Skip to main content

The Return of Sanskrit


Sanskrit was originally the language of the gods the their beloved people.  Manu stipulated a terrible fate for the lower caste people who dared to listen to the Vedas or utter the shlokas.  “If the Sudra intentionally listens for committing to memory the Veda, then his ears should be filled with (molten) lead; if he utters the Veda, then his tongue should be cut off.”

Now some 3000 years after those glorious days, the language is struggling to find learners.  Hence the BJP government has decided to make it compulsory in certain schools. 

A language is ineluctably associated with a culture.  When the culture evolves, the language has to evolve too.  Conversely, the death of a language implies the death of a culture.  The ancient Brahminical tradition with its neat and convenient hierarchy which ensured that power remained concentrated in a few hands died as the civilisation evolved and democratic ideas overtook it.

By the time India became independent the Brahminical system was quite dead.  The Nehruvian concept of secularism (which has been pooh-poohed for quite some time now) and the Gandhian ideals which promoted the rights of the erstwhile subaltern people gained vitality.  But the various governments that came to power in Indraprastha after the days of the nation’s founding fathers diluted the concepts and ideals for the sake of vote banks.  

Victors and vanquished change places in history quite often.  Indian history is entering a new phase of evolution with some such displacements and replacements.  Some of those ancient victors who were vanquished at the turn of the 20th century are now capturing back their lost powers.  The return of Sanskrit is a symbol.  That some people who were originally subalterns are the present agents of the dislocations may be an interesting irony.

There is nothing wrong in teaching and learning the classical language of the country.  In fact, there are more Sanskrit scholars outside India now than inside.  The problem, however, is when it is imposed with political motives.  Why not leave it as an optional subject which those interested can choose?  Why not encourage students to choose it rather than ram it down their throats? 


Some things in history change naturally and gracefully; Enlightenment in Europe, for instance.  Some changes are forced upon and they distort civilisation; Nazism, for example.   Only those changes last which merge meaningfully into the current condition of the civilisation.  Indian civilisation is at an advanced status and hence may not absorb all the things being imposed on it by the current regime in Indraprastha.  All saffron is not necessarily holy, Indians have learnt that already. 

Comments

  1. According to Alwin Toffler, the re-emergence of fundamentalism from the 70's will not have the longivity these had during the first half and middle of the last millenium- thanks to the faster incremental advancements of science and technology. The art of writing by hand is almost getting extinguished...the art of communication and the medial has gone beyond the traditional terrain...a new smart young generation is ready to discard the old .....they would embrace change and discard the old like they change their dress. If sanskrit can reinvent itself to cater to the demanding needs of the new generation....yes.. then it has a chance. ..I was told some time back that latin and sanskrit are best suited for computer programming.....but nothing has been heard on this front since then....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with you totally. If Sanskrit can reinvent itself, it has a chance. Otherwise this present move will drive in the last nail on the coffin. Classical languages like Latin and Sanskrit may be more amenable to computer programming for various reasons which I am not able to understand. Is it that computers are going to be our next bosses just like these languages were? :)

      Delete
  2. ''If the Sudra intentionally listens for committing to memory the Veda, then his ears should be filled with (molten) lead; if he utters the Veda''.You are mistaken .it is not of Veda but a Mantra ,The Gayathry manthra.ॐ भूर्भुवः स्वः
    तत्सवितुर्वरेण्यं ।
    भर्गो देवस्य धीमहि
    धियो यो नः प्रचोदयात् ॥
    Om Bhuur-Bhuvah Svah
    Tat-Savitur-Varennyam |
    Bhargo Devasya Dhiimahi
    Dhiyo Yo Nah Pracodayaat ||

    Meaning:
    1: Om, that (Divine Illumination) which Pervades the Bhu Loka (Physical Plane), Bhuvar Loka (Antariksha Loka or the Astral Plane) and Suvar Loka (Swarga Loka or the Celestial Plane),
    2: That Savitr (Divine Illumination) which is the Most Adorable,
    3: On that Divine Radiance we Meditate,
    4: May that Enlighten Our Intellect and Awaken our Spiritual Wisdom.
    pls avoid the word'' utter''.It is not an uttering but a sorta silent.You cannot defend the ancient civilization of Bharath .I am lazy ,so I stop here ,but i guess you get that what i mean .Thank you

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, JK. The rule was for all of the Vedas. The scriptures in general, not a particular mantra, were out of reach of the low castes.

      Delete
    2. Its because of these practices that awesome things like yoga is not valued by us Indians but there are a whole lot of foreigners who are learning and value the art. The upper castes were just not ready to share their knowledge with anyone else.

      Delete
    3. That was a serious mistake of the past, Athena. And now we are making another mistake, forcing children to learn something that they are not able to appreciate or value. Is it because the govt is really concerned about Sanskrit or is it a different game?

      Delete
    4. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    5. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    6. Its definitely a different ball game, its not about Sanskrit, its about anything that can prove that they are working with Hindutva as their core target.

      Delete
  3. The caste system developed by ancient india, was the beginning of our trouble. We were never get united. Aliens like Brits divided Hindu and muslim, then hindu into upper and lower, then lower into backward and forward.
    In a country having craze of Western culture, forcing students to learn a language nowhere exists other than books will make the current govt feel like unstoppable calling of nature, and no symbol of swachh bharat, the ultimate toilet in sight.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We cannot change the past and so it's no use looking back and blaming what happened there. But we can change our present. The govt is changing it in wrong directions sometimes; the approach to Sanskrit being one of them.

      Delete
  4. In fact, there are more Sanskrit scholars outside India now than inside. The problem, however, is when it is imposed with political motives. I completely agree with your views but some special thing can be done forcefully only . If not ? why English is in India ? so something or some special things are really motivated by political wings and these should be !!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As I said, language is an integral part of a civilisation. As Indian civilisation became more and more global - as most civilisations do these days - English became its lingua franca. Nobody is forcing us to learn English; we learn it because we need it.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Adventures of Toto as a comic strip

  'The Adventures of Toto' is an amusing story by Ruskin Bond. It is prescribed as a lesson in CBSE's English course for class 9. Maggie asked her students to do a project on some of the lessons and Femi George's work is what I would like to present here. Femi converted the story into a beautiful comic strip. Her work will speak for itself and let me present it below.  Femi George Student of Carmel Public School, Vazhakulam, Kerala Similar post: The Little Girl

Joys of Onam and a reflection

Suppose that the whole universe were to be saved and made perfect and happy forever on just one condition: one single soul must suffer, alone, eternally. Would this be acceptable? Philosopher William James asked that in his 1891 book, The Moral Philosopher and the Moral Life . Please think about it once again and answer the question for yourself. You, as well as others, are going to live a life without a tinge of sorrow. Joyful existence. Life in Paradise. The only condition is that one person will take up all the sorrows of the universe on him-/herself and suffer – alone, eternally. What do you say? James’s answer is a firm no . “Not even a god would be justified in setting up such a scheme,” James asserted, knowing too well how the Bible justified a positive answer to his question. “It is expedient that one man should die for the people, so that the nation can be saved” [John 11:50]. Jesus was that one man in the Biblical vision of redemption. I was reading a Malayalam period...

The Little Girl

The Little Girl is a short story by Katherine Mansfield given in the class 9 English course of NCERT. Maggie gave an assignment to her students based on the story and one of her students, Athena Baby Sabu, presented a brilliant job. She converted the story into a delightful comic strip. Mansfield tells the story of Kezia who is the eponymous little girl. Kezia is scared of her father who wields a lot of control on the entire family. She is punished severely for an unwitting mistake which makes her even more scared of her father. Her grandmother is fond of her and is her emotional succour. The grandmother is away from home one day with Kezia's mother who is hospitalised. Kezia gets her usual nightmare and is terrified. There is no one at home to console her except her father from whom she does not expect any consolation. But the father rises to the occasion and lets the little girl sleep beside him that night. She rests her head on her father's chest and can feel his heart...

The Real Enemies of India

People in general are inclined to pass the blame on to others whatever the fault.  For example, we Indians love to blame the British for their alleged ‘divide-and-rule’ policy.  Did the British really divide India into Hindus and Muslims or did the Indians do it themselves?  Was there any unified entity called India in the first place before the British unified it? Having raised those questions, I’m going to commit a further sacrilege of quoting a British journalist-cum-historian.  In his magnum opus, India: a History , John Keay says that the “stock accusations of a wider Machiavellian intent to ‘divide and rule’ and to ‘stir up Hindu-Muslim animosity’” levelled against the British Raj made little sense when the freedom struggle was going on in India because there really was no unified India until the British unified it politically.  Communal divisions existed in India despite the political unification.  In fact, they existed even before the Briti...

Loving God and Hating People

Illustration by Gemini AI There are too many people, including in my extended family. who love God so much that other people have no place in their hearts. God fills their hearts. They go to church or other similar places every day and meet their God. I guess they do. But they return home from the place of worship only to pour out the venom in their hearts on those around them. When I’m vexed by such ‘religious’ people I consult Dostoevsky’s novel The Brothers Karamazov in which there are some characters who are acutely vexed by spiritual questions. Let me leave Ivan Karamazov to himself, as he has been discussed too much already. In Book II, Chapter 4 [ A lady of Little Faith ], a troubled woman comes to Father Zosima, the wise monk, and confesses her spiritual struggle. “I long to love God,” she says. She knows that she cannot love God without loving her fellow human beings, or at least doing some service to them. The truth is, she says, “I cannot bear people. The closer they ...