Chapter 19

We have seen that the oblique form is the resultant of a general melting down of all the oblique cases of Sanskrit and Prakrit, and that in consequence it can be used for any oblique case. It is obvious that if it were so employed it would often give rise to great confusion. Hence, when it is necessary to show clearly what particular case is intended, it is usual to add defining particles corresponding to the English prepositions “of,” “to,” “from,” “by,” &c., which, as in all Indo-Aryan languages they follow the main word, are here called “postpositions.” The following are the postpositions commonly employed to form cases in our three languages:—Agent.Genitive.Dative.Ablative.Locative.PanjabinaidānũtēviccHindostaninēkākōsēmẽBraj Bhashanẽkaukaũtẽ,saũmaĩEastern HindiNonekēr,kkãsēmẽ,bikhēThe agent case is the case which a noun takes when it is the subject of a transitive verb in a tense formed from the past participle. This participle is passive in origin, and must be construed passively. In the Prakrit stage the subject was in such cases put into the instrumental case (seePrakrit), as in the phraseahaṁ tēṇa māriō, I by-him (was) struck,i.e.he struck me. In Eastern Hindi this is still the case, the old instrumental being represented by the oblique form without any suffix. The other two languages define the fact that the subject is in the instrumental (or agent) case by the addition of the postpositionnē, &c., an old form employed elsewhere to define the dative. It is really the oblique form (by origin a locative) ofnāornō, which is employed in Gujarati (q.v.) for the genitive. As this suffix is never employed to indicate a material instrument but here only to indicate the agent or subject of a verb, it is called the postposition of the “agent” case.The genitive postpositions have an interesting origin. In Buddhist Sanskrit the wordskŗtas, done, andkŗtyas, to be done, were added to a noun to form a kind of genitive. A synonym ofkŗtyaswaskāryas. These three words were all adjectives, and agreed with the thing possessed in gender, number, and case; thus,māla-kŗtēkaraṇḍē, in the basket of the garland, literally, in the garland-made basket. In the various dialects of Apabhraṁśa Prakritkŗtasbecame (strong form)kida-uorkia-u,kŗtyasbecamekicca-u, andkāryasbecamekēra-uorkajja-u, the initialkof which is liable to elision after a vowel. With the exception of Gujarati (and perhaps Marathi,q.v.) every Indo-Aryan language has genitive postpositions derived from one or other of these forms. Thus from(ki)da-uwe have Panjabidā; fromkia-uwe have H.kā, Br.kau, E.H. and Biharikand Naipalikō; from(ki)cca-uwe have perhaps Marathicā; fromkēra-u, E.H. and Biharikēr,kar, Bengali Oriya and Assamese -r, and Rajasthani -rō; while from(ka)jja-uwe have the Sindhijō. It will be observed that whilek,kēr,kar, andrare weak forms, the rest are strong. As already stated, the genitive is an adjective.Bāpmeans “father,” andbāp-kāghōrāis literally “the paternal horse.” Hence (while the weak forms as usual do not change) these genitives agree with the thing possessed in gender, number, and case. Thus,bāp-kā ghōṛā, the horse of the father, butbāp-kī ghōṛī, the mare of the father, andbāp-kē ghōṛē-kō, to the horse of the father, thekābeing put into the oblique case masculinekē, to agree withghōṛē, which is itself in an oblique case. The details of the agreement vary slightly in P. and W.H., and must be learnt from the grammars. The E.H. weak forms do not change in the modern language. Finally, in Prakrit it was customary to add these postpositions (kēra-u, &c.) to the genitive, as inmamaormama kēra-u, of me. Similarly these postpositions are, in the modern languages, added to the oblique form.The locative of the Sanskritkŗtas,kŗtē, was used in that language as a dative postposition, and it can be shown that all the dative postpositions given above are by origin old oblique forms of some genitive postposition. Thus H.kō, Br.kaũ, is a contraction ofkahũ, an old oblique form ofkia-u. Similarly for the others. The origin of the ablative postpositions is obscure. To the present writer they all seem (like the Bengalhaïtē) to be connected with the verb substantive, but their derivation has not been definitely fixed. The locative postpositionsmẽandmaīare derived from the Skr.madhyē, in, throughmajjhi,māhī, and so on. The derivation ofviccandbikhēis obscure.Apabhraṁśa.Panjabi.Hindostani.BrajBhasha.EasternHindi.i,Nom.haūmaīmaĩhaũmaīObl.maī,mahu,majjhumaimujhmohimōwe,Nom.amhēasĩhamhamhamObl.amahãasāhamõhamaū,hamanihamthou,Nom.tuhũtũtūtūtaĩObl.taĩ,tuha,tujjhutaitujhtohitōyou,Nom.tumhētusĩtumtumtumObl.tumhahãtusātumhõtumhaūtumThe pronouns closely follow the Prakrit originals. This will be evident from the preceding table of the first two personal pronouns compared with Apabhraṁśa.It will be observed that in most of the nominatives of the first person, and in the E.H. nominative of the second person, the old nominative has disappeared, and its place has been supplied by an oblique form, exactly as we have observed in the nominative plural of nouns substantive. The P.asĩ,tusĩ, &c., are survivals from the old Lahndā (seeLinguistic Boundaries, above). The genitives of these two pronouns are rarely used, possessive pronouns (in H.mērā, my;hamārā, our;tērā, thy;tumhārā, your) being employed instead. They can all (except P.asāḍā, our;tusāḍā, your, which are Lahndā) be referred to corresponding Ap. forms.There is no pronoun of the third person, the demonstrative pronouns being used instead. The following table shows the principal remaining pronominal forms, with their derivation from Ap.:—Apabhraṁśa.Panjabi.Hindostani.BrajBhasha.EasternHindi.that, he,Nom.?uhwohwōūObl.?uhuswāōthose, they,Nom.ōiōhwēwaiunhObl.?unhãunhuniunhthis, he,Nom.ēhuihyehyahīObl.ēhasu, ēhahoihisyāēthese, they,Nom.ēiēhyēyaiinhObl.ēhāṇainhãinhiniinhthat,Nom.sōsōsōsōsēObl.tasu, tahotihtistātēthose,Nom.sēsōsōsōsēObl.tāṇatinhãtinhtinitenhwho,Nom.jōjōjōjōjēObl.jasu, jahojihjisjājēwho(pl.),Nom.jējōjōjōjēObl.jāṇajinhãjinhjinijenhwho?Nom.kō, kawaṇukauṇkaunkōkēObl.kasu, kahokihkiskākēwho?(pl.),Nom.kēkauṇkaunkōkēObl.kāṇakinhãkinhkinikenhwhat?(Neut.),Nom.kiṁkiākyākahākāObl.kāha, kāsukāh, kāskāhēkāhēkāhēThe origin of the first pronoun given above (that, he; those, they) cannot be referred to Sanskrit. It is derived from an Indo-Aryan base which was not admitted to the classical literary language, but of which we find sporadic traces in Apabhraṁśa. The existence of this base is further vouched for by its occurrence in the Iranian language of the Avesta under the formava-. The base of the second pronoun is the same as the base of the first syllable in the Skr.ē-ṣas, this, and other connected pronouns, and also occurs in the Avesta. Ap.ēhuis directly derived fromē-sas.There are other pronominal forms upon which, except perhapskōī(Pr.kō-vi, Skr.kō-’pi), any one, it is unnecessary to dwell. The phrasekōī hai? “Is any one (there)?” is the usual formula for calling a servant in upper India, and is the origin of the Anglo-Indian word “Qui-hi.” The reflexive pronoun isāp(Ap.appu, Skr.ātmā), self, which, something like the Latinsuus(Skr.svas), always refers to the subject of the sentence, but to all persons, not only to the third. Thusmaĩ apnē(notmērē)bāp-kō dēkhtā-hũ, “I see my father.”C.Conjugation.—The synthetic conjugation was already commencing to disappear in Prakrit, and in the modern languages the only original tenses which remain are the present, the imperative, and here and there the future. The first is now generally employed as a present subjunctive. In the accompanying table we have the conjugation of this tense, and also the three participles, present active, and past and future passive, compared with Apabhraṁśa, the verb selected being the intransitive rootcallorcal, go. In Ap. the word may be spelt with one or with twols, which accounts for the variations of spelling in the modern languages.The imperative closely resembles the old present, except that it drops all terminations in the 2nd person singular; thus,cal, go thou.In P. and H. a future is formed by adding the syllablegā(fem.gī) to the simple present. Thus, H.calũ-gā, I shall go. Thegāis commonly said to be derived from the Skr.gatas(Pr.gaō), gone, but this suggestion is not altogether acceptable to the present writer, although he is not now able to propose a better. Under the form of-gauthe same termination is used in Br., but in that dialect the old future has also survived, as incalihaũ(Ap.calihaũ, Skr.caliṣyāmi), I shall go, which is conjugated like the simple present. The E.H. formation of the future is closely analogous to what we find in Bihari (q.v.). The third person is formed as in Braj Bhasha, but the first and second persons are formed by adding pronominal suffixes, meaning “by me,” “by thee,” &c., to the future passive participle.Apabhramśa.Panjabi.Hindostani.BrajBjasja.EasternHindi.Old Present—Singular 1.callaũcallãcalũcalaũcalaūSingular 2.callasi,callahicallẽcalēcalaicalasSingular 3.callaicallēcalēcalaicalaiPlural   1.callahūcalliyēcalẽcalaīcalaīPlural   2.callahucallōcalōcalaucalauPlural   3.callanti,callahĩcallaṇcalẽcalaīcalaīPresent Participlecallanta-ucalldācaltācalatucalatPast Part. Passivecallia-ucalliācalācalyaucalāFuture Part. Passivecallaṇia-ucallṇācalnācalnaũcalliavva-u. .. .caliwaũcalabThus,calab-ũ, it-is-to-be-gone by-me, I shall go. We thus get the following forms. It will be observed that, as in many other Indo-Aryan languages, the first person plural has no suffix:—Sing.Plur.1.calabũcalab2.calabēcalabō3.calihaicalihaīIn old E.H. the future participle passive,calab, takes no suffix for any person, and is used for all persons.The last remark leads us to a class of tenses in P. and W.H., in which a participle, by itself, can be employed for any person of a finite tense. A few examples of the use of the present and past participles will show the construction. They are all taken from Hindostani.Woh caltā, he goes;woh caltī, she goes;maī calā, I went;woh calī, she went;wē calē, they went. The present participle in this construction, though it may be used to signify the present, is more commonly employed to signify a past conditional “(if) he had gone.” It will have been observed that in the above examples, in all of which the verb is intransitive, the past as well as the present participle agrees with the subject in gender and number; but, if the verb be transitive, the passive meaning of the past participle comes into force. The subject must be put into the case of the agent, and the participle inflects to agree with the object. If the object be not expressed, or, as sometimes happens, be expressed in the dative case, the participle is construed impersonally, and takes the masculine (for want of a neuter) form. Thus,maī-nē kahā, by-me it-was-said,i.e.I said;us-nē ciṭṭhī likhī, by-him a-letter (fem.) was-written, he wrote a letter;rājā-nē shērnī-kō mārā, the king killed the tigress, lit., by-the-king, with-reference-to-the-tigress, it (impersonal) -was-killed. In the articlePrakritit is shown that the same constructionisobtained in that language.In E.H. the construction is the same, but is obscured by the fact that (as in the future) pronominal suffixes are added to the participle to indicate the person of the subject or of the agent, as incalat-eũ, (if) I had gone;cal-eũ, I went;mār-eũ(transitive), I struck, lit., struck-by-me;mār-es, struck-by-him, he struck. If the participle has to be feminine, it (although a weak form) takes the feminine terminationi, as inmāri-ũ, I struck her;calati-ũ, (if) I (fem.) had gone;cali-ũ, I (fem.) went.Further tenses are formed by adding the verb substantive to these participles, as in H.maĩ caltā-hū, I am going;maĩ caltā-thā, I was going;maĩ calā-hū, I have gone;maĩ calā-thā, I had gone. These and other auxiliary verbs need not detain us long. They differ in the various languages. For “I am” we have P.hã, H.hū, Br.haũ, E.H.bāṭyeũoraheũ. For “I was” we have P.sīorsā, H.thā, Br.hauorhutau, E.H.raheũ. The H.hũis thus conjugated:—Sing.Plur.1.hũhaĩ2.haihō3.haihaīThe derivation ofhã,hũ,haũ, andaheũis uncertain. They are usually derived from the Skr.asmi, I am; but this presents many difficulties. An old form of the third person singular ishwai, and this points to the Pr.havaï, he is, equivalent to the Skr.bhavati, he becomes. On the other hand this does not account for the initialaofaheũ. This last word is in theformof a past tense, and it may be a secondary formation fromasmi. The P.sīis not a feminine ofsā, as usually stated, but is a survival of the Skr.āsīt, Pr.āsī, was. As in the Prakrit form,sīis employed for both genders, both numbers and all persons.Sāis a secondary formation from this, on the analogy of the H.thā, which is from the Skr.sthitas, Pr.thiō, stood, and is a participial form likecalā; thus,woh thā, he was;woh thī, she was. The Br.hauis a modern past ofhaū, whilehutauis probably by origin a present participle of the Skr.bhũ, become, Pr.huntaō. The E.H.bāṭeũ, is the Skr.vartē, Ap.vaṭṭaũ.Raheũis the past tense of the rootrah, remain.The future participle passive is everywhere freely used as an infinitive or verbal noun; thus, H.calnā, E.H.calab, the act of going, to go. There is a whole series of derivative verbal forms, making potential passives and transitives from intransitives, and causals (and even double causals) from transitives. Thusdīkhnā, to be seen; potential passive,dikhānā, to be visible; transitive,dēkhnā, to see; causal,dikhlānā, to show.D.Literature.—The literatures of Western and Eastern Hindi form the subject of a separate article (seeHindostani Literature). Panjabi has no formal literature. Even theGranth, the sacred book of the Sikhs, is mainly in archaic Western Hindi, only a small portion being in Panjabi. On the other hand, the language is peculiarly rich in folksongs and ballads, some of considerable length and great poetic beauty. The most famous is the ballad ofHīrandRānjhāby Wāris Shāh, which is considered to be a model of pure Panjabi. Colonel Sir Richard Temple has published an important collection of these songs under the title ofThe Legends of the Punjab(3 vols., Bombay and London, 1884-1900), in which both texts and translations of nearly all the favourite ones are to be found.Authorities.—(a) General: The two standard authorities are the comparative grammars of J. Beames (1872-1879) and A. F. R. Hoernle (1880), mentioned in the articleIndo-Aryan Languages. To these may be added G. A. Grierson, “On the Radical and Participial Tenses of the Modern Indo-Aryan Languages” in theJournal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, vol. lxiv. (1895), part i. pp. 352 et seq.; and “On Certain Suffixes in the Modern Indo-Aryan Vernaculars” in theZeitschrift für vergleichende Sprachforschung auf dem Gebiete der indogermanischen Sprachenfor 1903, pp. 473 et seq.(b) For the separate languages, see C. J. Lyall,A Sketch of the Hindustani Language(Edinburgh, 1880); S. H. Kellogg,A Grammar of the Hindi Language(for both Western and Eastern Hindi), (2nd ed., London, 1893); J. T. Platts,A Grammar of the Hindūstānī or Urdū Language(London, 1874); andA Dictionary of Urdū, Classical Hindi and English(London, 1884); E. P. Newton,Panjābī Grammar: with Exercises and Vocabulary(Ludhiana, 1898); and Bhai Maya Singh,The Panjabi Dictionary(Lahore, 1895).The Linguistic Survey of India, vol. vi., describes Eastern Hindi, and vol. ix., Hindostani and Panjabi, in each instance in great detail.

We have seen that the oblique form is the resultant of a general melting down of all the oblique cases of Sanskrit and Prakrit, and that in consequence it can be used for any oblique case. It is obvious that if it were so employed it would often give rise to great confusion. Hence, when it is necessary to show clearly what particular case is intended, it is usual to add defining particles corresponding to the English prepositions “of,” “to,” “from,” “by,” &c., which, as in all Indo-Aryan languages they follow the main word, are here called “postpositions.” The following are the postpositions commonly employed to form cases in our three languages:—

The agent case is the case which a noun takes when it is the subject of a transitive verb in a tense formed from the past participle. This participle is passive in origin, and must be construed passively. In the Prakrit stage the subject was in such cases put into the instrumental case (seePrakrit), as in the phraseahaṁ tēṇa māriō, I by-him (was) struck,i.e.he struck me. In Eastern Hindi this is still the case, the old instrumental being represented by the oblique form without any suffix. The other two languages define the fact that the subject is in the instrumental (or agent) case by the addition of the postpositionnē, &c., an old form employed elsewhere to define the dative. It is really the oblique form (by origin a locative) ofnāornō, which is employed in Gujarati (q.v.) for the genitive. As this suffix is never employed to indicate a material instrument but here only to indicate the agent or subject of a verb, it is called the postposition of the “agent” case.

The genitive postpositions have an interesting origin. In Buddhist Sanskrit the wordskŗtas, done, andkŗtyas, to be done, were added to a noun to form a kind of genitive. A synonym ofkŗtyaswaskāryas. These three words were all adjectives, and agreed with the thing possessed in gender, number, and case; thus,māla-kŗtēkaraṇḍē, in the basket of the garland, literally, in the garland-made basket. In the various dialects of Apabhraṁśa Prakritkŗtasbecame (strong form)kida-uorkia-u,kŗtyasbecamekicca-u, andkāryasbecamekēra-uorkajja-u, the initialkof which is liable to elision after a vowel. With the exception of Gujarati (and perhaps Marathi,q.v.) every Indo-Aryan language has genitive postpositions derived from one or other of these forms. Thus from(ki)da-uwe have Panjabidā; fromkia-uwe have H.kā, Br.kau, E.H. and Biharikand Naipalikō; from(ki)cca-uwe have perhaps Marathicā; fromkēra-u, E.H. and Biharikēr,kar, Bengali Oriya and Assamese -r, and Rajasthani -rō; while from(ka)jja-uwe have the Sindhijō. It will be observed that whilek,kēr,kar, andrare weak forms, the rest are strong. As already stated, the genitive is an adjective.Bāpmeans “father,” andbāp-kāghōrāis literally “the paternal horse.” Hence (while the weak forms as usual do not change) these genitives agree with the thing possessed in gender, number, and case. Thus,bāp-kā ghōṛā, the horse of the father, butbāp-kī ghōṛī, the mare of the father, andbāp-kē ghōṛē-kō, to the horse of the father, thekābeing put into the oblique case masculinekē, to agree withghōṛē, which is itself in an oblique case. The details of the agreement vary slightly in P. and W.H., and must be learnt from the grammars. The E.H. weak forms do not change in the modern language. Finally, in Prakrit it was customary to add these postpositions (kēra-u, &c.) to the genitive, as inmamaormama kēra-u, of me. Similarly these postpositions are, in the modern languages, added to the oblique form.

The locative of the Sanskritkŗtas,kŗtē, was used in that language as a dative postposition, and it can be shown that all the dative postpositions given above are by origin old oblique forms of some genitive postposition. Thus H.kō, Br.kaũ, is a contraction ofkahũ, an old oblique form ofkia-u. Similarly for the others. The origin of the ablative postpositions is obscure. To the present writer they all seem (like the Bengalhaïtē) to be connected with the verb substantive, but their derivation has not been definitely fixed. The locative postpositionsmẽandmaīare derived from the Skr.madhyē, in, throughmajjhi,māhī, and so on. The derivation ofviccandbikhēis obscure.

The pronouns closely follow the Prakrit originals. This will be evident from the preceding table of the first two personal pronouns compared with Apabhraṁśa.

It will be observed that in most of the nominatives of the first person, and in the E.H. nominative of the second person, the old nominative has disappeared, and its place has been supplied by an oblique form, exactly as we have observed in the nominative plural of nouns substantive. The P.asĩ,tusĩ, &c., are survivals from the old Lahndā (seeLinguistic Boundaries, above). The genitives of these two pronouns are rarely used, possessive pronouns (in H.mērā, my;hamārā, our;tērā, thy;tumhārā, your) being employed instead. They can all (except P.asāḍā, our;tusāḍā, your, which are Lahndā) be referred to corresponding Ap. forms.

There is no pronoun of the third person, the demonstrative pronouns being used instead. The following table shows the principal remaining pronominal forms, with their derivation from Ap.:—

The origin of the first pronoun given above (that, he; those, they) cannot be referred to Sanskrit. It is derived from an Indo-Aryan base which was not admitted to the classical literary language, but of which we find sporadic traces in Apabhraṁśa. The existence of this base is further vouched for by its occurrence in the Iranian language of the Avesta under the formava-. The base of the second pronoun is the same as the base of the first syllable in the Skr.ē-ṣas, this, and other connected pronouns, and also occurs in the Avesta. Ap.ēhuis directly derived fromē-sas.

There are other pronominal forms upon which, except perhapskōī(Pr.kō-vi, Skr.kō-’pi), any one, it is unnecessary to dwell. The phrasekōī hai? “Is any one (there)?” is the usual formula for calling a servant in upper India, and is the origin of the Anglo-Indian word “Qui-hi.” The reflexive pronoun isāp(Ap.appu, Skr.ātmā), self, which, something like the Latinsuus(Skr.svas), always refers to the subject of the sentence, but to all persons, not only to the third. Thusmaĩ apnē(notmērē)bāp-kō dēkhtā-hũ, “I see my father.”

C.Conjugation.—The synthetic conjugation was already commencing to disappear in Prakrit, and in the modern languages the only original tenses which remain are the present, the imperative, and here and there the future. The first is now generally employed as a present subjunctive. In the accompanying table we have the conjugation of this tense, and also the three participles, present active, and past and future passive, compared with Apabhraṁśa, the verb selected being the intransitive rootcallorcal, go. In Ap. the word may be spelt with one or with twols, which accounts for the variations of spelling in the modern languages.

The imperative closely resembles the old present, except that it drops all terminations in the 2nd person singular; thus,cal, go thou.

In P. and H. a future is formed by adding the syllablegā(fem.gī) to the simple present. Thus, H.calũ-gā, I shall go. Thegāis commonly said to be derived from the Skr.gatas(Pr.gaō), gone, but this suggestion is not altogether acceptable to the present writer, although he is not now able to propose a better. Under the form of-gauthe same termination is used in Br., but in that dialect the old future has also survived, as incalihaũ(Ap.calihaũ, Skr.caliṣyāmi), I shall go, which is conjugated like the simple present. The E.H. formation of the future is closely analogous to what we find in Bihari (q.v.). The third person is formed as in Braj Bhasha, but the first and second persons are formed by adding pronominal suffixes, meaning “by me,” “by thee,” &c., to the future passive participle.

Thus,calab-ũ, it-is-to-be-gone by-me, I shall go. We thus get the following forms. It will be observed that, as in many other Indo-Aryan languages, the first person plural has no suffix:—

In old E.H. the future participle passive,calab, takes no suffix for any person, and is used for all persons.

The last remark leads us to a class of tenses in P. and W.H., in which a participle, by itself, can be employed for any person of a finite tense. A few examples of the use of the present and past participles will show the construction. They are all taken from Hindostani.Woh caltā, he goes;woh caltī, she goes;maī calā, I went;woh calī, she went;wē calē, they went. The present participle in this construction, though it may be used to signify the present, is more commonly employed to signify a past conditional “(if) he had gone.” It will have been observed that in the above examples, in all of which the verb is intransitive, the past as well as the present participle agrees with the subject in gender and number; but, if the verb be transitive, the passive meaning of the past participle comes into force. The subject must be put into the case of the agent, and the participle inflects to agree with the object. If the object be not expressed, or, as sometimes happens, be expressed in the dative case, the participle is construed impersonally, and takes the masculine (for want of a neuter) form. Thus,maī-nē kahā, by-me it-was-said,i.e.I said;us-nē ciṭṭhī likhī, by-him a-letter (fem.) was-written, he wrote a letter;rājā-nē shērnī-kō mārā, the king killed the tigress, lit., by-the-king, with-reference-to-the-tigress, it (impersonal) -was-killed. In the articlePrakritit is shown that the same constructionisobtained in that language.

In E.H. the construction is the same, but is obscured by the fact that (as in the future) pronominal suffixes are added to the participle to indicate the person of the subject or of the agent, as incalat-eũ, (if) I had gone;cal-eũ, I went;mār-eũ(transitive), I struck, lit., struck-by-me;mār-es, struck-by-him, he struck. If the participle has to be feminine, it (although a weak form) takes the feminine terminationi, as inmāri-ũ, I struck her;calati-ũ, (if) I (fem.) had gone;cali-ũ, I (fem.) went.

Further tenses are formed by adding the verb substantive to these participles, as in H.maĩ caltā-hū, I am going;maĩ caltā-thā, I was going;maĩ calā-hū, I have gone;maĩ calā-thā, I had gone. These and other auxiliary verbs need not detain us long. They differ in the various languages. For “I am” we have P.hã, H.hū, Br.haũ, E.H.bāṭyeũoraheũ. For “I was” we have P.sīorsā, H.thā, Br.hauorhutau, E.H.raheũ. The H.hũis thus conjugated:—

The derivation ofhã,hũ,haũ, andaheũis uncertain. They are usually derived from the Skr.asmi, I am; but this presents many difficulties. An old form of the third person singular ishwai, and this points to the Pr.havaï, he is, equivalent to the Skr.bhavati, he becomes. On the other hand this does not account for the initialaofaheũ. This last word is in theformof a past tense, and it may be a secondary formation fromasmi. The P.sīis not a feminine ofsā, as usually stated, but is a survival of the Skr.āsīt, Pr.āsī, was. As in the Prakrit form,sīis employed for both genders, both numbers and all persons.Sāis a secondary formation from this, on the analogy of the H.thā, which is from the Skr.sthitas, Pr.thiō, stood, and is a participial form likecalā; thus,woh thā, he was;woh thī, she was. The Br.hauis a modern past ofhaū, whilehutauis probably by origin a present participle of the Skr.bhũ, become, Pr.huntaō. The E.H.bāṭeũ, is the Skr.vartē, Ap.vaṭṭaũ.Raheũis the past tense of the rootrah, remain.

The future participle passive is everywhere freely used as an infinitive or verbal noun; thus, H.calnā, E.H.calab, the act of going, to go. There is a whole series of derivative verbal forms, making potential passives and transitives from intransitives, and causals (and even double causals) from transitives. Thusdīkhnā, to be seen; potential passive,dikhānā, to be visible; transitive,dēkhnā, to see; causal,dikhlānā, to show.

D.Literature.—The literatures of Western and Eastern Hindi form the subject of a separate article (seeHindostani Literature). Panjabi has no formal literature. Even theGranth, the sacred book of the Sikhs, is mainly in archaic Western Hindi, only a small portion being in Panjabi. On the other hand, the language is peculiarly rich in folksongs and ballads, some of considerable length and great poetic beauty. The most famous is the ballad ofHīrandRānjhāby Wāris Shāh, which is considered to be a model of pure Panjabi. Colonel Sir Richard Temple has published an important collection of these songs under the title ofThe Legends of the Punjab(3 vols., Bombay and London, 1884-1900), in which both texts and translations of nearly all the favourite ones are to be found.

Authorities.—(a) General: The two standard authorities are the comparative grammars of J. Beames (1872-1879) and A. F. R. Hoernle (1880), mentioned in the articleIndo-Aryan Languages. To these may be added G. A. Grierson, “On the Radical and Participial Tenses of the Modern Indo-Aryan Languages” in theJournal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, vol. lxiv. (1895), part i. pp. 352 et seq.; and “On Certain Suffixes in the Modern Indo-Aryan Vernaculars” in theZeitschrift für vergleichende Sprachforschung auf dem Gebiete der indogermanischen Sprachenfor 1903, pp. 473 et seq.

(b) For the separate languages, see C. J. Lyall,A Sketch of the Hindustani Language(Edinburgh, 1880); S. H. Kellogg,A Grammar of the Hindi Language(for both Western and Eastern Hindi), (2nd ed., London, 1893); J. T. Platts,A Grammar of the Hindūstānī or Urdū Language(London, 1874); andA Dictionary of Urdū, Classical Hindi and English(London, 1884); E. P. Newton,Panjābī Grammar: with Exercises and Vocabulary(Ludhiana, 1898); and Bhai Maya Singh,The Panjabi Dictionary(Lahore, 1895).The Linguistic Survey of India, vol. vi., describes Eastern Hindi, and vol. ix., Hindostani and Panjabi, in each instance in great detail.

(G. A. Gr.)

1“Hindōstān” is a Persian word, and in modern Persian is pronounced “Hindūstān.” It means the country of the Hindūs. In medieval Persian the word was “Hindōstān,” with anō, but in the modern language the distinctions betweenēandīand betweenōandūhave been lost. Indian languages have borrowed Persian words in their medieval form. Thus in India we haveshēr, a tiger, as compared with modern Persianshīr;gō, but modern Pers.gū;bōstān, but modern Pers.būstān. The word “Hindu” is in medieval Persian “Hindō” representing the ancient Avestahendava(Sanskrit,saindhava), a dweller on theSindhuor Indus. Owing to the influence of scholars in modern Persian the word “Hindū” is now established in English and, through English, in the Indian literary languages; but “Hindō” is also often heard in India. “Hindostan” withois much more common both in English and in Indian languages, although “Hindustan” is also employed. Up to the days of Persian supremacy inaugurated in Calcutta by Gilchrist and his friends, every traveller in India spoke of “Indostan” or some such word, thus bearing testimony to the current pronunciation. Gilchrist introduced “Hindoostan,” which became “Hindustan” in modern spelling. The word is not an Indian one, and both pronunciations, withōand withū, are current in India at the present day, but that withōis unquestionably the one demanded by the history of the word and of the form which other Persian words take on Indian soil. On the other hand “Hindu” is too firmly established in English for us to suggest the spelling “Hindo.”. The word “Hindī” has another derivation, being formed from the PersianHind, India (Avestahindu, Sanskritsindhu, the Indus). “Hindi” means “of or belonging to India,” while “Hindu” now means “a person of the Hindu religion.” (Cf. Sir C. J. Lyall,A Sketch of the Hindustani Language, p. 1).2Sir C. J. Lyall,op. cit.p. 9.3This and the preceding paragraph are partly taken from Mr Platts’s article in vol. xi. of the 9th edition of this encyclopaedia.4In some dialects of W.H. weak forms have masculines ending in u and corresponding feminines ini, but these are nowadays rarely met in the literary forms of speech. In old poetry they are common. In Braj Bhasha they have survived in the present participle.

1“Hindōstān” is a Persian word, and in modern Persian is pronounced “Hindūstān.” It means the country of the Hindūs. In medieval Persian the word was “Hindōstān,” with anō, but in the modern language the distinctions betweenēandīand betweenōandūhave been lost. Indian languages have borrowed Persian words in their medieval form. Thus in India we haveshēr, a tiger, as compared with modern Persianshīr;gō, but modern Pers.gū;bōstān, but modern Pers.būstān. The word “Hindu” is in medieval Persian “Hindō” representing the ancient Avestahendava(Sanskrit,saindhava), a dweller on theSindhuor Indus. Owing to the influence of scholars in modern Persian the word “Hindū” is now established in English and, through English, in the Indian literary languages; but “Hindō” is also often heard in India. “Hindostan” withois much more common both in English and in Indian languages, although “Hindustan” is also employed. Up to the days of Persian supremacy inaugurated in Calcutta by Gilchrist and his friends, every traveller in India spoke of “Indostan” or some such word, thus bearing testimony to the current pronunciation. Gilchrist introduced “Hindoostan,” which became “Hindustan” in modern spelling. The word is not an Indian one, and both pronunciations, withōand withū, are current in India at the present day, but that withōis unquestionably the one demanded by the history of the word and of the form which other Persian words take on Indian soil. On the other hand “Hindu” is too firmly established in English for us to suggest the spelling “Hindo.”. The word “Hindī” has another derivation, being formed from the PersianHind, India (Avestahindu, Sanskritsindhu, the Indus). “Hindi” means “of or belonging to India,” while “Hindu” now means “a person of the Hindu religion.” (Cf. Sir C. J. Lyall,A Sketch of the Hindustani Language, p. 1).

2Sir C. J. Lyall,op. cit.p. 9.

3This and the preceding paragraph are partly taken from Mr Platts’s article in vol. xi. of the 9th edition of this encyclopaedia.

4In some dialects of W.H. weak forms have masculines ending in u and corresponding feminines ini, but these are nowadays rarely met in the literary forms of speech. In old poetry they are common. In Braj Bhasha they have survived in the present participle.

HINDŌSTĀNĪ LITERATURE.The writings dealt with in this article are those composed in the vernacular of that part of India which is properly called Hindōstān,—that is, the valleys of the Jumna and Ganges rivers as far east as the river Kōs, and the tract to the south including Rajpūtānā, Central India (Bundēlkhaṇḍ and Baghēlkhaṇḍ), the Narmadā (Nerbudda) valley as far west as Khandwā, and the northern half of the Central Provinces. It does not include the Punjab proper (though the town population there speak Hindōstānī), nor does it extend to Lower Bengal.

In this region several different dialects prevail. The people of the towns everywhere use chiefly the form of the language calledUrdūorRēkhta,1stocked with Persian words and phrases, and ordinarily written in a modification of the Persian character. The country folk (who form the immense majority) speak different varieties ofHindī, of which the word-stock derives from the Prākrits and literary Sanskrit, and which are written in the Dēvanāgari or Kaithī character. Of these the most important from a literary point of view, proceeding from west to east, areMārwāṛīandJaipurī(the languages of Rajpūtānā),Brajbhāshā(the language of the country about Mathurā and Agra),Kanaujī(the language of the lower Ganges-Jumna Doāb and western Rohilkhaṇḍ),Eastern Hindī, also calledAwadhīandBaiswārī(the language of Eastern Rohilkhaṇḍ, Oudh and the Benares division of the United Provinces) andBihārī(the language of Bihār or Mithilā, comprising several distinct dialects). What is calledHigh Hindīis a modern development, for literary purposes, of the dialect of Western Hindi spoken in the neighbourhood of Delhi and thence northwards to the Himālaya, which has formed the vernacular basis of Urdū; the Persian words in the latter have been eliminated and replaced by words of Sanskritic origin, and the order of words in the sentence which is proper tothe indigenous speech is more strictly adhered to than in Urdū, which under the influence of Persian constructions has admitted many inversions.

As in many other countries, nearly all the early vernacular literature of Hindōstān is in verse, and works in prose are a modern growth.2Both Hindī and Urdū are, in their application to literary purposes, at first intruders upon the ground already occupied by the learned languages Sanskrit and Persian, the former representing Hindū and the latter Musalmān culture. But there is this difference between them, that, whereas Hindī has been raised to the dignity of a literary speech chiefly by impulses of revolt against the monopoly of the Brahmans, Urdū has been cultivated with goodwill by authors who have themselves highly valued and dexterously used the polished Persian. Both Sanskrit and Persian continue to be employed occasionally for composition by Indian writers, though much fallen from their former estate; but for popular purposes it may be said that their vernacular rivals are now almost in sole possession of the field.

The subject may be conveniently divided as follows:—

1. Early Hindī, of the period during which the language was being fashioned as a literary medium out of the ancient Prākrits, represented by the old heroic poems of Rajpūtānā and the literature of the earlyBhagatsor Vaishnava reformers, and extending from aboutA.D.1100 to 1550;2. Middle Hindī, representing the best age of Hindī poetry, and reaching from about 1550 to the end of the 18th century;3. The rise and development of literary Urdū, beginning about the end of the 16th century, and reaching its height during the 18th;4. The modern period, marked by the growth of a prose literature in both dialects, and dating from the beginning of the 19th century.

1. Early Hindī, of the period during which the language was being fashioned as a literary medium out of the ancient Prākrits, represented by the old heroic poems of Rajpūtānā and the literature of the earlyBhagatsor Vaishnava reformers, and extending from aboutA.D.1100 to 1550;

2. Middle Hindī, representing the best age of Hindī poetry, and reaching from about 1550 to the end of the 18th century;

3. The rise and development of literary Urdū, beginning about the end of the 16th century, and reaching its height during the 18th;

4. The modern period, marked by the growth of a prose literature in both dialects, and dating from the beginning of the 19th century.

1.Early Hindī.—Our knowledge of the ancient metrical chronicles of Rajpūtānā is still very imperfect, and is chiefly derived from the monumental work of Colonel James Tod, calledThe Annals and Antiquities of Rājāsthān(published in 1829-1832), which is founded on them. It is in the nature of compositions of this character to be subjected to perpetual revision and recasting; they are the production of the family bards of the dynasties whose fortunes they record, and from generation to generation they are added to, and their language constantly modified to make it intelligible to the people of the time. Round an original nucleus of historical fact a rich growth of legend accumulates; later redactors endeavour to systematize and to assign dates, but the result is not often such as to inspire confidence; and the mass has more the character of ballad literature than of serious history. The materials used by Tod are nearly all still unprinted; his manuscripts are now deposited in the library of the Royal Asiatic Society in London; and one of the tasks which, on linguistic and historical grounds, should first be undertaken by the investigator of early Hindī literature is the examination and sifting, and the publication in their original form, of these important texts.

Omitting a few fragments of more ancient bards given by compilers of accounts of Hindī literature, the earliest author of whom any portion has as yet been published in the original text is Chand Bardāī, the court bard of Prithwī-Rāj, the last Hindū sovereign of Delhi. His poem, entitledPrithī-Rāj Rāsau(orRāysā), is a vast chronicle in 69 books or cantos, comprising a general history of the period when he wrote. Of this a small portion has been printed, partly under the editorship of the late Mr John Beames and partly under that of Dr Rudolf Hoernle, by the Asiatic Society of Bengal; but the excessively difficult nature of the task prevented both scholars from making much progress.3Chand, who came of a family of bards, was a native of Lahore, which had for nearly 170 years (since 1023) been under Muslim rule when he flourished, and the language of the poem exhibits a considerable leaven of Persian words. In its present form the work is a redaction made by Amar Singh of Mēwār, about the beginning of the 17th century, and therefore more than 400 years after Chand’s death, with his patron Prithwī-Rāj, in 1193. There is, therefore, considerable reason to doubt whether we have in it much of Chand’s composition in its original shape; and the nature of the incidents described enhances this doubt. The detailed dates contained in the Chronicle have been shown by Kabirāj Syāmal Dās4to be in every case about ninety years astray. It tells of repeated conflicts between the hero Prithwī-Rāj and Sultān Shihābuddin, of Ghōr (Muhammad Ghori), in which the latter always, except in the last great battle, comes off the worst, is taken prisoner and is released on payment of a ransom; these seem to be entirely unhistorical, our contemporary Persian authorities knowing of only one encounter (that of Tiraurī (Tirawari) near Thēnēsar, fought in 1191) in which the Sultān was defeated, and even then he escaped uncaptured to Lahore. The Mongols (Book XV.) are brought on the stage more than thirty years before they actually set foot in India, and are related to have been vanquished by the redoubtable Prithwī-Rāj. It is evident that such a record cannot possibly be, in its entirety, a contemporary chronicle; but nevertheless it appears to contain a considerable element which, from its language, may belong to Chand’s own age, and represents the earliest surviving document in Hindī. “Though we may not possess the actual text of Chand, we have certainly in his writings some of the oldest known specimens of Gaudian literature, abounding in pure Apabhramśa Śaurasēnī Prākrit forms” (Grierson).

It is very difficult now to form a just estimate of the poem as literature. The language, essentially transitional in character, consists largely of words which have long since died out of the vernacular speech. Even the most learned Hindus of the present day are unable to interpret it with confidence; and the meaning of the verses must be sought by investigating the processes by which Sanskrit and Prākrit forms have been transfigured in their progress into Hindī. Chand appears, on the whole, to exhibit the merits and defects of ballad chroniclers in general. There is much that is lively and spirited in his descriptions of fight or council; and the characters of the Rājpūt warriors who surround his hero are often sketched in their utterances with skill and animation. The sound, however, frequently predominates over the sense; the narrative is carried on with the wearisome iteration and tedious unfolding of familiar themes and images which characterize all such poetry in India; and his value, for us at least, is linguistic rather than literary.

It is very difficult now to form a just estimate of the poem as literature. The language, essentially transitional in character, consists largely of words which have long since died out of the vernacular speech. Even the most learned Hindus of the present day are unable to interpret it with confidence; and the meaning of the verses must be sought by investigating the processes by which Sanskrit and Prākrit forms have been transfigured in their progress into Hindī. Chand appears, on the whole, to exhibit the merits and defects of ballad chroniclers in general. There is much that is lively and spirited in his descriptions of fight or council; and the characters of the Rājpūt warriors who surround his hero are often sketched in their utterances with skill and animation. The sound, however, frequently predominates over the sense; the narrative is carried on with the wearisome iteration and tedious unfolding of familiar themes and images which characterize all such poetry in India; and his value, for us at least, is linguistic rather than literary.

Chand may be taken as the representative of a long line of successors, continued even to the present day in the Rājpūt states. Many of their compositions are still widely popular as ballad literature, but are known only in oral versions sung in Hindōstān by professional singers. One of the most famous of these is theAlhā-khaṇḍ, reputed to be the work of a contemporary of Chand called Jagnik or Jagnāyak, of Mahōbā in Bundēlkhaṇḍ, who sang the praises of Rājā-Parmāl, a ruler whose wars with Prithwī-Rāj are recorded in the Mahōbā-Khaṇḍ of Chand’s work. Ālhā and Ūdal, the heroes of the poem, are famous warriors in popular legend, and the stories connected with them exist in an eastern recension, current in Bihār, as well as in the Bundēlkhaṇḍī or western form which is best known. Two versions of the latter have been printed, having been taken down as recited by illiterate professional rhapsodists. Another celebrated bard was Sārangdhar of Rantambhōr, who flourished in 1363, and sang the praises of Hammīr Dēo (Hamir Deo), the Chauhān chief of Rantambhōr who fell in a heroic struggle against Sultān ‘Alā‘uddīn Khiljī in 1300. He wrote theHammīr KāvyaandHammīr Rāsau, of which an account is given by Tod;5he was also a poet in Sanskrit, in which language he compiled, in 1363, the anthology calledSārngadhara-Paddhati. Another work which may be mentioned (though much more modern) is the long chronicle entitledChhattra-Prakās, or the history of Rājā Chhatarsāl, the Bundēlā rājā of Pannā, who was killed, fighting on behalf of Prince Dārā-Shukōh, in the battle of Dhōlpur won by Aurangzēb in 1658. The author, Lāl Kabi, has given in this work a history of the valiant Bundēlā nation which was rendered into English by Captain W. R. Pogson in 1828, and printed at Calcutta.

Before passing on to the more important branch of earlyHindī literature, the works of theBhagats, mention may be made here of a remarkable composition, a poem entitled thePadmāwat, the materials of which are derived from the heroic legends of Rajpūtānā, but which is not the work of a bard nor even of a Hindu. The author, Malik Muḥammad of Jā‘is, in Oudh, was a venerated Muslim devotee, to whom the Hindu rājā of Amēṭhī was greatly attached. Malik Muḥammad wrote the Padmāwat in 1540, the year in which Shēr Shāh Sūr ousted Humāyān from the throne of Delhi. The poem is composed in the purest vernacular Awadhī, with no admixture of traditional Hindu learning, and is generally to be found written in the Persian character, though the metres and language are thoroughly Indian. It professes to tell the tale of Padmāwatī or Padminī, a princess celebrated for her beauty who was the wife of the Chauhān rājā of Chītōr in Mēwār. The historical Padminī’s husband was named Bhīm Singh, but Malik Muḥammad calls him Ratan Sēn; and the story turns upon the attempts of ‘Alā‘uddīn Khiljī, the sovereign of Delhi, to gain possession of her person. The tale of the siege of Chītōr in 1303 by ‘Alā‘uddīn, the heroic stand made by its defenders, who perished to the last man in fight with the Sultan’s army, and the self-immolation of Padminī and the other women, the wives and daughters of the warriors, by the fiery death calledjōhar, will be found related in Tod’sRājāsthān, i. 262 sqq. Malik Muḥammad takes great liberties with the history, and explains at the end of the poem that all is an allegory, and that the personages represent the human soul, Divine wisdom, Satan, delusion and other mystical characters.

Both on account of its interest as a true vernacular work, and as the composition of a Musalmān who has taken the incidents of his morality from the legends of his country and not from an exotic source, the poem is memorable. It has often been lithographed, and is very popular; a translation has even been made into Sanskrit. A critical edition has been prepared by Dr G. A. Grierson and Paṇḍit Sudhākar Dwivēdi.

Both on account of its interest as a true vernacular work, and as the composition of a Musalmān who has taken the incidents of his morality from the legends of his country and not from an exotic source, the poem is memorable. It has often been lithographed, and is very popular; a translation has even been made into Sanskrit. A critical edition has been prepared by Dr G. A. Grierson and Paṇḍit Sudhākar Dwivēdi.

The other class of composition which is characteristic of the period of early Hindī, the literature of theBhagats, or Vaishnava saints, who propagated the doctrine ofbhakti, or faith in Vishnu, as the popular religion of Hindōstān, has exercised a much more powerful influence both upon the national speech and upon the themes chosen for poetic treatment. It is also, as a body of literature, of high intrinsic interest for its form and content. Nearly the whole of subsequent poetical composition in Hindī is impressed with one or other type of Vaishnava doctrine, which, like Buddhism many centuries before, was essentially a reaction against Brahmanical influence and the chains of caste, a claim for the rights of humanity in face of the monopoly which the “twice-born” asserted of learning, of worship, of righteousness. A large proportion of the writers were non-Brahmans, and many of them of the lowest castes. As Śiva was the popular deity of the Brahmans, so was Vishnu of the people; and while the literature of the Śaivas and Śāktas6is almost entirely in Sanskrit, and exercised little or no influence on the popular mind in northern India, that of the Vaishnavas is largely in Hindī, and in itself constitutes the great bulk of what has been written in that language.

The Vaishnava doctrine is commonly carried back to Rāmānuja, a Brahman who was born about the end of the 11th century, at Perambur in the neighbourhood of the modern Madras, and spent his life in southern India. His works, which are in Sanskrit and consist of commentaries on the Vēdānta Sūtras, are devoted to establishing “the personal existence of a Supreme Deity, possessing every gracious attribute, full of love and pity for the sinful beings who adore him, and granting the released soul a home of eternal bliss near him—a home where each soul never loses its identity, and whose state is one of perfect peace.”7In the Deity’s infinite love and pity he has on several occasions become incarnate for the salvation of mankind, and of these incarnations two, Rāmachandra, the prince of Ayōdhyā, and Kṛishṇa, the chief of the Yādava clan and son of Vasudēva, are pre-eminently those in which it is most fitting that he should be worshipped. Both of these incarnations had for many centuries8attracted popular veneration, and their histories had been celebrated by poets in epics and by weavers of religious myths inPurānasor “old stories”; but it was apparently Rāmānuja’s teaching which secured for them, and especially for Rāmachandra, their exclusive place as the objects ofbhakti—ardent faith and personal devotion addressed to the Supreme. The adherents of Rāmānuja were, however, all Brahmans, and observed very strict rules in respect of food, bathing and dress; the new doctrine had not yet penetrated to the people.

Whether Rāmānuja himself gave the preference to Rāma against Krishna as the form of Vishnu most worthy of worship is uncertain. He dealt mainly with philosophic conceptions of the Divine Nature, and probably busied himself little with mythological legend. Hismantra, or formula of initiation, if Wilson9was correctly informed, implies devotion to Rāma; but Vāsudēva (Krishna) is also mentioned as a principal object of adoration, and Rāmānuja himself dwelt for several years in Mysore, at a temple erected by the rājā, at Yādavagiri in honour of Krishna in his form Raṇchhōṛ.10It is stated that in his worship of Krishna he joined with that god as hisŚaktī, or Energy, his wife Rukminī; while the later varieties of Krishna-worship prefer to honour his mistress Rādhā. The great difference, in temper and influence upon life, between these two forms of Vaishnava faith appears to be a development subsequent to Rāmānuja; but by the time of Jaidēo (about 1250) it is clear that the theme of Krishna and Rādhā, and the use of passionate language drawn from the relations of the sexes to express the longings of the soul for God, had become fully established; and from that time onwards the two types of Vaishnava religious emotion diverged more and more from one another.

The cult of Rāma is founded on family life, and the relation of the worshipper to the Deity is that of a child to a father. The morality it inculcates springs from the sacred sources of human piety which in all religions have wrought most in favour of pureness of life, of fraternal helpfulness and of humble devotion to a loving and tender Parent, who desires the good of mankind, His children, and hates violence and wrong. That of Krishna, on the other hand, had for its basis the legendary career of a less estimable human hero, whose exploits are marked by a kind of elvish and fantastic wantonness; it has more and more spent its energy in developing that side of devotion which is perilously near to sensual thought, and has allowed the imagination and ingenuity of poets to dwell on things unmeet for verse or even for speech. It is claimed for those who first opened this way to faith that their hearts were pure and their thoughts innocent, and that the language of erotic passion which they use as the vehicle of their religious emotion is merely mystical and allegorical. This is probable; but that these beginnings were followed by corruption in the multitude, and that the fervent impulses of adoration made way in later times for those of lust and lasciviousness, seems beyond dispute.

The worship of Krishna, especially in his infant and youthful form (which appeals chiefly to women), is widely popular in the neighbourhood of Mathurā, the capital of that land of Braj where as a boy he lived. Its literature is mainly composed in the dialect of this region, called Brajbhāshā. That of Rāma,though general throughout Hindōstān, has since the time of Tulsī Dās adopted for poetic use the language of Oudh, called Awadhī or Baiswārī, a form of Eastern Hindī easily understood throughout the whole of the Gangetic valley. Thus these two dialects came to be, what they are to this day, the standard vehicles of poetic expression.

Subsequently to Rāmānuja his doctrine appears to have been set forth, about 1250, in the vernacular of the people by Jaidēo, a Brahman born at Kinduvilva, the modern Kenduli, in the Bīrbhūm district of Bengal, author of the SanskritGītā Gōvinda, and by Nāmdēo or Nāmā, a tailor11of Mahārāshtra, of both of whom verses in the popular speech are preserved in theĀdi Granthof the Sikhs. But it was not until the beginning of the 15th century that the Brahman Rāmānand, a prominentGōsāīṅof the sect of Rāmānuja, having had a dispute with the members of his order in regard to the stringent rules observed by them, left the community, migrated to northern India (where he is said to have made his headquarters Galtā in Rajpūtānā), and addressed himself to those outside the Brahman caste, thus initiating the teaching of Vaishnavism as the popular faith of Hindōstān. Among his twelve disciples or apostles were a Rājpūt, a Jāt, a leather-worker, a barber and a Musalmān weaver; the last-mentioned was the celebratedKabīr(see separate article). One short Hindī poem by Rāmānand is contained in theĀdi Granth, and Dr Grierson has collected hymns (bhajans) attributed to him and still current in Mithilā or Tirhūt. Both Rāmānand and Kabīr were adherents of the form of Vaishnavism where devotion is specially addressed to Rāama, who is regarded not only as an incarnation, but as himself identical with the Deity. A contemporary of Rāmānand, Bidyāpati Ṭhākur, is celebrated as the author of numerous lyrics in the Maithilī dialect of Bihār, expressive of the other side of Vaishnavism, the passionate adoration of the Deity in the person of Krishna, the aspirations of the worshipper being mystically conveyed in the character of Rādhā, the cowherdess of Braj and the beloved of the son of Vasudēva. These stanzas of Bidyāpati (who was a Brahman and author of several works in Sanskrit) afterwards inspired the Vaishnava literature of Bengal, whose most celebrated exponent was Chaitanya (b. 1484). Another famous adherent of the same cult was Mīrā Bāī, “the one great poetess of northern India” (Grierson). This lady, daughter of Rājā Ratiyā Rānā, Rāṭhōr, of Mērtā in Rajpūtānā, must have been born about the beginning of the 15th century; she was married in 1413 to Rājā Kumbhkaran of Mēwār, who was killed by his son Uday Rānā in 1469. She was devoted to Krishna in the form of Raṇchhōṛ, and her songs have a wide currency in northern India.


Back to IndexNext