Therefore, when Prof. Muller affirms that "there is not a
single word in Panini's terminology which presupposes the existence of
writing" (op. cit. 507), we become a little shaken in our loyal
deference to Western opinion. For it is very hard to conceive how one
so pre-eminently great as Panini should have been incapable of inventing
characters to preserve his grammatical system--supposing that none had
previously existed--if his genius was equal to the invention of
classical Sanskrit. The mention of the word Grantha, the equivalent for
a written or bound book in the later literature of India--though applied
by Panini (in B. I. 3, 75) to the Veda; (in B. iv. 3, 87) to any work;
(in B. iv. 3, 116) to the work of any individual author; and (in B. iv.
3, 79) to any work that is studied, do not stagger Prof. Muller at all.
Grantha he takes to mean simply a composition, and this may be handed
down to posterity by oral communication. Hence, we must believe that
Panini was illiterate; but yet composed the most elaborate and
scientific system of grammar ever known; recorded its 3,996 rules only
upon the molecular quicksands of his "cerebral cineritious matter," and
handed them over to his disciples by atmospheric vibration, i.
Pages:
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562