the Epics is as variegated as its grammar. The main
element is words inherited from Vedic Sanskrit, but there is an Indo-European
sediment of words not to be found in Vedic:
1. alāta - fire brand
2. kiṇa - callous scar
3. /khañj/ to limp
4. /tarj/ to menace
5. /vrīḍ/ to feel ashamed
6. /stan/ to moan
7. aṅgana - court
8. eḍuka - relic chamber
9. kuṇapa - lance
10.kuddāla - spade
11.kūṭa - snare
12.nīra - water
13.mīna - fish
14.vañjula - a plant
Another peculiar feature of Epic Sanskrit is the presence of non-Indian words like
Iranian, Greek and Austro-Asiatic; kuḍaka - baby, mihira – sun (Iranian) and the
following words are of Greek origin:
kunta – spear - kontos
khalīna – bridle- khalinos
paristoma – pillow- peristros
suruṅga – tunnel- surwnges
The vocabulary is enriched by new words, mostly connected with flora and
fauna and military terms for which earlier Sanskrit speakers had no words of their
own. Epic Sanskrit represents a link connecting Vedic Sanskrit to Classical
Sanskrit. From PIE to Vedic Sanskrit the changes, transformation and derivations
are known to modern scholars because they have reconstructed the Proto-Language
and thus the linguistic modifications and changes are known and studied. Similarly
we can know the changes from Vedic Sanskrit up to Classical Sanskrit by
analysing Epic Sanskrit.
In Vedic Sanskrit case affixes are used with great flexibility for eg we can
find devebhiḥ and devaiḥ together also the difference in declension between two
types of feminine ī-stems is lost in classical Sanskrit i.e. devī and vṛkī words.
These two feminine words ending in ī are declined differently in Vedic Sanskrit as
well as in Epic Sanskrit. This difference is lost in classical Sanskrit and all the
ī-stems are declined like nadī word. The peculiar declensions of devī and vṛkī
words are given below:

Singular Dual Plural

Nom दे वी दे वी दे वीः
Acc दे वीम ् - -
Inst - - -
Dat दे व्यै - -
Abl - - -
Gen दे व्याः - दे वीिाम ्
Loc दे व्याम ् - -
Voc दे पव - -

Singular Dual Plural

Nom वक
ृ ः वक्
ृ या वक्
ृ याः
Acc वक्
ृ यम ् - -
Inst - - -
Dat वक्
ृ ये - -
Abl - - -
Gen वक्
ृ यः - वक
ृ िाम ्
Loc वक
ृ - -
Voc वकृ क - -

As per the current system both devī and vṛkī are declined like nadī as given below:

Singular Dual Plural

Nom दे वी दे व्यौ दे व्यः
Acc दे वीम ् दे व्यौ दे वीः
Inst दे व्या दे वीभ्याम ् दे वीशभः
Dat दे व्यै दे वीभ्याम ् दे वीभ्यः
Abl दे व्याः दे वीभ्याम ् दे वीभ्यः
Gen दे व्याः दे व्योः दे वीिाम ्
Loc दे व्याम ् दे व्योः दे वीषु
Voc दे पव दे व्यौ दे व्यः

The study of Epic Sanskrit is very essential due to the following reasons:
 a whole new dimension of Sanskrit is explored
 such a study will help to know the history of Epic India
 influence of other languages on Sanskrit
 a probable reconstruction of pre-Sanskrit language of India with respect to
Indus Valley Civilisation
Thus with this background and introduction the further study of Sanskrit of
Mahābhārata shall be analysed broadly on two major areas
1. Taddhitas
2. Nominals
 2.Taddhita of Vanaparva of Mahābhārata

One of the unique features f Sanskrit is the ability to create words. It is

because of this feature or strength one cannot term Sanskrit a fossilised language or
a dead language. Pāṇini was well aware of the fact that languages are always in a
constant state of flux. They change, many aspects are lost, new aspects are
included, existing aspects are modified and thus languages undergo many changes
over the period of time. Taddhita rules enable Sanskrit to coin new words, to add
subtle nuances to existing words and to accept new words. Hence Pāṇini has
devoted approximately 1100 sūtras out of 3995 in Aṣṭādhyāyī.
Among the various taddhita affixes the focus shall be more on tadrāja
taddhita affixes. This is because this group of affixes are important to analyse the
taddhitas of epics, in this case Vanaparva of Mahābhārata. “तेभ्य प्रयोगेभ्यः हहता
इनत तपिता”-this is the definition of taddhita. In tadrāja group we come across
references to various clans, tribes, dynasties, sages, seers and city-states. The term
taddhita is a pre- Pāṇinian term used by him. The term taddhita is found in Nirukta
2.2 and Vājasaneyī Prātiśākhya 1.27. It is to be noted that the term taddhita was
used by ancient grammarians in the sense of a word derived from a substantive by
the application of affixes like अ यत ् अि ् etc and not in the sense of words derived
from roots by affixes like अि ्, नत etc.
The affixes अञ ् अि ् ञ्यङ् ण्य इञ ् छ ञ्यट्
ु यञ ् टे ण्यि ् which are given in the
rules of Aṣṭādhyāyī 4.1.168 to 5.3.112-119 are called tadrāja affixes because these
affixes are applied to such words meaning both the country and the warrior race or
clan. The peculiar feature of this group of affixes is that they are elided when the
derived word is made plural, for eg: ‘ऐक्ष्वाकः ऐक्ष्वाकौ इक्ष्वाकवः’
Taddhitas are used in high numbers in those parts of Vanaparava which
contain upākhyānas, especially those parts of the text which are interpolated and
which deviate from the Pāṇḍavas and taddhitas are used because they were
convenient for the bards to interpolate their legends in the continuum of the theme
of the Epic. Taddhitas play a very crucial role in determining the inclusion of
secondary materials as a part of the main epic. According to scholars Vanaparva is
fraught with secondary materials because of the abundance of taddhita affixes.
Apatyavācakas and janapadavācakas taddhitas occupy Vanaparva. The bards
found the use of taddhitas a very convenient way to insert their metrical system
and also to highlight their specific characters, the exploits of their heroes and the
messages they want to convey. These secondary legends point out to the inclusive
nature of the epic which has made it very popular in the subcontinent and beyond.
Interestingly, Mahābhārata was specifically patronized by the Mughal Emperors
because they wanted to establish their legitimacy on the people of the vast
subcontinent by associating themselves with the characters of the epic. It was
during Akbar the mammoth task of translating Mahābhārata into Persian was
undertaken and many Persian stories and phrases were inserted into the epic by the
scribes and translators. Taddhitas don’t exist in Persian or Arabic yet interpolations
were done by Mughal scribes by inserting Persian and Arabic words like khuda,
allah, rahnumah,etc.
There are many taddhitas in Vanaparva and it is also considered to be a later
addition. There is a possibility that the bards who were influenced by the narration
of Rāmāyaṇa were using the same personal epithets to describe their own heroes in
the Mahābhārata. Tri-syllabic taddhitas are very common at cadential positions.
kaunteya,rādheya, kaurava, pāṇḍava, bhārata are very commonly used taddhita
forms. Along with these, some strῑ apatyavācakas like gāndharῑ, pāñcāla and
janapadavācakas like māgadha also come very frequently.
We shall see the prominent taddhitas of Vanaparva as follows:
 From Nalopākhyāna
1. pāñcāla
2. jānapada
3. pārthiva
4. pārtha
5. vāsudeva
6. dhārtarāṣṭra
7. bhaimīx
8. naiṣadha
9. vaidarbhī
10.kaurava
11.kauravya
12.vārṣṇeya
13.sauhārda
14.āditya
 15.brahmaṇya
16.tāpasa
17.paura
18.kaitava
 From Rāmopākhyāna
1. vaidehī
2. vaideha
3. vaiśravaṇa
4. draupadeya
5. saindhava
6. jānakī
7. rāvaṇa
8. kausalyā
9. kaikeyī
10.mārkaṇḍeya
11.maithilī
12.dāśarathī
13.paulastya
14.mārīca
15.kākutstha
16.rāghava
17.saumitrī
18.sāgara
19.aikṣvāka
20.vāsava
21.rāvaṇi
22.mātali
23.paulomī
 From Sāvitrī Upākhyāna
1. śaibya
2. auśīnara
3. vaivasvata
4. mālava
5. dālbhya
6. pārthivī
 From Ājagaraparva
1. yādava
 2. ārṣṭiṣeṇa
3. daiva
4. daitya
 From Draupadī-Satyabhāmā-Saṁvāda Parva
1. yājñasenī
2. pāñcālī
3. sātrajitī
4. nākuli
 Other common taddhitas
1. pāṇḍaveya
2. mādreya
3. aindri
4. paurava
5. pāśupata

Taddhita form pārtha is the most frequent taddhita form at the three positions of
anuṣṭubh. But it is less frequent at the beginning of the first pāda. Here we have
discussed a very interesting result of taddhita form naiṣadha. Naiṣadha is a
personal epithet of Nala and it is very illuminating to go through the analysis of
this taddhita. Occurences of naiṣadha in all the Mbh. -: 45 times.
43 times in Vanaparva, 1 time in Droṇaparva and Anuśāsanaparva.
Nala is a hero of upākhyāna which is a part of this parvan. In a way this search
reveals the secondary character of nalopākhyāna as well as the personal epithet
also which is not a common for all the parvans of the Mbh. These types of searches
throw light on the secondary episodes and the diction involved in it. We shall
discuss this in the search result of mārkaṇḍeya also. Therefore this is evident that
Nala or Mārkaṇḍeya are not the characters concerned directly with the Mbh. story.
This personal epithet of Nala occurs at all the four metrical positions.
भशू मं जयो वष
ृ क्राथो िैषधश्च महाबल:। (Dr 19.13)
मान्धाता वै मच
ु क
ु ु न्दश्च राजा भरू र्यम्
ु िो िैषधः सोमकश्च। (Anu 75.25)

Mārkaṇḍeya occurs at the beginning of first pāda also. It appears 15 times

and 7 times in the Vanaparvan. Here also the frequency of the mārkaṇḍeya is
observable in Vanaparvan. As we have discussed in case of naiṣadha, mārkaṇḍeya
also seems to be a foreign figure for this epic. Again it is very frequent in
Vanaparvan. These two results reveal that the content of Vanaparvan is mostly
secondary. These are some grammatical substitution systems discussed at this
place. This list of grammatical substitution system is sufficient to explain the
mechanism involved in the oral bardic poetry. The most important observation that
leads us to reconsider the definition of formula is that the same underlying
grammatical patterns are frequently seen at the particular metrical positions.
Apatyavācaka and janapadakṣatriya taddhitas dominate the taddhita diction in the
Mahābhārata. Also other types of the taddhitas may be further studied, which are
less frequent but still noticeable. Taddhitas do certainly come through to remediate
the metrical needs of the bards. This formulaic nature of taddhitas is thus a
significant feature of the epic diction. Wide occurrences of certain taddhitas, only
in the certain parvans, make the central narrative and the peripheral narrative
structure of the epic evident. There are instances where taddhitas come in
combination with other grammatical feature like compounding and help to form
full lines of anuṣṭubh meter e.g. dhārtarāṣṭrabalaṃ ghoraṃ. Vocative forms of bi-
and tri- syllabic taddhitas are the most useful fillers in the cadential positions.
pārtha, bhārata, pāṇḍava, kaurava and kaunteya are the great instruments in the
metrical exigencies faced by the bard under the rapid speed of composition in the
performance, This is very noteworthy point since narrative poetry like
Mahābhārata reflects, the way of narrations through these vocatives. These
vocatives stand as the characteristic mark of the oral epic.
As had discussed earlier the tadrāja affixes play a very important role in the
analysis. These affixes are found in 4th and 5th chapters of Aṣṭādhyāyī-- ते तद्राजाः।
(4.1.174) ‘these affixes are called tadrāja affixes (the King of there and these). The
affixes as discussed above are alone to be considered as tadrāja affixes as indicated
by the pronoun ते and not all the affixes treated before 4.1.168; for they have
special designation of gotra and yuvan affixes. The six main sūtras of tadrāja
affixes are given below:
1. janapadaśabdāt kṣatriyādañ.
2. sālveyagāndhāribhyāṁ ca.
3. dvyañmagadhakaliṅgasūramasādaṇ.
4. vṛddhātkosalājādaññyaṅ.
5. kurunādibhyo ṇyaḥ.
6. sālvāvayavapratyagrathakalakūṭāśmakādiñ
7. te tadrājāḥ.
There are other sūtras too related to tadrāja affixes like:
1. kambojalluk
2. striyāmavantikuntikurubhyaśca
3. na prācyabhargādiyaudheyādibhyaḥ
pañcāla + añ by janapadaśabdāt kṣatriyādañ|
pāñcāla + ṅīp = pāñcālī and the sūtra na prācyabhargādiyaudheyādibhyaḥ| debars
ataśca| and we get forms like pāñcālī vaidehī āṅgī vāṅgī māgadhī bhārgī kāruṣī
kaikeyī yaudheyī etc. pāñcāla is the name of the kingdom and the taddhita pāñcāla
denotes the warriors of the kingdom. Thus the kṣatriyas of pañcāla kingdom are
called pāñcāla derived by the affix añ by the sūtra janapadaśabdāt kṣatriyādañ | and
the descendants of the family of pañcāla kingdom are also called pāñcāla derived
by the affix aṇ by prāgdīvyato'ṇ | The final word is the same with accent being
different for both.

kosala + ñyaṅ by vṛddhātkosalājādaññyaṅ|

and by ṭāp we get kausalyā.
kuru + ṇyaḥ by kurunādibhya ṇyaḥ|
and we get kauravyaḥ

ikṣvāku + añ by janapadaśabdāt kṣatriyādañ |

and we get aikṣvākaḥ
The word aikṣvākaḥ is derived as follows:

ikṣvāku + añ ----------------- janapadaśabdātkṣatriyādañ|

aikṣvāku + a ----------------- taddhiteṣvacāmādeḥ|
aikṣvāk + a -------------------
dāṇḍināyanahāstināyanātharvaṇikajaihmākṣvākamaitreyahiraṇmayāni|
aikṣvāka ----------------------- kṛttaddhitasmāsaśca| ṅyāpprātipadikāt| pratyayaḥ|
paraśca|
aikṣvāka + su ---------------- svaujasamauṭchaṣtābhyam.............|
aikṣvākaḥ
From ikṣvāku to aikṣvāku it is formed by default by the sūtra as mentioned above.

We shall also see the derivation of kauravya:

kuru + ṇya ----------------------- kurunādibhya ṇyaḥ|

kauru + ya ----------------------- taddhiteṣvacāmādeḥ|
kauro + ya ----------------------- yaci bham| orguṇaḥ|
kaurav + ya ---------------------- eco'yavāyāvaḥ|
kauarvya + su ------------------- kṛttaddhitasmāsaśca| ṅyāpprātipadikāt| pratyayaḥ|
paraśca| and svaujasamauṭchaṣtābhyam.............|
kauravyaḥ

The vanaparava of Mahābhārata has Rāmopākhyāna too and hence the derivation
of kuru and ikṣvāku taddhita forms have been explained. In taddhita the term kuru
has many affixes applicable to it and the term itself is mentioned in many sūtras
indicating the primary position of the kuru dynasty which was the dynasty of
bharata tribe which gained prominence after the Battle of Ten Kings of Ṛg Veda.
The following sūtras are applied to the term kuru alone:
utsādibhyo'ñ| employs añ affix
ṛṣyandhakavṛṣṇikurubhyaśca| employs aṇ affix
tikādibhyo phiñ| employs phiñ affix
kurvādibhyo ṇyaḥ| employs ṇya affix which is not tadrāja
kurunādibhyaḥ ṇyaḥ| employs ṇya affix which is tadrāja

pṛthā + aṇ = pārtha ------ śivādibhyo'ṇ|

niṣadha + aṇ = naiṣadha by śeṣe| (king of niṣadha)

niṣadha + ṇya = naiṣadha by kurunādibhyaḥ ṇyaḥ| (son of niṣadha)

vasudeva + aṇ = vāsudeva by ṛṣyandhakavṛṣṇkurubhyaśca|

dhṛtarāṣṭra + aṇ = dhārtarāṣṭra by prāgdīvyato'ṇ|
vṛṣṇi + ḍhak = vārṣṇeya by śubhrādibhyaśca| and not by
ṛṣyandhakavṛṣṇkurubhyaśca|
brahman + yat = brahmaṇya by khalayavamāṣatilavṛṣabrahmaṇaśca|
śarad + aṇ + ṅīp = śāradī by sandhivelādyṛtunakṣatrebhyo'ṇ|
pura + aṇ + su = pauraḥ by tatra bhavaḥ|
kitava + aṇ = kaitavaḥ
janapada + aṅ = jānapada by utsādibhyo'ñ|
viśravaṇa + aṇ = vaiśravaṇa by śivādibhyo'ṇ|
sindhu + aṇ = saindhava by sindhutakṣaśilādibhyo'ṇañau|
mṛkaṇḍu + ḍhak = mārkaṇḍeya by śubhrādibhyaśca|

ru + yuc by suyuruvṛño yuc| gives ravaṇa + aṇ by śivādibhyo'ṇ| gives the word

rāvaṇa. kekaya + aṇ = kaikeya + ṅīp = kaikeyī here the tadrāja affix is not elided
by the power of the sūtra na prācyabhargādi yaudheyādibhyaḥ|

mithilā + aṇ + ṅīp = maithilī by so'sya nivāsaḥ|

daśaratha + iñ = dāśarathi by ata iñ|
pulasti + yañ = paulastya by gargādibhyo yañ|
marīci + aṇ = mārīcaḥ by prāgdīvyato'ṇ|

mārīca is identified patronymic and translated, “Mārīca, descendant of Marīci”

The patronymic vaiśravaṇa, which occurs more often in the Rāmopākhyāna for the
lord of wealth known more widely elsewhere as Kubera, is similarly treated. The
term visravan, from which it derives, doesn't occur in the Rāmopākhyāna. Its
synonym viśravas occurs instead as the proper name of Kubera's father, the
reincarnation of half of Pulastya. Just as a metronymic identifies someone as the
son, daughter, or descendant of the female ancestor from whose name the name is
derived, and a patronymic of the male ancestor, an entry lexically categorized
tadrāja identifies a person as royalty of a certain people. Such derivatives are
formed with affixes termed tadrāja by Pāṇini 4.1.168–174. Pāṇini introduces these
affixes after words which are homophonous in two senses: a kṣatriya and a land
(janapada). As the Kāśikā explains, introduced after the base in the first sense, the
derivate denotes the offspring of the kṣatriya (janapadaśabdo yaḥ kṣatriyavācī
tasmād apatye añpratyayo bhavati); introduced after the base in the latter sense, it
denotes the ruler of the land (kṣatriyasamānaśabdāj janapadaśabdāt tasya rājany
apatyavai). Examples include vaideha and maithilī, terms for Janaka, the father of
Sītā who herself is called vaidehī and maithilī, for example, in 261.28 and 261.2.
Nīlakaṇṭha comments under 261.28 and 263.3 that Sita is entitled to the names
vaidehī and maithilī as Janaka's daughter. She is entitled to the names directly as a
female ruler of the lands videha and mithila as well. The Kāśikā explicitly entions
vaideha as an example of a tadrâja derivate but is silent about maithila. An
alternative derivation of the latter signifying only the descendant of king Mithila
might exclude the term mithila from words denoting both a ksatriya and a land.
Despite Nīlakaṇṭha's reluctance, the Kāśikā's reticence, and the fact that Mithilā is
commonly known as a city rather than a land, I have extended the derivation to
maithila because the name Mithilā (properly mithilāḥ in the masculine plural) does
conform to the derivational history of other terms for a janapada such as pañcālāḥ
discussed in Pā. 1.2.51–53. The derivation of agent and action nouns lists the krt
affix indented to the same degree beneath the verbal root after which it occurs to
form the derivate. For example, the lexical entry of the agent noun nihant
‘conqueror’ in 270.12 has indented beneath it the lexical entry of the root n√han
‘strike down, slay from which it derives and beneath the root the lexical entry of
the agentive affix, -t (-t c 3.1.133).” Similarly, the lexical entry of the agent noun
jet conqueror’ in 261.12 has indented beneath it the lexical entries of the root √ji
‘conquer’ and of the affix, “-t (-t n 3.2.135).” The glossary shows the form in
which the affix appears in the derived stem in both cases as -t . Pāṇini, however,
introduces different agentive affixes distinguished by their markers: one, -t c with
the marker c, by 3.1.133 and another, -t n with the marker n, under the additional
condition that the agent performs the action out of duty or habit or that he does it
well, by 3.2.135. The former would mean simply one who slays; the latter, not just
one who wins but one whose duty or custom it is to win or who is good at winning.
Although post-Vedic texts do not show accentuation, the stems derived by Pāṇini
are differently accented: high-pitched on its final syllable and jét high-pitched on
its initial vowel. While the glossary does not explicate these additional details of
the derivation, the marker c conditions high-pitched accentuation of the final vowel
of the derivate by Pā. 6.1.163 and the marker n, of its initial vowel by Pā.
6.1.197.14 Since the unaccented text does not reveal whether an agent noun has
final or initial vowel high-pitched, only the context of each of these words has
influenced whether to infer a derivation according to the former or latter rule. The
derivation of agent nouns does not always show the affix. For example, the lexical
entry of the agent noun gopt ‘protector’ in 261.12 has indented beneath it the
lexical entry of the root √gup ‘protect’ from which it derives but no entry for an
affix. By its lexical identification as an agent noun and its context in the verse with
jet, the reader may infer the latter affix -t n. the lexical entry of the abstract noun
ānayana ‘bringing’in 264.14 has indented beneath it the lexical entries of the root ā
√nī ‘lead’ to, bring’ and of the affix, “-ana (-lyuṭ 3.3.115).” The form of the affix
as it appears in the derivate in the text is -ana.Pāṇini introduces the affix by 3.3.115
in the form of the symbol yu with the markers l and ṭ attached. While the glossary
does not explicate these additional details of the derivation, 7.1.1 provides that yu
is replaced by ana. The marker l conditions high pitched accentuation of the
stem-vowel preceding the affix by Pā. 6.1.193 and, irrelevant to the present neuter
form, the marker ṭ conditions addition of the affix ṅīp in the feminine by Pā.
4.1.15. Although the Rāmopākhyāna does not show accent, the stem derived by
Pānini is Ānáyana the taddhita affix indented to the same degree beneath the
proper noun after which it occurs to form the derivate. For example, the lexical
entry of the metronymic saumitri ‘son of Sumitrā’ in 263.24 has indented beneath
it the lexical entry of the proper noun sumitrā from which it derives and, beneath
the proper noun, the lexical entry of the metronymic-forming affix, “-i(-iñ 4.1.96
bāhvādi).” Lakṣmaṇa is called
saumitri after his mother Sumitrā Pāṇini 4.1.96 introduces the affix -iñ (-i marked
with ñ) after members of the list beginning with bāhu (the gaṇa bāhvādi) to form
derivates denoting the offspring of the person whose name is in the list. The Kāśkā
includes the proper noun sumitrā in the list. Similarly, the lexical entry of the
patronymic jānakī ‘daughter of Janaka' in 258.1 has indented beneath it the lexical
entry of the proper noun janaka and that of the affix, “-a (-aṇ 4.1.83). Sītā is called
jānakī after her father Janaka. The Glossary of Proper Names describes the person
Janaka and the English translation of the verse clarifies that the daughter of Janaka
is Sītā by including her name in parentheses. Pāṇini 4.1.83 introduces the affix -aṇ
(-a marked with ṇ) and 4.1.15 provides the affix -ī (ṅīp), if the patronymic jānaka
occurs in the feminine. While the glossary does not explicate these additional
details of the above two derivations, the markers ñ and ṇ condition the replacement
of the initial vowel of the stem by its corresponding vrddhi vowel by 7.2.117.
4.1.92 tasyāpatyam states the semantic condition under which the affixes aṇ and iñ,
among others, occur to form metronymics and patronymics, namely that the
derivate denote the offspring of the person named by the word after which the affix
is provided. The derivation of jānakī includes subordinate derivations further
indented immediately beneath the stems they derive. The proper name janaka is
derived from the agent noun janaka further indented beneath it which in turn is
derived from the verbal root √jan and the agentive affix -aka further indented
beneath it. Despite the vertical intervention of these subordinate derivations
between the lexical entry of the proper noun janaka and those of the affixes -a and
ī, the horizontal alignment of the latter three entries indented just one degree
beneath jānakī shows that they immediately derive it. As in the case of
metronymics and patronymics, the derivation of other secondary nominal
derivates lists the taddhita affix indented to the same degree beneath the nominal
after which it occurs to form the derivate. For example, the lexical entry of the
adjective balavat ‘strong’ in 257.4 has indented beneath it the lexical entry of the
noun basis ‘strength’ and beneath it the affix's lexical entry, “-vat (-matup 5.2.94, v
8.2.9).” Derivates terminating in vat and mat of similar meaning are common.
Panini accounts for these by introducing one affix -matup, -mat with the markers u
and p, and subsequently replacing the m by v under certain conditions. 5.2.94
introduces -matup under the condition that what is to be denoted is something
related to, or the locus of, that which is denoted by the word after which it is
introduced. Accordingly the derivate balavat denotes that which has strength or is
the locus of strength. While the glossary does not explicate these additional details,
the marker u conditions the addition of the augment n (nutrì) to the final vowel of
the derivate before sarvanāmasthāna nominal terminations by 7.1.70 to form the
strong declensional stem and the addition of the affix -ī (-ṅīp) in the feminine by
4.1.6.16 The marker p marks the affix as low-pitched in accordance with 3.1.4. In
taddhita section the importance of Rāmopākhyāna has been dealt in detail because
it provides a thorough comparative analysis of Rāmāyaṇa from the point of view of
another epic i.e. Mahābhārata. As one compares various versions of the story with
each other, one can distinguish the threads of the human, divine, and spiritual
dimensions unique to each redaction. One can segregate these strands even in the
earliest extant layers of the narrative, namely in the Rāmāyaṇa and the
Rāmopākhyāna of the Mahābhārata, where the expectation that Rāma is divine
hasn't been thoroughly imposed on the text. By analyzing the narrative one can
unravel supplementary strands to isolate and identify the original thread of plot
around which the others have built. While this exercise leads one to identify the
human dimension of the story as historically prior, one must recognize that its
synthesis with the divine dimension accounts for its continuing popularity and
survival. The anthropomorphic divine dimension, in turn, at once distinct from the
more abstract spiritual dimension of the story, illuminates the perennial spiritual
knowledge which resonates with life and vibrancy in much of Indian literature.
Rāma's circumstances are similar to Yudhiṣṭhira's in several other respects besides
the abduction of his wife. He is exiled to the forest because of his step-mother's
greed for her son to rule the kingdom, as Yudhiṣṭhira is because of his cousin
Duryodhana's greed to rule. He is accompanied by his wife Sītā and his brother
Lakṣmaṇa, as Yudhiṣṭhira is by his wife Krṣṇā and his five brothers. He recovers
his abducted wife and his kingdom, as does Yudhiṣṭhira. Despite these similarities,
however, it is remarkable how sharply the conditions of his departure and return to
his kingdom contrast with Yudhiṣṭhira's. Rāma's departure is characterized by
peaceful adherence to truth as opposed to bitter resentment, and his return by
devotion and joy as opposed to strife and sorrow. Yudhiṣṭhira is forced to reside in
the forest for twelve years and to remain hidden for a thirteenth by the wager he
agrees to in a dice match. His cousin Duryodhana, who has long been scheming to
acquire control of his share of the kingdom, defeats him in the match by cheating
and refuses to return the kingdom to him when he claims it thirteen years later.
Yudhiṣṭhira recovers it only after a prolonged war. In contrast, Rāma departs for
the forest voluntarily in order that his father remain true to the promise he made to
his second wife Kaikeyī, even though that promise puts her son Bharata on the
throne in his stead. Bharata, far from scheming to acquire the kingdom from his
elder half-brother, is absent when his mother makes the request on his behalf. Far
from refusing to hand over the kingdom upon Rāma's return, Bharata renounces the
crown and sets out to bring Rāma back, rules the kingdom in Rāma's name when
Rāma insists on remaining in the forest, and joyfully relinquishes the kingdom
when he finally does return. The mutual devotion of Rāma and his brothers, their
abhorrence of self-aggrandizement, and their unhesitating adherence to truth and
right, regardless of the personal consequences, sets them apart as exemplary
standards of virtue. Bharata, in particular, displays the epitome of morality,
unhesitantly dismissing the riches and power of the kingdom out of devotion to his
brother. The contrast between Rāma's relation with his brothers and Yudhiṣṭhira's
with his cousins is so striking that it suggests that the story of Rāma, including the
exemplary brotherly warmth, was deliberately composed as a moral critique of the
Mahābhārata. Conversely, a simpler, less ideal story of Rāma may have preceded
the composition of a redaction which serves as a moral critique of the
Mahābhārata. With great distress at stripping it of its most noble and endearing
characteristics, one can imagine the story of Rāma pervaded with more ordinary
human motivations as a realistic narrative of historical events.
 Thus the importance of taddhita has been dealt with. The common taddhitas
used for the main characters of Mahābhārata are bhārata, pārtha, kaurava, kaunteya
and dhārtarāṣṭra with ḍhak and aṇ affixes used frequently. The taddhitas of eastern
kingdoms are declined with the exceptions as mentioned in Aṣṭādhyāyī. The
inclusions of secondary legends portray the use of abundant taddhita affixes
different from the common taddhitas of the epic. This is because the scribes of
those legends wanted to portray their patrons at par with the main heroes of the
epic. Pāṇini was well aware of the epics and by the time of Pāṇini, Mahābhārata
had already assumed a very prominent position with the emergence of vāsudeva
cult with kṛṣna as the now central god. Apart from this rudra of Vedas became well
established as the supreme Lord Śiva and śaivism too started to emerge as a rival
cult to vaiṣṇavism. With the changes in political and social surroundings the use of
language too changed and thus these changes are reflected in the epic Sanskrit.
 3. Treatment of Nominals in Vanaparva

The language of Epic Sanskrit follows the same concepts of ancient Sanskrit
and the Proto-Indo European language system. There are four components of
Sanskrit language and these are given in the nirukta of Yāska:
‘त्यानि चतवारर र्दजातानि िामाख्याते चोर्सगपनिर्ाताश्च तािीमानि भवत्न्त’
‘tadyāni catvāri padajātāni nāmākhyāte copasarganipātāśca tānīmāni bhavanti’
-there are four types of words, nouns, verbs, prepositions and particles. In this
paper we shall analyze the treatment of nominals in Vanaparva.
In epic Sanskrit the nouns or nominal stems have all the three dimensions
namely case, gender and number. All the eight cases of Vedic Sanskrit are found in
epic Sanskrit but there is some aberration in the usage of the same. As already
stated the aberrations of epic Sanskrit have their roots in Vedic usage itself. The
most important irregular features of the declension are confusion of weak and
strong stem-forms, particularly in case of nominative and accusative and of
case-endings and transfer of stems. Gender and number are declensional and
syntactic categories. Genders are determined by agreement patterns rather than by
semantic features or phonological shape of the word and the three genders are
systematically identifiable only in adjectives. The distinction of three genders
persists throughout Epic Sanskrit though that of individual words was not always
stable. In addition to case and gender, nouns are also inflected for number,
distinguishing systematically singular, dual and plural. Though in Middle
Indo-Aryan the dual as a distinct category is lost it is well preserved and in regular
use in Epic Sanskrit.
By analyzing the lingual aspects of the use of nominal stems in Mahābhārata
we will come to know the core features of the Proto-Indo European history and its
connection with non-PIE cultures mainly the semitic cultures. In the current age of
globalization we do observe people of different race and ethnicity come together
which also involve the merger of different cultures such a feature is certainly not a
distinct one of the current era but it also existed in the ancient the world too.
The Indus valley civilisation is still an indecipherable cipher of the study of
human history. However this civilisation is a mystery because it was one of the
most advanced civilisation of the ancient world which spanned an area larger than
Egypt, Sumer and Mesopotamia with a wide trade culture and planned urban
centers. Indus valley civilisation had a satellite settlement in Shortugai in current
day Afghanistan which was famous for the mines of lapis lazuli and which was in
great demand in Ancient Egypt. Ancient Egypt imported precious and
semi-precious stones from the traders of Indus valley cultures. The settlement in
Shortugai is located in Oxus river also known as vakṣu in Vedic texts. Oxus and
Jaxartes rivers are two main prominent rivers of Vedic texts. Oxus is vakṣu and
Jaxartes is rasā of saramā - paṇi fame. The presence of non-Indian motifs in
Indus-seal is very significant because it provides a thin clue to understand the
possibility of a non-Sanskrit Indian language connected with Indus valley culture.
As observed earlier, the main corpus of Mahābhārata was a flexible one and not
rigid like Vedic texts hence many legends and sub-stories were included in the
epic. Thus there is no doubt that any Indus valley legend that might have survived
along with its other symbols like paśupati figure, should have been included in the
expanding epic of Mahābhārata. This can be re-constructed by analyzing the
language pattern and the symbolisms as displayed in the epic.

This is an Indus seal with Gilgamesh theme displayed on it.

In the Vedic texts and even in later texts we do come across the term vrātya which
has been defined in different ways by different scholars. Vrātyas were non-aryan
groups who were later merged with the expanding Vedic society but these vrātyas
maintained their primitive shamanism which again was assimilated in Atharva
veda and in tantric texts. The purpose of including these facts is Rudra is called as
the lord of vrātyas and of various other tribes. Rudra is identified as paśupati in
Atharva Veda and by later texts. Thus one may believe that vrātyas to be the
descendants of the early Indus-valley people.
As mentioned earlier, in Mahābhārata we do see the emergence of
vaiṣṇavism and śaivism with Kṛṣṇa and Śiva occupying the prime position
eclipsing the older Vedic gods. The dynasty of Kṛṣṇa had a very close connection
the Kuru kingdom and also played a very important role in the War. Lord Kṛṣṇa
had given his nārāyaṇa army to Duryodhana while he himself was with Arjuna as
his charioteer. This was because originally the Yādavas were neutral and were
allies of the Kuru kingdom hence they were favorable to both Pāṇḍavas and
Kauravas. In Sabhāparva 2.13.55 Kṛṣṇa declares that his lineage (kula) there are
18000 vrātas.
vrātyāḥ saṃśliṣṭakarmāṇaḥ prakṛtyaiva vigarhitāḥ |
vṛṣṇyandhakāḥ kathaṃ pārtha pramāṇaṃ bhavatā kṛtāḥ|| 7.118.15
‘O Partha, how could you consider as the authority Vṛṣṇis and Andhakas who are
vrātyas, not distinguishing good deeds from evil deeds, and by their very nature
worthy of blame!’ Thus the tribes of Kṛṣṇa were vrātyas or were the descendants
of the vrātyas or were related to the vrātyas.
Rudra= paśupati= vrātya=Indus valley= Mahābhārata.

Thus if we can sieve the specific aberrant lingual aspects from the legends of
Mahābhārata we will be in a position to reconstruct or decipher the Indus-script.
This is the task of future scholars of History, Archaeology and Sanskritists and
linguists to undertake further research.

Basic Proto-Indo European Grammar

The common features of Proto-Indo European (PIE) culture are its shared
language, mythology and symbolism. It portrays a cataclysmic war that established
a new order and replaces the old order resulting in great loss of life involving the
intervention of gods. Gods, demigods, heroes, warriors and sons of gods all
participate in a great war which originated as family feud of a prominent dynasty.
Thus we have Mahābhārata war, Battle of Lake Regillus of Rome, Ragnarok of
Norse mythology etc. However it is in Mahābhārata alone do we find a complete
record of the actual magnitude of the war and the factors leading up to the war and
the aftermath of the war.
The nominal declension affixes of PIE are given below, which is common to
both Vedic Sanskrit and Epic Sanskrit:
Case Singular Dual Plural
Nominative -s -au,-i,-u -as
Accusative -am -au,-i,-u -n
Instrumental -na -bhyam -bhis
Dative -ai -bhyam -bhyas
Ablative -as,-et,-os -bhyam -bhyas
Genitive -as -aus -nam
Locative -i, -am -aus -su
Vocative -s -au,-i,-u -as
The wealth of Vedic forms has been cut down considerably, for e.g.
Instrumental singular –ā was replaced by –ena
Nominative accusative dual –ā replaced by –au
Nominative masculine plural -āsaḥ replaced by -āḥ
Nominative accusative neutral plural –ā replaced by –āni
Instrumental plural -ebhiḥ replaced by aiḥ

The nominal case declension as given by Pāṇini is:

Case Singular Dual Plural
Nominative su au jas
Accusative am auṭ śas
Instrumental ṭā bhyām bhis
Dative ṅe bhyām bhyas
Ablative ṅasi bhyām bhyas
Genitive ṅas os ām
Locative ṅi os sup
Also in PIE in the beginning the gender was classified as animate and inanimate.
Later the animate was further classified as masculine and feminine whereas the
inanimate became neutral gender. PIE had an elaborate system of morphology that
included inflectional suffixes (analogous to English life, lives, life's, lives') as well
as ablaut (vowel alterations, for example, as preserved in English sing, sang, sung)
and accent. PIE nominals and pronouns had a complex system of declension,
and verbs similarly had a complex system of conjugation.

Nominal stems in Vanaparava

As we have discussed earlier the deviant forms in the epic literature originated
form the Vedas. Just as the Vedic language was a spoken language similarly Epic
Sanskrit was also a spoken language. The best example to begin the analysis is the
word pati (र्नत)
The word pati is irregularly declined in Vedas as well as in Mahābhārata.

भतपव्या रक्षिीया च र्तिी हह र्नतिा सदा|

bhartavyā rakṣaṇīyā ca patnī hi patinā sadā | (3.67.13)
Here the word pati is declined as patinā instead of the current form as patyā.
The words pati and sakhi, even though they end in short i, yet they are not
considered as ghi. We shall see the derivation of the ghi word hari:

hari + ṭā ---------- svaujasamauṭ|

hari + nā --------- āṅo nā'striyām|
hari + ṇā ---------- aṭkupvāṇnumvyavāye'pi|
hariṇā (हररिा).
In the sūtra, āṅo nā'striyām|, the term āṅ is the ancient term for ṭā. This sūtra is
applicable only to ghi stems. Since sakhi and pati are not ghi the sūtra āṅo
nā'striyām| won’t apply and by iko yaṇaci| the sandhi of the two vowels will take
place:
pati + ṭā ---------- svaujasamauṭ|
pati + ā ---------- cuṭū| tasya lopaḥ|
patyā. In Vedas we find pati declined like muni for e.g. kuluñcānāṁ pataye namo
namo| (śatarudrīyam). In the above verse of Mahābhārata as it is seen pati has been
declined like muni.
Thus in the following verse it is observed that the word prakṛti is irregularly
declined:
तास्तु सवापः प्रकृतयो ्पवतीयं समर् ु त्स्थताः।
tāstu sarvāḥ prakṛtayo dvitīyaṁ samupasthitāḥ|
as per current grammar rules it should be as given below:
तास्तु सवापः प्रकृतीः ्पवतीयं समर् ु त्स्थताः।
tāstu sarvāḥ prakṛtīḥ dvitīyaṁ samupasthitāḥ|
Here the word prakṛti is used in the sense of accusative in the epic.
तस्य जािंु ददौ भीमो जघ्िे चैिमरत्तििा।
tasya jānuṁ dadau bhīmo jaghne cainamaratninā|
‘bhīma placed his knees on jayadratha (striked jayadratha on his chest with his
knees). Here it is जािम ु ् (jānum) which is in accusative singular it should be जािू
(jānū) accusative dual as some editions of the text has.
The word jānu is a neuter word. Its declension in nominative and accusative is
given below:
Nominative jānu jānunī jānūni
Accusative jānu jānunī jānūni
As per śabdakalpadruma, jānu is derived as jan + ñyuṇ = jānu by uṇādi 1.3.
As per vācaspatyam it is neutral. Apte too has recorded it as neutral. In Monier
Williams it is given that in Mahābhārata the word is treated as masculine but the
original form of the word is negative. This is because in epic language the genders
of words are changed. The word jānu is derived from the PIE root *genu* which is
an inanimate word i.e. a neutral word. From *genu* the modern word knee has
been derived. In the epic it is treated as masculine word. As discussed earlier the
earliest gender system of PIE was based on animate and inanimate classification.
Thus the words in animate gender have similar or same declensions whereas
inanimate gender has different declensions. In case of “u-stems” the declension for
all the three gender words are given below:
Masculine: bhānu
Nominative bhānuḥ bhānū bhānavaḥ
Accusative bhānum bhānū bhānūn
Feminine: dhenu
Nominative dhenuḥ dhenū dhenavaḥ
Accusative dhenum dhenū dhenūḥ

Neuter: madhu
Nominative madhu madhunī madhūni
Accusative madhu madhunī madhūni
The word jānu should be declined like madhu; however in the epic its gender was
transferred from neutral to masculine.
हा र्त्र
ु हा सात्वव वधःू क्वाशस क्वासीतयरोदताम ्।
hā putra hā sādhvi vadhūḥ kvāsi kvāsītyarodatām|
vadhū is nominative singular which is treated as vocative. Here vadhū is treated
like bhrū and śrī feminine words which takes iyaṅ and uvaṅ affixes.

ततः तैः पवहहतः र्व

ू ं समङ्गो िाम बल्लवः।
समीर्स्थास्तदा गावो धत ृ राष्रे न्यवेदयत ्॥
tataḥ taiḥ vihitaḥ pūrvaṁ samaṅgo nāma ballavaḥ|
samīpasthāstadā gāvo dhṛtarāṣṭre nyavedayat||
Here the word gāvo should be accusative plural gāḥ. This aberrant form is not due
to metrical exigencies but because of the confusion or flexibility of cases which is
one of the distinct features of epic Sanskrit.
go + su ------------ svaujasamauṭ|
go + su ------------ goto ṇit|
gau + su ---------- acoñṇiti|
gauḥ

go + am ---------- svaujasamuṭ |
gām --------------- auto'ṁśasu |

Similarly we do find aberrations in the use of महत ् and र्ंस

ु ः (mahat and
pumsaḥ).
कषपन्तो लाङ्गलैः र्ंस
ु ो घ्ित्न्त भशू मशयाि ् बहूि ्।
karṣanto lāṇgalaiḥ puṁso ghnanti bhūmiśayān bahūn|
Nominative pumān pumāṁsau pumāṁsaḥ
Accusative pumāṁsam pumāṁsau puṁsaḥ
As can be observed accusative plural used in place of nominative plural.
mahyam (मह्यम ्) as genitive:
In the epic language too we can find mahyam used in the sense of genitive. In
Vedic grammar we have the sūtra caturthyarthe bahulaṁ chandasi| which states
that in the Vedas genitive is employed diversely with the force of dative. Thus in
Mahābhārata we find the following verse:
हहडिम्बश्च सखा मह्यं दनयतो विगोचरः।
हतो दरु ातमिािेि स्वसा चास्य हृता र्रु ा॥
In this verse mahyam (मह्यम ्) is used in the sense of mama (मम).

Transfer of “in-stems” to “i-stems” with the example of kalki:

कल्कः र्ार्ं हार्ययपतया अत्स्त अस्य । कल्क + इनि = कत्ल्कि ् (अत इनिििौ।)
kalkaḥ pāpaṁ hāryyatayā asti asya, kalka + ini = kalkin (ata iniṭhanau|)

क॒ लँ = शब्दसंख्याियोः

kala - śabdasaṁkhyānayoh

कल ् + क - कृदाधारार्चपकशलभ्यः कः।

kal + ka --------- kṛdādhārārcikalibhyaḥ kaḥ |

Kalka means sin and one who destroys sin is called kalki. Kalki is an “in-ending”
stem which is treated as “i-stem” in Mahābhārata and in Epic Sanskrit in general.

kalkī kalkinau kalkinaḥ

kalkinam kalkinau kalkinaḥ
kalkinā kalkibhyām kalkibhiḥ
In the text the following verses appear:

1. कत्ल्कः चररष्यनत महीं सदा दस्यव

ु धे रतः।

kalkiḥ cariṣyati mahīṁ sadā dasyuvadhe rataḥ|

2. कत्ल्कः पवष्िुयशा िाम ्पवजः कालप्रचोहदतः।

kalkiḥ viṣṇuyaśā nāma dvijaḥ kālapracoditaḥ|.

In both these verses kalki is treated as “i-ending” stem. In non-critical edition texts
available it is provided as per the current rules of grammar i.e. कल्क (kalkī).
According to the various lexicons kalki is also treated as “i-ending” stem. In kalki
purāṇa, kalki is declined as “i-ending” stem in many verses.

ये तु धमं असय
ू न्ते बपु िमोहात्न्वता िराः।
अर्था गच्छतां तेषामिय
ु ाता च र्ीड्यते॥
ye tu dharmaṁ asūyante buddhimohānvitā narāḥ|

apathā gacchatāṁ teṣāmanuyātā ca pīḍyate||

In non-critical edition dharmaṁ is given as dharmān. As per the rules of Pāṇini the
person against whom the feeling of envy (asūy) is expressed must be in dative.

krudhadruherṣyā'sūyārthānāṁ yaṁ prati kopaḥ| (1.4.37)

“Verbs having the sense of krudh, druh, īrṣya, asūy, the person against whom it is
employed gets dative” for eg haraye asūyati. The root asūy demands dative case.
jugups and bhī should be ablative. As per the sūtra:

ध्रव
ु मर्ायेऽर्ादािाम ्। (१.४.२४)

dhruvamapāye'pādānām| (1.4.24)

A noun whose relation to an action is that of a fixed point, from which departure
takes place, is called ablation. Further, this is elaborated in kāśikā:

जुगप्ु सापवरामप्रमादाथापिामर्
ु संख्यािम ्।

jugupsāvirāmapramādārthānāmupasaṅkhyānaṁ|

“Objects of verbs denoting aversion, association and negligence also demand

ablation” for eg adharmāt jugupsate. However this rule is not applicable in Epic
Sanskrit as it can be seen from the below verse:

यदा बव
ु यनत बोिव्यं लोकवतृ तं जुगुप्सते। (३.२०३.८)

yadā budhyati boddhavyaṁ lokavṛttaṁ jugupsate| (3.203.8)

Here for lokavṛttaṁ it is accusative instead of ablative.

In Mahābhārata the indeclinable ṛte is used without following the current rules of
grammar, as it is seen in the below verse:

शक्तोऽन्यः सहहतंु वेगं ऋते दे वं पर्िाककिम ्। (३.४०.३१)

Here we can observe that there is no ablative case used but instead we find
accusative case being used. As per Pāṇini it is:

अन्याराहदतरते हदक्शब्दाञ्चतू तरर्दाजाहहयक्

ु तम ्। (२.३.२९)

As per this rule all the above terms command ablative case for eg:

ऋते ज्ञािात ् ि मत्ु क्तः (ṛte jñānāt na muktiḥ). However the use of ṛte with
accusative is found in ancient Vedic texts too especially in śaṅkhāyana śrauta sūtra
12.6.13 which is given as follows:

वष
ृ ाकपर्ं पव हह सोतोरसक्ष
ृ तेतयेतदृते कुन्तार्ेिेतयथपः।

vṛṣākapiṁ vi hi sotorasṛkṣatetyatadṛte kuntāpenetyarthaḥ

In Ṛg Veda 10.55.6 we find- ṛte karmamupājāyanta devāḥ|

Similarly we find the use of ṛte with accusative in other verses of vanaparva, they
are given below:

praviśantaṃ ca māṁ tatra na kaścid dṛṣtavān naraḥ|

ṛte tāṁ pārthivasutāṁ bhavatāmeva tejasā||

apahāya tu ko gacchet puṇyaślokaṁ ṛte nalam|

pāṇḍavāḥ kimakurvaṁste taṃ ṛte savyasācinam|

taṁ ṛte te naravyāghrāḥ pāṇḍavāḥ janamejayaḥ|

tyakṣyāmi tvāṃ ṛte putra prāṇāniṣṭatamān bhuvi|

ṛte use with accusative than ablative is more logical than grammatical. According
to Pāṇini ṛte will always be with ablative whereas in Vedas and Epics it is with
accusative. However as per the text named Avyayakoṣa the use of accusative with
ṛte can be made compliant with the rules of Pāṇini based on the sūtra
र्थ
ृ त्वविािािाशभस्तत
ृ ीयाऽन्यतरस्याम ्। (२.३.३२)

‘When joined with words pṛthak, vinā and nānā, all mean "without", third, fifth as
well as second case can be applied optionally’. ṛte means without so by this sūtra
using ṛte with accusative is sādhu

Thus the grammatical analysis of vanaparva of Mahābhārata has been completed.

This is certainly not exhaustive but just the tip of the iceberg. As discussed earlier
this is a field of study that requires still further research.
 4.Conclusion and Observation

Thus we have seen the grammatical analysis of Mahābhārata which has

revealed many new aspects in the course of the research. India is one of the few
nations who have the privilege of being a continuous civilisation since the
prehistoric era up to the modern age. As a result of this various archaeological
proofs and evidences are forever lost in the layers of civilisation and modernity.
Also the educated mass of India entertains the least interest in history and
archaeology because of which there are no innovative methods to link the jigsaw
puzzle of India’s history. Thus in order to provide more clarity about the history of
ancient India, the use of grammar and linguistics proves to be great tool because it
helps to reconstruct the picture of ancient India. The entire history of ancient Egypt
was reconstructed and understood because its pharoahic culture came to an end
with the emergence of Christianity and later Islam. As a result the ancient cities of
Egypt were lost and submerged in the sands of time waiting for explorers to be
explored. Thus once these cities and remnants of ancient Egypt were discovered
the scholars got a wealth of concrete archaeological evidences and proofs which
corroborated with textual sources.

However this is not the case of India, what we have is a rich source of
ancient literature that was a contemporary of ancient Egypt, Mesopatamia and
Greece. Hence an in depth analysis of the ancient texts will reveal the mysteries of
ancient India. Mahābhārata is indeed an ancient text and it does contain the keys to
the missing links of ancient India and ancient world in general. Its description of
war and its aftermath is too logical to be discarded as mere myth. Such a scientific
analysis of the text can fill up the lacuna of missing archaeological evidences. One
cannot deny the fact that inside the land on which the parliament of India stands;
one may find the ruins of Indraprastha of Mahābhārata era. Mahābhārata is not an
epic but it is an actual historic record mixed with legends, philosophies, allegories
and symbolisms. In order to extricate the historic aspect the study of grammar of
Epic is essential and one can segregate the other elements with the study of
language alone because philosophies and symbolisms have their own specific
terms and language pattern. The language of tantric literature is also too wide and
divergent from the rules of classical Sanskrit and it is also as old as the Vedas.
 Thus there is great scope for further research on Epic Sanskrit of
Mahābhārata and the sacred and secular elements of the text can be distilled by
analysing the language pattern alone. Mahābhārata is a mine of information which
covers all the aspects of knowledge and it provides a great scope for further
research in the area of grammar and language.

5.IPA Chart for Sanskrit

Bibiliography

1. Mahabharata, Gitapress Gorakhpur, Gorakhpur, 1995

2. Prolegomena of Critical Edition, The Bhandarkar Oriental Research

Institute, Pune, 1933

3. Mahabharata Critical Edition, The Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute,

Pune, 1966

4. Oberlies, Thomas. A Grammar of Epic Sanskrit, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin,

2003

5. Quiles, Carlos. A Grammar of Modern Indo-European, Asociacion Cultural

Dnghu, EU, 2007

6. Levin, Saul. Semitic and Indo-European The Principal Etymologies With

Observations on Afro-Asiatic, John Benjamins Publishing Co, Amsterdam,
1995

7. Bidnur, Jahnavi. METRICAL EXIGENCIES AND TADDHITAS IN THE

MAHᾹBHᾹRATA A FORMULAIC APPROACH, IIT Bombay.

8. Vassilkov, Yaroslav. The Mahabharata and Non-Vedic Aryan Traditions,

University of Zagreb, 2016

9. V.Srivatsankacharya, Avyaya Kosa, Samskrit Education Society, Chennai,

2004

10.Yardi, MR. Epilogue of Mahabharata, Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, Pune, 2001

11.VS Sukthankar, Critical Studies in the Mahabharata, The Bhandarkar

Oriental Research Institute, Pune, 1944

12.Vyas, Bholashankar. Sanskrit Vanmay ka Brhat Itihas Volume 3, Uttar

Pradesh Sanskrit Sanstha, Lucknow, 2000

13. Vyas, Bholashankar. Sanskrit Vanmay ka Brhat Itihas Volume 15, Uttar
Pradesh Sanskrit Sanstha, Lucknow, 2000
14.SC Vasu, Siddhanta Kaumudi, MLBD, New Delhi, 6th Reprint, 2017

15.Vishvabandhu, Vedic Vyakaran, Vishveshvaranand Vaidik Shodh Sanstha,

Hoshiyarpur, 1965

16.Scharf, Peter. Ramopakhyana- The Story of Rama in the Mahabharata,

Routledge Curzon, New York, 2003

17.MA Mehendale, Interpolations in the Mahabharata, Annals BORI,

LXXXII, 2001

18.Joshi, SD and Roodbergen, JAF. The Astadhyayi of Panini, Sahitya

Akademi, New Delhi, 1991