The case for Sanskrit as National Language of India
In my previous column, I had raised the possibility of adopting Sanskrit as the national language of India. But Hindi, along with English, has been our official language since independence. Therefore, before I move on to make my case for Sanskrit I will examine the status of Hindi and its qualifications as the official language and/or national language.
Hindi is a regional language
Based on massive historical evidence in the form of lakhs of books in Sanskrit written by authors spanning over several millennia and spanning the length and breadth of India and covering every imaginable branch of knowledge, one can say with confidence that at the pan-India level Sanskrit is mukhya (principal) and all other languages including Hindi are gouṇa (subordinate). What is mukhya can never become gouṇa, and what is gouṇa can never become mukhya. No power on Earth or Heaven can alter this fact. This is the essence of my argument that Hindi as official language is such a deeply flawed idea.
Firstly, lets us look at the number of Hindi speakers in the country, who incidentally, belong only to North-India. As per the 2001 census only 25% of population had declared Hindi as their native language. An additional 20% speak one of many dialects of Hindi. Even if we add these up and say that about 45% of India speaks ‘Hindi’, still, it is less than 50% which could have been an excuse for foisting a language on the entire nation. States in the west, east and south have no emotional connection to Hindi at all. Furthermore, these states have languages of much greater antiquity than Hindi and even regard Hindi as an inferior language.
Secondly, Hindi, like other regional languages, but unlike Sanskrit, has never been a medium of higher learning. This should be actually the most important criteria for a language to be elevated as a national or official language.
The third problem is the vast gulf between ‘official’ Hindi that is loyal to Sanskrit and the popular ‘Hindi’ on TV and in ‘Hindi’-movies that is completely overrun by Urdu. Though geographically speaking Urdu is an Indian language, it is rooted in Persian and thus disconnected with the greater Indian civilization that is firmly rooted in Sanskrit. This two-faced nature of Hindi is confusing and the Urduized ‘Hindi’, which is the public face of Hindi, is completely disconnected with the essence, heart and soul of Indian civilization.
[contextly_sidebar id=”xudWp3aiTlwCCIQi7ndEO1ruTjSqzQSj”]
Finally, even the use of ‘official’-Hindi is more of a window-dressing since it is not used in the most important tasks of the Government; for example, the actual making of the laws, i.e. putting a law into writing, is done in English. Only the original English text is considered official and authoritative and not the Hindi translation. Most of the official documents like international agreements etc. are also in English. This is the situation in spite of repeated efforts at pushing Hindi for almost seventy years by the Government. The Government has failed to do what it preaches.
It should be clear to any rational person that Hindi as official language has failed. Therefore it is time we reconsidered Sanskrit which was anyway the choice of half of the Constituent Assembly of 1949 that voted on the choice of official language.
*On September 11 1949, the then Law Minister Dr. B.R.Ambedkar supported by Dy.Minister for External Affairs Dr. B.V.Keskar and Mr.Naziruddin Ahmed sponsored an amendment declaring that the official language of the Union shall be Sanskrit. The amendment had thirteen other signatories of whom eleven hailed from South-India including nine from Madras (now Chennai). When asked by a PTI correspondent ‘Why Sanskrit?’, Dr.Ambedkar’s short reply was ‘What is wrong with Sanskrit?’ Dr.Ambedkar also wanted the Executive Committee of All India Scheduled Caste Federation to pass a resolution supporting Sanskrit as official language, but he had to withdraw it due to opposition from the youth members of the Federation.
Why Sanskrit?
For several millennia, Sanskrit has been the sole medium of not only religion and ritual but also of philosophy & metaphysics, poetics, mathematics and the sciences, law, jurisprudence etc. Sanskrit has always been the common language of all literate persons pursuing studies in various traditional disciplines. To this day, in scores of gurukulams, and in several Sanskrit departments, the medium of instruction and the common language for everyday interaction is Sanskrit.
The logical structure and power of expression of Sanskrit is well-known. Especially, Sanskrit is distinguished by the extraordinary vastness of its vocabulary. The size of Sanskrit vocabulary as testified by the dictionary project at Deccan College, Pune, is one crore or ten million. According to Merriam-Webster, the size of modern English vocabulary including scientific words is about one million. If Sanskrit lacks the words for modern science & technology it is because we have not bothered to learn and use Sanskrit.
There should be no doubt in anyone’s mind about ability of Sanskrit to cater to the needs of the modern scientific & technological age. As early as the 1940’s, the great Sanskrit scholar, linguist and nationalist Acharya Raghuvira single handedly compiled a dictionary which he called ‘A Greater English-Hindi dictionary’. In this dictionary he had coined one lakh fifty thousand Sanskrit words for more than thirty-two areas of Administration and Law and for scores of scientific disciplines. His visionary idea was that this dictionary could serve as a reference for all Indian languages thus facilitating use of Indian languages in all modern education. Unfortunately, this pioneering work was quickly forgotten as the states failed to appreciate its importance and the threat that English would eventually pose to regional languages.
Declare Sanskrit as National Language
In summary, the following unique qualities of Sanskrit make it the only choice as national language of India:
(a) Unlike other regional languages, it is an independent language, i.e. it has a built-in mechanism to generate new vocabulary based on a vast store of base-words and roots. This incomparable power of generating words for every human endeavour and aspiration is Sanskrit’s greatest strength.
(b) It has proven its ability to not only to be the medium, but due to its innate power, also a driving force in the pursuit of man’s worldly pursuits as well as his aspiration for highest spiritual knowledge and enlightenment.
(c) It is the only language that for several thousand years has been continuously link language for educated people from ALL parts of India.
(d) No state or region can claim Sanskrit as its own, but at the same time its vocabulary pervades ALL state/regional languages thus giving it a national identity. This simple fact seems to have been lost to those in the Constituent Assembly who voted in favor of Hindi.
Therefore, the position of Sanskrit as the national language and also the official language is unassailable. Fortunately, though English and Hindi were chosen as official languages for the conduct of official proceedings, the Constitution did not declare any language as the national language.
India currently does not have a recognized national language.
Therefore, Parliament should declare Sanskrit as national language and the Central Government should envisage a National Mission for Sanskrit Literacy. The status quo may be maintained – for now – with regards to English and Hindi as official languages.
An awakened and united India
But what could or should Sanskrit literacy achieve? Surely this cannot be about merely replacing one language with another. The advent of Sanskrit as a common voice will help unite all Indians by awakening them to their shared history. People will find out for themselves, as did Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, that India’s vast intellectual and spiritual heritage has nothing to do with caste, ethnicity or race and that it can be embraced by all of humanity. This will greatly help unify all Indians to overcome inimical internal and external forces. A stronger India will emerge that is confident in its own skin and its innate strengths. It can chart its own future course as well as influence the larger humanity, based on its own high principles and values. The sleeping giant will finally awaken.
*Sourced from the book ‘Samskrit, The Voice of India’s Soul and Wisdom’, by NCERT (May 2001)
Urdu is not disconnected with Indian civilization. Urdu is a major language of India and it is the window to our culture. Sanskrit is comparable to Latin which is an ancient language which is more of a thing of the past. Urdu has been the language of the public throughout much of India for the last few hundred years until the arrival of “Hindi”. People still haven’t stopped speaking Urdu, but are calling it Hindi.
urdu and hindi may be phonetically similar but are also very different in terms of script. More like step siblings of racially different mothers. Pure urdu is actually a minority language around india . i can understand the grammar but the words are completely different. urdu has a persian base and hindi has a Sanskrit base.
So you want Sanskrit as the national language like hockey is the national sports. Sure why not. pathetic.
whats pathetic in it ?
why Hindi became the official Language and why this language became the language of the majority of North India and not other parts of India? It was only because of Patronage by the muslim rulers for over 400 years
Hindustani Language formation is only because of Muslim invasions whether you accept it or not, it’s a fact which wont change.
A language developed under invasion
Original Khariboli Dialect
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khariboli_dialect
When the muslims rulers imposed Persian Language as the official language over 400 years in muslim ruled regions then many Persian/Turkish(Chagatai)/Arab words to get assimilated into Khariboli dialect of Delhi giving rise to the Hindustani Language which then
British East Indian Company during British rule they gave patronage to Hindustani language by using Hindustani in British administration along with English which eventually went to become official language of India and Pakistan under Hindi and Urdu respectively.
Israelis were able to revive Hebrew while Indians cant revive Sanskrit shows the pathetic vision of Indian leaders.
Hindi and Urdu are both derived from Hindustani language where Hindi and Urdu
have more emphasis on Sanskrit and Arabic/Persian respectively.
Hindi always had less Persian/Arabic influence than Urdu but the muslims in Bollywood want to change that.
SO If Sanskrit is given State level Patronage in every Government Institutions, Sanskrit too will become the Language of India.
SO If Sanskrit is given State level Patronage in every Government Institutions, Sanskrit too will become the Language of India.
Odisha & Bengal gave state level Patronage in schools by introducing Sanskrit as Second Language. What is the result?
not in schools since you learn but never apply it practical life.
I meant it by putting it into practice In every Government administration which will make the citizens comply with the demands.
It should be started from Schools. The way Parsi / English started by British to prepare Clerks from India. Now also we should start from school to use Sanskrit and write letters in Sanskrit etc etc. Even people who advocate for Sanskrit never use Sanskrit in personal letters to their family members. But they give advice to use Sanskrit in Government communications.
Even now a days e-mail has killed the art of letter writing and art of good handwriting. So first we should reject e-mail till Sanskrit is used to write e-mail.
They give advice because they want to create awareness in the public that using Sanskrit will be better for us than Hindi. I, myself, am not a great scholar in Sanskrit but I can surely understand this language. If more and more awareness is created, then of course, people will want to know Sanskrit and thereafter Sanskrit can be declared the Official Language of India.
Any language can be promoted if the advantages of adopting that language are given ; this the author has not.
He mentions the following :
The advent of Sanskrit as a common voice will help unite all Indians by awakening them to their shared history. People will find out for themselves, as did Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, that India’s vast intellectual and spiritual heritage has nothing to do with caste, ethnicity or race and that it can be embraced by all of humanity. This will greatly help unify all Indians to overcome inimical internal and external forces. A stronger India will emerge that is confident in its own skin and its innate strengths. It can chart its own future course as well as influence the larger humanity, based on its own high principles and values. The sleeping giant will finally awaken.
Does he seriously think that all the 125 crore people or even a fraction of the population will read all the ancient texts to understand India’s past glory ?
If really all these people are interested in reviving India , why don’t they translate all these ancient texts into the popular languages of today , so that everyone becomes aware ? Because that is hard work , and it is always easier to thrust something down everyone’s throat. Just make Sanskrit compulsory and that’s it. Like it or lump it.
Ignorance is bliss. There is no cure for ignorance and wrong interpretation. If you really want to educate yourself what the author is exactly trying to say, I can suggest you another website where a detailed presentation has been made. Do spend a considerable times there in educating yourself and then come back and read this article again in PURE and Open mind not in Colonial mind. All your doubts about 125 Crore peopole can’t understand Sanskrit will be clear. Moreover Sanskrit will be a language connecting people ( exactly like what English is playing the role in India today) across States. Translation to local language is much required. Sanskrit is more close to an Indian than English. If I have to talk in your language, it is much better to thrust Sanskrit than English. But the author is not talking about making Sanskrit compulsory. He is merely pointing replacing Engish and Hindi the status of National Language, to Sanskrit.
http://www.bhashaneeti.org
The cure for ignorance and wrong interpretation is that you take the trouble to explain.
The reason Hindi and English were chosen as the official languages was because there was already a sizable fraction of the population which spoke and understood these languages.
Now , if we want to shift to Sanskrit , there have to be compelling reasons why we should do so ; can you give at least 2 reasons ? Just giving a lot of rhetoric about sleeping giants awakening is not a reason. Let us talk logic and facts.
Did you go to that website I provided the link for educating yourself? If not first you go there ( that has enough substance to prepare for an open debate.)?
It will help cleansing a colonial mind with all the answers you are looking for. I don’t want to waste time in writing the same thing again and again each time here.
I started going through it and made some comments ; by slide #13 , I saw it is all humbug. Waste of time.
A piece of advice is, you are welcome not to waste your and other’s time here particularly mine. Time is precious and I don’t have any intention to engage with you anymore as I don’t think you have anything to contribute.
Commie, so your spread misinformation here and cite scroll articles which spreads more shit.
Do you even know why Hindi became the official Language and why this language more prevalent and became the language of the majority of North India and less prominent in other parts of India? It was only because of Patronage by the muslim rulers for over 400 years
Hindustani Language formation is only because of Muslim invasions whether you accept it or not, it’s a fact which wont change.
A language developed under invasion
Original Khariboli Dialect
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khariboli_dialect
When the muslims rulers imposed Persian Language as the official language over 400 years in muslim ruled regions then many Persian/Turkish(Chagatai)/Arab words to get assimilated into Khariboli dialect of Delhi giving rise to the Hindustani Language after which then British East India Company during their British rule gave patronage to this Hindustani language by using Hindustani in British administration along with English. Hindustani language then eventually went to become official language of India and Pakistan under Hindi and Urdu respectively.
Hindi and Urdu are both derived from Hindustani language where Hindi and Urdu
have more emphasis on Sanskrit and Arabic/Persian respectively.
Hindi always had less Persian/Arabic influence than Urdu but the muslims in Bollywood want to change that.
Israelis were able to revive Hebrew while Indians cant revive Sanskrit shows the pathetic vision of Indian leaders.
SO If Sanskrit is given State level Patronage in every Government Institutions, Sanskrit too will become the Language of India.
Hindi is not the only official language of India. People in the South are not ready to accept Hindi because they have nothing to do with it. If Hindi is made the sole official of India then, there’ll be discrimination with people in the South. They will have to start all over again as compared to the Hindi speakers. They will be classed as second class citizens. If Sanskrit is used, then everybody will be at the same status. No one will be superior or inferior.
Why are people in the North unwilling to accept English ?
Because it originated in another country ?
Why do Indians leave India and go either to work or settle down in other countries ?
Why Sanskrit instead of English ?
It’s a question why the North don’t want to accept English. Even in the South people are somehow reluctant to accept English but they have to, because there’s no other choice. English does not represent India’s essence in any way. Indians go to settle in other countries because of unemployment dear. Is that something difficult to understand? Sanskrit can unite the whole of the subcontinent rather than divide it like Hindi.
No one at least in Tamil Nadu is unwilling to accept English.
The last time we were in Mahabalipuram , we came across several foreigners ; one of them was a group of 2 elderly British ladies who had come to Tamil Nadu to spend a vacation of 2 to 3 weeks ; they had hired a car and a driver , and they were driving throughout Tamil Nadu.
People are very comfortable with those who speak English as well as Hindi. There are so many migrants from Jharkand , Odisha , UP , Bihar in Chennai ; they are more at ease here than they are in Mumbai.
Once people learn Sanskrit , will their going abroad for employment come to an end ? If it is going to continue , then how will they manage without a knowledge of English ?
If 130 crore Indians want to unite , they can unite despite the dozens of languages ; it is certainly not essential to have only one language to have unity ; nor is there is any guarantee that once we have a single language , we will not find some other reason to be divided.
You know, English is relatively very easy to learn compared to other world language. So you mean that we should learn English because we want to please the foreigners with our good English speaking skills? English has seeped so deep in Indian society that even if Sanskrit is made the national language, English will continue to prevail even for 200+ years. People in Germany, France, Poland and so on do not learn English but still they understand and many can even speak good English. It’s not necessary for English to be present in the school syllabus for you to learn it. Do you think that newspapers like Times Of India and The Hindu will change their language medium if Sanskrit was to become official? So, we can surely say that English will continue to prosper in Indian society even if it does not finds its place in the educational system.
I say it once more, Hindi will create more division. It is not a unifying language. Surely if you speak Hindi and I understand it, I will also use it. But if you try to force it down my throat, then I need not to say what will be the consequences.
You mean if tomorrow some Polish and Germans come live next door to me, I should better speak their language instead of them to learn mine?
Of course not, people will still be moving out for employment. Many institutions in India are offering English courses, German courses, French courses and so on. If they wish to move out for employment surely they can look up to these institution. In fact many Indians are choosing Germany and France to study. Are these languages currently taught in all Indian school? Like I said previously, English will still persist in Indian society; it will never come to an end.
I’m not talking about division between Indians but division between the culture, the governments and so on. One language is necessary because you can’t have a foreign language to represent you. You have to at least come to a consensus on this issue because don’t expect that the language debate will end in India any time soon. As long as this nation persists, so will the language issue crop up from time to time. Today many Indians are patriotic and want to see a united India. In the future, the world will become more globalised; the future generations will become more outward looking and who knows that patriotism may no longer exist in India and by the way it is on the decline. When people talk about patriotism in India, many laugh at it thinking it to be fanaticism. They can demand their state to secede from the Union of India. You know, all these languages in India are surely a unifying factor for now but as India evolves, each state is trying to create a distinct identity of itself. The language can in the longer term, unite them, preventing further fragmentation of India because each state will be binded to each other with a common language.
There is so much we can debate , but I am tired. You say :
“One language is necessary because you can’t have a foreign language to represent you. ”
Why ?
“Today many Indians are patriotic and want to see a united India.”
So for the past 70 years , they were not patriotic , and did not want to see a united India ?
This is so ridiculous that I think it is meaningless to debate any further.
Sorry.
But why do you want a foreign language to represent you? Is there something missing in your culture? Or you think that you are inferior to native English speakers? Or you think that India has not been able to produce such good languages and so let’s accept other people’s language and show them that we want to become like them?
I meant that Indians were patriotic then and they are now. But we don’t know till when will this patriotism prevail because it is on the decline. You can see it for yourself. You talk something patriotic, they start to laugh at you. You talk about South India to the North Indians, they laugh at the culture of South Indians. This is all because they don’t understand the South. The South celebrates North Indian festivals like Holi, Raksha Bandhan and so on. But tell me one festival of the South that the North celebrates? The little knowledge the South has about Hindi makes them feel somehow “Indians” and so they accept their festivals becoming “global India” but the North has practically zero knowledge of the South and all of that because of language. The language gap has still not unite them despite 70 years of independence. This is my point. You know saying that different languages unite India is only true for political reasons but in reality it is very different. I have seen people in India itself who do not marry people from other states. This itself proves how different languages “unite” India.
The small number of states that do speak Hindi hardly share anything else in common ; the North does not understand the South not just because the language is different , but because everything from history to culture to music to cuisine is different.
Having a common language is not going to make it easier for the North to understand the South.
Language is never a barrier when people really wish to marry ; most often people do not wish to marry outside their caste , not necessarily because of the language ; there are Malayalis who marry Bengalis !
You cannot say HARDLY share anything. They share many things in common. Part of the reason may be history, culture and all. But the most prominent reason is of language barrier. They cannot communicate easily with the South. People from the North hardly go to the South except Bengaluru. They consider the South to be “outsiders”/ “foreign”. Had a common language put in place, it would have been easier for people to move across India to work. Unemployment in India itself can drastically be reduced by this. So, India need not to fear a brain drain. Yes, surely, language is not a barrier for marriage. In fact, my context was different. You did not understand what I had to say. I mean to say that every state has its own official language, right? So, they try to create a distinct identity of themselves from the rest of other Indian states. This makes them feel that they are different from other Indians. Hence, they refrain to marry people outside they state.
I am from Orissa. Our second language was Sanskrit in school. We were handicapped outside India with out any knowledge on Hindi or English.
SJ is not a moron , though in that case he could be excused ; he is a wilful maniac.
Witness the following statement :
States in the west, east and south have no emotional connection to Hindi at all.
What about this then ?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dakshina_Bharat_Hindi_Prachar_Sabha
The same old tripe viz. historical evidence !
For every argument about anything remotely connected with Hinduism or Bharat , whether it is Sanskrit , Yoga , cow slaughter , beef , Saraswati Vandana , or even against Hinduism or Hindus , as in Muslim atrocities against Hindus , destruction of temples ,… the list is endless , we have to invoke historical evidence.
Why live in the present , leave alone think of the future , when our past is so full of glory and can be mined for all sorts of grievances ?
If only this guy could get amnesia.
you must be an illiterate fool, but having some English knowledge. People like you are not needed in India.
Or, your name is fake and trying to mislead the people.
Author has rightly said Hindi is regional language of North and also its hidden connection with Urdu. Hindi is nothing but Urdu with some mix of Samskrutha words. Hindi sentence format same as Urdu. Hindi does not have its own script. Its grammar is strange.. only some parts of Samskrutha like Sandhi is taken as rest is Urdu! Thus Hindi does not have its own words, script or grammar. So is there a language called Hindi?? listen to any Bollywood songs, it is completely Urdu. That’s why Bollywood movies are hit i Pak & Bangla. Pan India imposition of Hindi aka Urdu has only helped illegal migrants to roam around India easily. All state languages must be accorded official status. When we are all equal why not our languages? Did non Hindi people won freedom to loose again back to North Indians? Yes, Samskrutha has deep roots in all Indian languages including all South Indian languages & deserves an eternal place.
totally agreed…
There are a Group of People who just jump the GUN , when it is said SANSKRIT to be promoted…..It doesn’t mean to Kill the other languages……In addition to the Languages they currently know ,Sanskrit should be Learnt …..Again there the Question arises why Should we learn Sanskrit???The Point is Sanskrit is a Ocean which is so Vast & MORE & MOST IMPORTANTLY all our Knowledge(mostly) were written down in Sanskrit by our Ancestors……So it is in our Best interests we should know the Language…….The Cunningness of the White men here has to be Mentioned here…..They destroyed our Gurukul system of Education , Banned Sanskrit (other Languages too) Just for the reason that people should not be able to use their Best knowledge & to make them Handicapped ……..& they started promoting English….which again has a sinister motive……because once we forget our Language , We have no choice but to start using the Language that was promoted…That Promoted Language being thrust upon was to Keep Propagating all False & Concocted stories , So the Seeds of this argument today was Sowed back some 300 400 years back by the Cunning Wicked Missionaric moronic white men………….Let us Understand that it is in our Best interests we should know the Language ourselves than to depend on some foreign who do the Translation work for us………It is common for all people across India(More aptly Subcontinent) …………People with Vested interests especially the Xtian Nexus is more responsible for the Hatred against Sanskrit as in the cases of all the hatred against Hindus /Hinduism
Samskrithenaiava baarathasya akhandathaam udgradhanam cha karthum sakyathe….
!!
संस्कृताध्ययनं विना विचारशक्तिरेव न सम्भवति ।विचारशक्तिम् विना नर : वानर: सम्पद्यते ।अत: सर्वै: संस्कृतं अवश्यं शिक्षणीयम् ।
Its a good debate that we must have.But,one of the important thing the writer and those in the comments section missed out on was that sanskrit’s religious significance.people talk like its just another language which gave lots of words to the modern languages.but consider this,even the most anti brahminical people would accept that sanskrit mantras and shlokas are used in all rituals across the regional state in temples.of course its possible that the regional language also has religious texts like tamil mantras(divya prabhndam for eg) but i still think none of the regional languages have that much content to compete with sanskrit in religious significance(correct me if iam wrong).im a tamilian and a brahmin at that.i know a thing or 2 about the opposition to sanskrit.but as ambedkar wanted sanskrit,its only obvious it would not only unite us but even lessen the kind of religious oppressions of the higher castes on the lower castes as not providing education to lower castes was supposed to be a prinicipal accusation against the ancient india.i dont know whether its true or not,however,implementing that now is only positive and nothing oppressive.i dont understand why promotion of sanskrit would mean promotion of brahmin oppression(percieved or otherwise).unfortunately the modern indian has lost a bit of respect for religious benefits.in fact that also is solved by promoting sanskrit.if we truly want the caste system to be rid of,we must not only be one people from outside hindu religion,we must be one people within hindu religion.imagine this,anybody who has a mastery of sanskrit at the end of say class 12 or degree,regardless of caste, has a legitimate and moral claim and confidence to become a true brahmin/spiritualist.and it is true that it is not spoken widely today,but as the writer said it dominates in all of our everyday languages’s words and philosophy.besides,after a generation or 2 of learning sanskrit,we might definitely begin to understand in a mass sense the real ancient india as it was and not the british version of things.also,iam a kv student i studied hindi as 1st language till my 10th standard.but how is it actually relevant in my life.i can speak a decent hindi,watch bollywood movies and connect and talk in hindi with any indian who is not a tamilian or who does not know english or is more comfortable with hindi.english is still the language of science and maths and majorly used as a bridge language in my life.the sanskrit i learnt in school was not deep enough for spoken sanskrit.imagine if sanskrit had replaced hindi in my life,it is highly possible that at the end of 12th or degree..i will be well versed in most religious rituals,habits.have a very deep understanding of the ancient indian culture.truly appreciate the exact meaning of many sanskrit origin words in my mother tongue or daily speech not to mention so many other benefit.hindi is just another language.sanskrit is after all hindu’s “language of the gods”.very few countries can afford to use the “language of the god” as a spoken alanguage in the modern world.for eg.latin,arabic are used as spoken languages in very few countries.after a honest assessment for a quite a long time,i would say that promotion of it is entirely beneficial to all hindus,in fact it will bring much more equality and clarity amongst us.we can have a genuine debate at that time about all aspects of hinduism.and those of us who will say we will return to forceful tendencies of religion,i would say its the exact opposite for we will never abandon english-the language of science and maths of the modern world but only replacing hindi with sanskrit-the language of science,maths and spirituality of the ancient world.it is true that till sanskrit becomes a spoken language we cant make it an official or national language.first make 3 language formula compulsory in school which are english,mother tongue and 3 rd language -hindi or sanskrit.one more thing i didnt mention was hindi is in a way beneficial to non-hindus in the sense of secular framework of india which is a good thing and we must never lose it .they might even feel threatened if we force them to learn sanskrit.maybe the 3rd language can be a choice between both hindi and sanskrit.after 25 years sanskrit will be added as a national and official language along with hindi.its only reasonable to think that most hindus will opt for sanskrit because of the religious significance.so contrary to some people’s notion,if given a choice most hindus will find it as an oppurtunity to learn their religion and not think whats the use of learning a dead language.
The third language cannot be Hindi for non Hindi people or Samskrutha for Hindi people. Instead North Indians should learn non Hindi language compulsory as third language. Then you people will understand cost of language imposition. BTW, Hindi is nothing but Urdu. It has only helped illegal migrants from Pak and Bangla.
What about people who speak languages that do not have Sanskrut as their root?
Dravidian languages like Tamil, a language probably as old as Sanskrut.
What about Manipuri (Meetei) a language belonging to Sino Tibetian branch?
Are we going to force everyone?
nobody is going to force you to forget your mother tongue this is just about creating a lingua franca for indians that is not english (more like first language status to both english and sanskrit:since english is also important)
Strange that none of the Sanskrut promoters put their money where their mouth is.
How many companies have they started that do engineering or advanced science exclusively in Sanskrut?
You’re putting the cart in front of the horse. Sanskrit needs to be promoted first to make any engineering or advanced science program in Sanskrit worth taking.
What you meant is youngsters must study advanced science or engineering and then hope/ beg for jobs which as yet don’t exist.
Pl create the jobs and then expect some child to risk their future.
Not everyone is a Abhimanyu to sacrifice their lives for someone whim.
All youngsters, even orphans have some responsibility on them to earn a living.
What does this have to do with anything I’ve said? I’m saying that sufficiently popularizing Sanskrit will ensure that scientific courses in Sanskrit medium will naturally arise.
Professional course cost a lot of money to set up and the students also incur considerable expense while studying.
Students will take up a professional course only if there is some job prospect.
So, if none of you have the guts to start a company that needs technical staff fluent in Sanskrut, then why do expect parents to sacrifice their child’s future?
You sound like Mulayam Singh, whose anti English rants did not stop him from giving his son an English based education.
There’s no question of sacrificing anyone’s future. The goal here is to popularize Sanskrit as a vernacular, which is hardly incompatible with studying a professional course in English or another language. Then, when Sanskrit is more widely spoken, there will be an incentive to set up courses in Sanskrit.
Jamadagni’s article is about Sanskrut being a national language?
Why force a dead language down everyone’s throat?
Why not Tamil, another classical language, but one which is alive.
Why force a dead language down everyone’s throat? Well first off, the author does not talk about “forcing” anything. Second, the author gives plenty of good reasons in the “Why Sanskrit” section of the article, like the fact that it is an integral part of India’s cultural heritage, the only Indian language that can reasonably make a claim to be a national language, and very much suited to meeting modern technological and scientific needs. Tamil is a great language, but it is and has always been a regional one, just like Hindi, and would meet opposition from North Indians just like Hindi meets opposition from South Indians. Sanskrit, on the other hand, has significantly influenced all major Indian languages, and Sanskritic culture is very much present in virtually all of India, but despite this, no one area can claim a monopoly on it.
Again, confusion between bharat and India.
Sanskrut is the root language of northern, western and some eastern Indian languages.
But, Manipuri (Meetei) is a Sino Tibetian root language.
Kannad, Tamil, Telugu and Malayam are Dravidian languages.
Has any major scientific work been done in this dead language to claim its suitable for modern technological or scientific jargon?
E.g. String theory, Algebraic geometry, Genetics etc?
People claim its suitablilty to computer programming, so go ahead prove and create a professional C/ C++ compiler in that uses Sanskrut instead of English.
Show actual use before writing such articles.
As it is the RSS/ BJP punished ~60 thousand students over German vs Sanskrut.
Not surprisingly, not a single govt official who signed the alleged illegal MOU was punished.
So either Smriti Irani is condoning the crime or really no crime was committed.
I am not saying that Sanskrit is the root of all Indian languages, but that it has influenced all major Indian languages, this includes both the Dravidian languages and even Northeastern languages like Assamese and Meithei (through Bengali). Sanskrit certainly has more pan-Indian influence than Hindi or English.
As far as scientific work is concerned, you are again putting the cart in front of the horse. Sanskrit first has to be revived as a medium of mass communication before you can do scientific work using Sanskrit.
Furthermore, the RSS/BJP has not “punished” anyone. German has not been removed from KVs, it has simply been removed as a third language, which, in accordance with the three language policy, must be an Indian language. Students can still take German as a fourth language if they want. The RSS/BJP is just enforcing pre existing language policies.
Again, so what is the point of this article?
What you are suggesting is reviving Sanskrut first, then, making it a national language is right now irrelevant.
Only, if it becomes popular then we can have a debate on whether it should be made a national language.
Which is why, I realize, you all are afraid that English might even more popular by then, and no sane progressive person would agree to making Sanskrut the official language.
Are you even aware that Dravidian languages have totally different script?
Changing a language in the middle of a crucial year is not painful to students? Seriously? Would heavens have fallen if the current batch passed out with German as 3rd language?
4th language? Are you will to try it in such a competitive system? AFAIK, even art students don’t do that and you want 12th science students to try it?
If third Indian language is the pre existing policy why was the official who signed the MOU not punished for breaking the law?
The point of this article is to revive Sanskrit, therefore the debate over whether it ought to be the national language is hardly irrelevant. Support for Sanskrit does not necessarily require being afraid of English. Indeed, the notion that English would somehow become so popular that it would make Sanskrit obsolete is ridiculous. The Indian govt has supported English for almost 70 years now; if it hasn’t made Sanskrit obsolete by now, then that proves that Sanskrit can never be made obsolete in India.
I am very much aware of the fact that Dravidian languages have a different script; I speak Telugu. I don’t see how that is relevant, because English has a script that is even more different from Dravidian scripts than the Devanagri used for Sanskrit. If Indians are willing to learn the former, then there can hardly be any protest against the latter, especially seeing as all Dravidian languages have significant Sanskrit influence.
I agree, however, that the language switching should not have been done in the middle of the year, and that any law breaking officials who signed the MOU ought to have been punished for violating Indian law.
Sanakrut is long irrelevant if not “obsolete”.
Don’t confuse the language with the grammer work of Panini.
That is why 60 thousand children had to be forced to take it.
Which is why no no bureaucrat was punished for the alleged infraction. Kapil Sibal, the former education minister was not even questioned for breaking the law.
Whereas highly respected academician Anil Kakodkar was asked a lots of questions about another MOU he signed with the foreign country.
And no, it is not the govt, it purely commercial decision that most people in India “support” and learn English. The current “I.T.” boom began with BPOs, which was because we know English.
Personally, I probably know around 10 words of Sanskrut and some grammer, none of any the Dravidian languages. But out of choice, I would learn a living language than a dead one.
I don’t see how any of this is relevant to the article.
The 60 thousand kids punished is the implementation of inane philosophy like the one espoused in this article.
By hook or crook you will see Sanskrut being forced down our throats.
There’s nothing inane about reviving Sanskrit in India.
This article is not about reviving Sanskrut it is about making it the national language.
Which is an inane, absurd and divisive idea.
No, it is not. The whole point of making Sanskrit a national language is so that it can unite, not divide. There is nothing inane, absurd, or divisive about making Sanskrit, the only Indian language that can reasonably make the claim of being India’s national language, its actual national language. You have yet to demonstrate what is inane, absurd, or divisive about it. You constantly whine about Sanskrit being “forced” down people’s throats, yet the article doesn’t propose any such thing, nor have you presented any case where anyone has been forced to learn Sanskrit. Those 60,000 kids were not forced to learn Sanskrit, they were merely stopped from taking German as a third language in accordance with pre existing Indian language policy. Stop whining and look at the big picture and potential benefits. Instead, you do exactly what Indians always do when confronted with language issues: obsess about regional language at the expense of national interest. That is what is truly absurd, inane, and divisive.
Mahabharat battle was fought between people speaking the same language, a version of Sanskrut.
Greeks fought each other incessantly.
France has had civil wars.
In India, the Rajputs fought each.
The Maratha confedracy attacked each other.
So where is the basis of your language unites?
After being stopped from taking German, was there another choice?
What is the bigger picture, ruin careers, but save a dead language?
All of that happened in spite of a unifying language, not because of it. No one is saying that a universal language will prevent all conflicts. Furthermore, saving a dead language doesn’t require ruining anyone’s careers.
Near perfect colonial argument. Show jobs to foist a culture and language.
Better than incessant fighting and poverty
Yet another colonial argument (and equally rooted in lies). Language and culture pushed with bait of “jobs” has only impoverished, because its main idea is hegemony of the giver and subservience of the society that falls for such bait.
So now Narayan Murthy, Azim Premji are hegemonists?
While you live in your Mithya, you make this land vulnerable to invaders again.
This pervert argument IS the evidence of servile colonial thinking. Narayana Murthy did NOT create any sustainable economic model or technology, they merely built an enterprise that generates money and jobs for the time being. I can understand however, colonized ignoramuses cannot think beyond this but have a long wagging tongue to talk of things they have no clue.
And Tirupati is creating wealth?
Or have you done anything close to creating wealth, created a 1000 cr company having “sustainable economic model or technology”?
I realize where your argument is coming from; the British (Macaulay) introduced universal education in India. This destroyed a who lot of freeloaders, who for generations under the guise of education, spewed self serving mumbo jumbo, restricted to a certain caste of society.
Kings could not now get away by just building palaces and temples.
Wealth was till then obtained by pillage.
Now anyone can earn their living by merit, this what you and your ilk hate.
So unable to respond on two colonial arguments now you retreat to yet another one, a more explicitly hate mongering one. Is Tirupati a financial enterprise meant to generate wealth or one that is spent on by those who generated wealth? Although I can understand your total perversion and dishonesty prevents you from seeing this much.
“I realize where your argument is coming from; the British (Macaulay) introduced universal education in India.”
Lie.
“This destroyed a who lot of freeloaders, who for generations under the
guise of education, spewed self serving mumbo jumbo, restricted to a
certain caste of society.”
Lie.
“Kings could not now get away by just building palaces and temples.”
Lie.
“Wealth was till then obtained by pillage.”
Lie.
“Now anyone can earn their living by merit, this what you and your ilk hate”
Lie.
And ALL these lies are colonial lies. Any human with the least bit of honesty and honor would investigate the reality behind such, instead of spewing such poison on his own society. But then, how could you?
At least you have indirectly admitted that none of the temples have done nothing good, just hoarded wealth.
And you contribution to Indian economy is nothing to write about.
NO. Such statements or attributions can be made only by a hate monger. Temple has done immense civilizational good, more than any other man made institution ever made in the entire history of mankind.
#1
In response to this apology for colonialism by kalpak:
“I realize where your argument is coming from; the British (Macaulay) introduced universal education in India.”
The following excerpts are from the book that the British banned (still ban?), written by Canadian historian Will Durant. The excerpts are taken from my 2nd hand copy of the original 1930 print by Simon and Schuster New York.
Will Durant, The Case for India (1930), Chapter 1, section VI. Social Destruction, excerpts from pp. 44-48:
‘When the British came there was, throughout India, a system of communal schools, managed by the village communities. The agents of the East India Company destroyed these village communities, and took no steps to replace the schools; even to-day, after a century of effort to restore them, they stand at only 66% of their number a hundred years ago.109 There are now in India 730,000 villages, and only 162,015 primary schools.110 Only 7% of the boys and 1.5% of the girls receive schooling; i.e., 4% of the whole.111 Such schools as the [British Indian] Government has established are not free, but exact a tuition fee which, though small to a Western purse, looms large to a family always hovering on the edge of starvation.’
‘The Government spends every year on education eight cents a head 113 it spends on the army eighty-three cents a head.114 In 1911 a Hindu representative, Gokhale, introduced a bill for universal compulsory primary education in India; it was defeated by the British and Government-appointed members. In 1916 Patel introduced a similar bill, which was defeated by the British and Government-appointed members; 115 the Government could not afford to give the people schools. Instead, it spent most of its eight cents for education on secondary schools and universities, where the language used was English, the history, literature, customs and morals taught were English, and young Hindus, after striving amid poverty to prepare themselves for college, found that they had merely let themselves in for a ruthless process that aimed to de-nationalize and de-Indianize them, and turn them into imitative Englishmen. The first charge on a modern state, after the maintenance of public health, is the establishment of education, universal, compulsory and free. But the total expenditure for education in India is less than one-half the educational expenditure in New York State.116 In the quarter of a century between 1882 and 1907, while public schools were growing all over the world, the appropriation for education in British India increased by $2,000,000; in the same period appropriations for the fratricide army increased by $43,000,000.117 It pays to be free.
Hence the 93% illiteracy of India. In several provinces literacy was more widespread before the British took possession than it is now after a century and a half of British control;118 in several of the states ruled by native princes it is higher than in British India. “The responsibility of the British for India’s illiteracy seems to be beyond question.”119′
‘Instead of encouraging education, the [India’s British] Government encouraged drink. When the British came, India was a sober nation. “The temperance of the people,” said Warren Hastings, “is demonstrated in the simplicity of their food and their total abstinence from spirituous liquors and other substances of intoxication.”120 With the first trading-posts established by the British, saloons were opened for the sale of rum, and the East India Company made handsome profits from the trade.121
When the Crown took over India it depended on the saloons for a large part of its revenue; the license system was so arranged as to stimulate drinking and sales. The Government revenue from such licenses has increased seven-fold in the last forty years; in 1922 it stood at $60,000,000 annually–three times the appropriation for schools and universities.’
#2
Still in response to this apology for colonialism by kalpak:
“I realize where your argument is coming from; the British (Macaulay) introduced universal education in India.”
And here’s another western writer of that time saying what the British wanted no one to know. Jabez T. Sutherland (also written Sunderland) wrote in the October 1908 issue of The Atlantic:
“A further answer to the assertion that India cannot govern herself–and surely one that should be conclusive–is the fact that, in parts, she is governing herself now, and governing herself well. It is notorious that the very best government in India to-day is not that carried on by the British, but that of several of the native states, notably Baroda and Mysore. In these states, particularly Baroda, the people are more free, more prosperous, more contented, and are making more progress, than in any other part of India. Note the superiority of both these states in the important matter of popular education. Mysore is spending on education more than three times as much per capita as is British India, while Baroda has made her education free and compulsory. Both of these states, but especially Baroda, which has thus placed herself in line with the leading nations of Europe and America by making provision for the education of all her children, may well be contrasted with British India, which provides education, even of the poorest kind, for only one boy in ten and one girl in one hundred and forty-four.”
About Jabez T. Sutherland/Sunderland: American born, former President of the India Information Bureau of America and Editor of Young India (New York). Author of India, America and World Brotherhood, and Causes of Famine in India.
The joke is that the British are thought of as seeking to promote universal education: what, the very British who banned Thomas Paine’s Rights of Man for speaking of universal human rights? The very British whose education system was so biased and far from universal and found wanting in every respect (think “education” in Dickensian England and try not to snigger). The joke would have been theoretically more believable had some Indian sycophant of colonialism rather spoken of French colonists of the Napoleonic or Revolutionary variety, since at least these had rescinded the christianity-imposed class system in their own country and at least paid lip-service to the notion of equal rights there, with the beginnings of education for even the French “peasant” class so long denied the right to even learn to read. In contrast, with the exception of the likes of the persecuted Thomas Paine (who was heavily involved in the American and French revolutions), the British back then still did not believe in equal rights among their own people, what to speak of where Indians were concerned? In the late 19th century, the British aristocracy (of “pocket boroughs” fame) were still of the opinion that reforms should not be so “radical” as to give voting rights to all British, such as their working men. Enough with the pretence that the British would promote equality anywhere at all when it was yet far from their conception.
#3
And in response to this monotheist delusion (propaganda) furthered by kalpak:
“This destroyed a who lot of freeloaders, who for generations under the
guise of education, spewed self serving mumbo jumbo, restricted to a
certain caste of society.”
For those not averse to an Indian reporting facts lifted verbatim from British records, Dharampal’s works show the scenario of education in Hindu institutes in India before and outside the British rule, and under British rule. Dharampal’s reports are entirely consistent with the findings of Durant and Sunderland/Sutherland. A brief reference to some findings in Dharampal’s work are still at a DNA India article:
“A renowned Gandhian, Dharampal, visited British and Indian archives and reproduced reports based on surveys conducted by the British in Madras, Punjab and Bengal presidencies during 1800-1830. According to a detailed survey undertaken during 1822-25 in the Madras Presidency (present day Tamil Nadu, a major part of present day Andhra Pradesh and some districts of Karnataka, Kerala and Orissa), 11,575 schools and 1,094 colleges were in existence in the Presidency and the number of students in them were 1,57,195 and 5,431, respectively. More important in view of the current debates and assumption is the unexpected and important information provided with regard to the broad caste composition of the students (see table). We find that the position as early as the first part of nineteenth century was significantly in favour of the backward castes as far as secular education was concerned. Hence, the British-inspired propaganda that education was not available to the so-called backward castes prior to their efforts is not valid. The “secular” education was always a major tool in social transformation prior to British rule.”
Some more facts mined by Dharampal that give the lie to the pervasive christian propaganda can be found in journalist Sandhya Jain’s 14 Dec 2004 article for The Pioneer titled “The Brahmin and the Hindu”, a copy of which is maintained by HVK. The full work of Dharampal on the subject can also be found online, for free. But only those who are not of monotheist missionary bent would be honest enough to peruse them.
Those Indians or others of once-colonised nations who believe in the myth that the British and other colonisers brought (equal) education to India, and those who believe that colonialism was beneficial or even better than native rule and who keep speaking of “caste system” and alleged Hindu inequality in access to education, tend to correspond with those who believe in and wish to propagate the myth of jesus christ (which stands exposed at sites like JesusNeverExisted dot com). For e.g. Goan catholic Dinesh D’Souza who wrote “Two Cheers for Colonialism”. That is, it is a peculiarly missionary lie that only colonised jesus-believers would buy and wish to sell onward.
Speaking of christianity, here follows historian and ex-Franciscan monk Joseph McCabe (famously touted as the “encyclopaedic brain”) on the christian record with regard to education in Europe. Notice how it mirrors the colonial (and equally christian) British record of ‘education’ in India marvellously:
“The Roman municipalities supplied free elementary instruction for the children of all workers. Anywhere you went, in a suburb of Rome or a small Italian town, you would see the teacher, in the porch of a house perhaps, teaching the children how to write on wax-faced tablets. Practically every Roman worker could read and write by the year 380 A.D., when Christianity began to have real power. By 480 nearly every school in the Empire was destroyed. By 580, and until 1780 at least, from ninety to ninety-five percent of the people of Europe were illiterate and densely ignorant. That is the undisputed historical record of Christianity as regards education.”
— The Story Of Religious Controversy, by Joseph McCabe
The above is to be read in conjunction with the records of christian burnings of the libraries of the native Graeco-Romans and South and Central Americans. The above is not just the first instance but a summary of the record of christianity (including colonialism) everywhere, and was its blueprint for undermininig and converting else destroying populations upholding the native ethos. The same goes for the introduction of alcoholism as a tool for subjugation to monotheism’s conquest (colonialism included), along with the illiteracy, famine, disease and all-round general genocide that the monotheism deliberately induced.
[…] http://indiafacts.co.in/case-sanskrit-national-language-india/ […]
please dont waste public time on national language. those who are passionate about language , let them study and talk /speak/ write only that language.
this here is a debating column my friend nobody is WASTING TIME. development and changes take place through debates it is a productive use of time. If your so concerned about PUBLIC TIME go do community service and plant some trees
If Israel can promote Hebrew…. why can’t we do the same for sanskrit….
Hebrew was declared as a dead Language by European countries, 50 years back. Now look at where is Hebrew. It used by only 82 lakhs people ( smaller than any smallest state of India). The worlds 4th Best University provides opportunity to study MBA in Hebrew. The Microsoft supplies Keyboards in Hebrews…what more, few Programming languages are also in Hebrew.
Wrong. Read this for information and fact rather than opinion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hebrew_language
QUOTE
The major result of the literary work of the Hebrew intellectuals along the 19th century was a lexical modernization of Hebrew. New words and expressions were adapted as neologisms from the large corpus of Hebrew writings since the Hebrew Bible, or borrowed from Arabic (mainly by Eliezer Ben-Yehuda) and older Aramaic and Latin. Many new words were either borrowed from or coined after European languages, especially English, Russian, German, and French. Modern Hebrew became an official language in British-ruled Palestine in 1921 (along with English and Arabic), and then in 1948 became an official language of the newly declared State of Israel. Hebrew is the most widely spoken language in Israel today.
UNQUOTE
There is no relevance between what I said and what you copied and pasted here. It takes less than 5 seconds to type “Wrong”.
Yes , I agree that it takes only 5 seconds to type “Wrong” , but if you care to read beyond that word , you will see that I have posted a link , and quoted from it. Can you please read it ?
You have mentioned :
Hebrew was declared as a dead Language by European countries, 50 years back.
The link clearly mentions that the revival of Hebrew started in the 19th century itself , and Modern Hebrew , which is quite different from Biblical Hebrew , became the official language of Palestine in 1921 , and as far back as 1948 ( more than 60 years back ) became the official language of Israel.
Even today , Modern Hebrew has been revived to the extent only 9 million speakers use Hebrew ; comparing the revival of Hebrew amongst 9 million people is a far cry from trying to get even a fraction of the 125 crore Indians to speak Sanskrit , most of whom will have to start from scratch.
What will be the benefit for those who are going to learn Sanskrit , other than for the few millions who are buried in our past glory ?
Many may not be aware that in Odisha till 1998 Sanskrit was almost compulsory as second language in the school. Most of the schools used to teach Sanskrit from class 6th to 11th. People of all caste and religion used to study Sanskrit and had fair knowledge in Sanskrit.
What is the cultural state of Odisha? Where do odisha stand in India?
What is the economic condition of Odisha? It is worse that other states where Sanskrit is not taught as second language.
So people of Odisha slowly moved from Sanskrit to Hindi for the better prospect.
Remember, hindi is just one of the languages spoken in India. Making case for sanskrit in hindi heart land is much simpler. So, no case can be made for sanskrit without discussing regional languages. In that sense, this article makes no case.
Sir, it would be good if you can provide a roadmap of how Sanskrit will be accepted by the people of India across all states as the national language once it is declared so. I am sure there will be a lot of resistance from various sections trying to portray Sanskrit as a Brahmanical language and not a language for the masses.
The Roadmap is already given in the following book released very recently.
“The English Medium Myth” by Sankrant Sanu, Rajiv Malhotra and Carl Clemens.
This book will surely make the Colonial Elite Indians very upset!! Particularly the Sekular Media. This book not only shows how Sanskrit can be used as a national language but also given lots of strategies on how Regional Languages should be empowered in Professions such as Engineering, Medicines, Administrations and Management. And how Sanskrit and Regional languages can compliment each other and how Sanskrit can enjoy the common language of India.
Surely Sanskrit will receive resistance but not as Hindi. Sanskrit has been portrayed to be Brahmanical because it was primarily used by Brahmins to conduct their prayers. But, it is not wrong now to make it the language of the masses. If it was Brahmanical, now it will not be.
You have sold me Dr.Jamadagni. When I went to a convent school in Bangaluru, believe this or not, Sanskrit was offered as a third language and all students, including Christians, Muslims, Sikhs, Hindu Atheists or Hindu Agnostics, etc., were expected to take Sanskrit. Even Christian faculty encouraged Sanskrit learning, and its critical discourse through unique conjugations. But Bangalore and Karnataka have always been wonderfully civilized to me. My wonderful memories of Bangalore, and its gentle cultured people (who were appreciative of multi-culturalism) was what kept me wanting to come back to India and settle down in Bangalore. Unfortunately Bangalore now is dominated by the IT crowd who can’t speak or write any language properly, except to say How R U? and Vat’s it 4? etc.
Lets at least start making Sanskrit an important second or third language from LKG or UKG or First Standard so we can, after twenty years, have at least a generation well versed in this wonderful language that is truly ” cosmic”. When I say my mantras or my slokas in Sanskrit with the right enunciation it is a completely unique body-mind experience. Unless people have that experience, or at least explore it, they are not going to know.
We need qualitative research on this: “language, emotions, enlightenment and neurological changes or enhancements”…comparing India’s great languages: Sanskrit, Tamil, Kannada, Manipuri, Assamese, Bengali, Gujarati, etc.
ಬೆಂಗಳೂರು ಮೇಡಮ್, ‘ಬಂಗಳೂರಲ್ಲ’!
I think something which is missing amidst all the linguistic jingoism is the lack of appreciation of regional languages. I don’t think schools in Bengaluru teach Tamil, or Telugu, which is strange considering that there are large populations of people from these regions.
Shrikant Jamadagni, you are doing an invaluable service to our mother language. Accept my sincere appreciation.
Geopolitics And Sanskrit Phobia
http://rajivmalhotra.com/library/articles/geopolitics-sanskrit-phobia/
Yes! Many like myself had even grown sick of Nagari script, because of the Hindi – an impure admixture with Farsi- being endlessly thrust down our throats!
More importantly, the language is not classical, while all four Dravidian sisters are. Hindi is little more than a recent pidgin, which the likes of Nehru embraced because… well they didn’t have to learn anything else. The Lutyens’ bimbos continue this policy, while speaking English.
More pragmatically, spoken Hindi (like others) is not phonetic. It may be useful for Govt. purposes to have one that is written in the same way that it is spoken – a formal, rigid language for the precise & long-lasting governance.
This must happen for India’s future to be secured. Those who are against this, invariably for their own nefarious agenda, must be defeated *whatever it takes*. The sooner people realise this the better.
Many may not be aware that in Odisha till 1998 Sanskrit was almost compulsory as second language in the school. Most of the schools used to teach Sanskrit from class 6th to 11th. People of all caste and religion used to study Sanskrit and had fair knowledge in Sanskrit.
What is the cultural state of Odisha? Where do stand in India?
What is the economic condition of Odisha? It is worse that other states where Sanskrit is not taught as second language.
So from real world people should give comments.
And what is your point, that Odisha’s poor state is due to Sanskrit being taught in schools? My goodness.
You know, India covers all the bases. It has the most intelligent people in the world, but it also has the most stupid, as you have just demonstrated. It gets tiresome having to deal with such absurd comments. But then when you are blinded by extreme hatred for Hindu culture, basic logic goes straight out of the window.
So, to adapt your poorly constructed final sentence, “from common sense people should give comments”.
Your understanding is wrong. Odisha is not poor due to Sanskrit being taught. My point is that in spite of teaching Sanskrit in schools for 40 years after independence, the condition of Odisha did not improve above other states where Sanskrit were not taught. So by teaching Sanskrit only can you improve the condition of India?.
You should read the famous Kathojodi speech of Gandhi. After the speech, an persona asked Gandhi, You are advocating for Hindi, but how come most of the Freedom fighter who came forward to free India from Britishers were English educated?. Do you know what Gandhi answered. I need not mention here. Please read yourself.
You are totally confusion about Hindu culture and taking pride is writing good English that is why you are feeling proud to point out my poorly constructed ENGLISH sentence. This is the condition of modern days Pseudo Hindu Rastravadis.
The main point is that I am very good at Sanskrit and Odia. But due lack of knowledge in English and Hindi, I had to under go many difficulties. Even a Pseudo-Hindu person like you could tell me Stupid for my English, though I and from IIT and working in a PSU.
“Your understanding is wrong. Odisha is not poor due to Sanskrit being
taught. My point is that in spite of teaching Sanskrit in schools for 40
years after independence, the condition of Odisha did not improve above
other states where Sanskrit were not taught. So by teaching Sanskrit
only can you improve the condition of India?.”
Still bullshit. Nobody said that teaching Sanskrit alone solves all problems. That is called a “strawman argument”, driven by your prejudice against Sanskrit.
“You should read the famous Kathojodi speech of Gandhi. After the speech,
an persona asked Gandhi, You are advocating for Hindi, but how come
most of the Freedom fighter who came forward to free India from
Britishers were English educated?. Do you know what Gandhi answered. I
need not mention here. Please read yourself.”
So your point is that what? That speaking Sanskrit makes someone a traitor? Or that speaking English is the mark of a true patriot? How does one respond to such an absurdity? I could ask you to explain exactly how a specific language encourages the culture of weak-will and deferment, and consequently *what* aspect of Sanskrit causes this bizarre mental deformity, or what aspect of English counters it, and why historically Sanskrit-speaking civilisation endured no such ailments, but I dread to think what kind of insane response you might produce. I can only reassure myself with the knowledge that fortunately, not everyone in India is as mentally enslaved as you are.
“You are totally confusion about Hindu culture and taking pride is
writing good English that is why you are feeling proud to point out my
poorly constructed ENGLISH sentence. This is the condition of modern
days Pseudo Hindu Rastravadis.”
Wrong again. I don’t place English on the pedestal that people like you do – otherwise I wouldn’t be advocating its removal from its special position and replacing it with something that is at the core of Indian civilisation. I was merely pointing out the irony that someone who loves English so much, and the people who foisted it on this country, could be so bad at it.
“The main point is that I am very good at Sanskrit and Odia. But due lack
of knowledge in English and Hindi, I had to under go many difficulties.
Even a Pseudo-Hindu person like you could tell me Stupid for my
English, though I and from IIT and working in a PSU.”
Hmm. This is why it’s impossible to debate with people like you. You use words completely out of context, which betrays the fact that your “reasoning” (or what passes for it) is driven entirely by mental conditioning and prejudice. If I am a “pseudo-Hindu”, what is a proper Hindu? One who discards his culture for Christianity, pathetic deference to white people and hatred for everything Hindu? Typically, you’ve got everything upside-down. Not to mention the fact that your notion that speaking English is compulsory for being “successful” is a symptom of the current state of affairs and not a universal fact that transcends all time, which is no way impinges on the need for India to rediscover her Sanskrit foundations in the long-term, and not to mention the fact that your failure in life might be more to do with your own inadequacies rather than Sanskrit.
In any way, I’m done with this exchange because I’d get more sense talking to mentally-challenged goat. Bye.
So your point is that what? That speaking Sanskrit makes someone a traitor?
Where di I say Sanskrit will make you traitor?. It is your own inferiority imaginations.
But pointing at my poorly constructed English sentence you felt great. Theses things comes out of inferiority complex. I never told that speaking English is the mark of a true patriot. It is again your imaginations. That is why pointed at my English. I have told that English and Hindi is required to sustain in India. I wanted to clarify you that by learnign Sanskrit alone one can not be great-Example of Odisha is before you.
You are mentally enslaved and suffering from inferiority complex and not having free mind. Most of our pseudo Rastravadi comes out of inferiority complex. They will advocate for Sanskrit but never learn or study.
Look PPP, you can’t blame a language for the state of Odisha. Had Sanskrit been taught as an Official language of India, all the states would have prospered. You might ask me how? Firstly, because more communication would have been done in Sanskrit between the states of India and so there’ll be less need for writing in regional languages and then translating them in English or Hindi. Secondly, teaching Sanskrit as the official language would keep everyone on the same standard. Why the South have revolted against Hindi? One reason is because they love their language. Afterall who doesn’t love their mother tongue? Another reason is that they will be classified as second class citizens as compared to the ones speaking Hindi. Because the Hindi ones will already have an advantage over them as they are being taught this language right from their birth. If Sanskrit is implemented as the official language, all the citizens of India will be at the same standard. Everyone will have to learn Sanskrit from the basics as the people belonging to other states. No one will be inferior or superior. So, my point is that Sanskrit should be made the official language of the Union of India. There’ll be less resistance as compared to Hindi.
First what is the definition of Culture?. I hope you will not tiresome to answer this question. My understanding of Culture may be different from yours.
Culture is the living style of people of a particular land based on Socio-Economic-Environmental-Philosophical Belief.
It covers the language, literature, dress, music, food habit and approach to life.
In what what way present Indian are true Indians?
Even Baba Ramdev started marketing Maggie noodles, which is adopted from Chinese culture. people eat Pizza, Burgers adopted from French culture.
Music and dress totally changed.
Do you know how many RAGAs are there in Hindustani Muslic or Karnatic Music. Do you know any classical dance to perform or just know hip-hops?
Read my response below. I’ll leave you to your prejudices and delusions.
Adopting sanskrit as a national language is not for economical benefits .. The major thing we can achieve if the entirity of the nation speaks a common tongue is unity.. and unity of people is always a boon for any nation. Just crossing to another state feels like a different country everyone must have experienced this at least once
PS sanskrit has nothing to do with the state of orissa its the incompetence of the local government and absence of any able leaders and i personally consider orissa culturally much richer than some other indian states
Samskrtam will unite Bharatam, Commis knw their enemy very well, so they effectively tried to curb Samskrtam all these years…
I beg to differ on this point. Many may not aware that in Odisha till 1998 Sanskrit was almost compulsory as second language in the school. Most of the schools used to teach Sanskrit from class 6th to 11th. People of all caste and religion used to study Sanskrit and had fair knowledge in Sanskrit.
What is the cultural state of Odisha? Where do stand in India?
What is the economic condition of Odisha? It is worse that other states where Sanskrit is not taught as second language.
So from real world people should give comments.