Sanskrit Version 2 : Open Source or Proprietary
Sanskrit
Version 2 : Open Source or Proprietary
Are the propounders of Sanskrit ready to open the floodgates and accept words like selfie, internet, bandwidth or will they coin new Sanskrit words for every such term.
The
critics, as expected, have taken diametrically opposite positions on the recent
attempts by Govt of India in spreading the knowledge and use of Sanskrit. The
Chroniclers of India History, however, have a third view. They are recording
this event as “The Biggest ever Irony in the History of India”.
During
the first millennium, when the masses of this country wanted to learn Sanskrit they
were deprived of this privilege by those in power. The Brahmins then felt that
the spread of knowledge of Sanskrit would dent their competitive advantage, as
all the knowledge of astrology, ayurveda etc would be known to many. AND now
those in power want to spread the knowledge of Sanskrit when masses have no
interest in learning. You can call it a joke on this heritage language, you can
call it an irony…..!
Now
whether such promotion of an almost extinct language is justified or whether
such promotion will bring back its glory are issues that shall always remain debatable
but I think the fundamental flaw lies in believing in the principle that there
is owner of a language.
To
me the term “Proprietary Ownership of Language” is an oxymoron. Brahmins tried
to own Sanskrit and ultimately harmed the language. The purpose of language is to converse. The
term “converse” means “to speak together” and it imbibes the term
“con” meaning ‘together’. Samvaad, the Sanskrit term for “conversation”
also comprises sam meaning ‘together’. It is, therefore, foolish to be proprietary
about something that inherently involves many.
Urdu
is a classic case to prove that ownership of language is non-existant. Urdu is the
national language of Pakistan but the largest Urdu speaking population in the
world resides in the birthplace of Urdu i.e. India. So who owns Urdu, India or
Pakistan ?
Similarly,
English has many owners and many who promote it. The largest circulating
English newspaper in the world in not published in British but in India, where less
than 1% of the population has English as its mother tongue. So who is
contributing more to the development of English language, Britain or India ?
And
why only of languages, even ownership of scripts is a mirage. Urdu script is
used both for Urdu as well Punjabi documentation. But ironically the majority speakers
of Urdu language cannot read Urdu script but read it using Devangari script. So
does Urdu language own Urdu script ? OR Does it own Devanagari script ? Or is
Devnagari script a proprietary of Hindi, Marathi or Sanskrit ? When we talk of Sanskrit,
which is known as the mother of almost all Indian langauges, does not have a
native script. For that matter, the Indian origin of Sanskrit is still an issue
of debate.
Therefore,
ownership of languages and their script remains only a myth in the minds of
people, what is true and more fundamental is that languages have survived not
because they had an owner or a promoter but because the languages were open to
adaptation.
It
is not the Strongest of the Species that Survives but the Most Adaptable
- Charles Darwin
English
has adapted into itself inflow of words from French to Farsi and from Hebrew to
Hind. While in the process, it has itself got modified but due to its
adaptability to change, it has emerged the most powerful in the global war among
languages.
Bollywood
too has followed similar principles. Hindi films did use purer form of Hindi in
1940s and 1950s but later shifted to a mix of Hindu and Urdu and now in the
current millennium to a mix of Hindi, Urdu and English.
English
language evolved and flowed like a river. But unfortunately, Sanskrit remained
like water in a private well. The big questions, therefore, are :
Whether those propounding Sanskrit are
ready to open the floodgates and accept words like selfie, internet, bandwidth
or will they coin new Sanskrit words for every such term.
Whether Sanskrit would always be looked
upon an Indian language or as an “open source code” language that would continue
to evolve as more non-native users start using it. And
Whether there is openness to use of
Roman script as another generally acceptable script for Sanskrit.
And
to answer these questions, it is important to be clear on the purpose of
promotion of Sanskrit. Is it only to keep it alive in its old form so that there
are enough people around to decipher and appreciate the knowledge of vedas OR would
Sanskrit be used for documentation, publication of current research or even verbal communication.
If the answer is the latter then openness should be seriously considered. Else
after few years Sanskrit will only be remembered as a high scoring subject in
school curriculum and probably this promotion exercise will be chronicled as
another joke on the language.
There are Vedic schools in Tamil Nadu and elsewhere ( Kancheepuram ,Thanjavur,Kumbokonam Benaras ) where Sanskrit is taught .As you have rightly said its taught to the children of the upper caste Brahmins ,who would like their ancestors follow the profession of serving the lord in temples as well as performing rituals.
ReplyDeleteOff course you do have foreign scholars and students from Germany and USA coming to learn the ancient language .The present government at the centre can work for making Sanskrit compulsory in all schools as a third language with an option of switching over to the native language later. If the modern generation needs to be aware of its golden heritage then Sanskrit needs to be read and learnt as a subject.
Thanks Nandita for the valuable inputs.
DeleteMaking Sanskrit compulsory is good in spirit but I am sure such a proposal will see objections for various sections.
Your point that there is a need for making the current generation aware of this golden heritage is very valid and I agree with you that for it to happen Sanskrit has to be learnt as a subject.
"It is not the Strongest of the Species that Survives but the Most Adaptable"
ReplyDelete-Darwins
One must note the fabrication and the biased assumptions done by the writer in order to make his point.
There is no proof firstly of an Aryan Invasion theory. Which thereby proves the indigenous character of Sanskrit. On the contrary, an Out of India theory stands more evident.
One must understand that Sanskrit was never denied to any sort of class or sex. We wouldn't have had the Itihaasas and the compilation of the Vedas if that were so. The person whom Hindus Refer to as Bhagwan Ved Vyas was the son of a Shudra. In the first and the second centuries, A Brahmin called Chanakya, picked up a Shudra child and made him the Chakravartin Samrat of India. As it is said in the Gita:
Chaaturvarnyam Maya Shrushtam Gunakarma Vibhagaj
One must understand that there doesn't exist a caste system in Hinduism. Jaatis and Varnas cannot be misinterpreted as Caste. Caste being a western term is extremely weak to be incorporated to explain the Jaatis and Varnas elaborately.
Sanskrit language has been the most adaptable language till date. Had it not been that, languages like pali and other sorts of North Indian Prakrits wouldn't have developed. Noting the antiquity of Sanskrit, other than that, all other languages including Urdu developed with a script. One must note that Urdu is owned by India and not Pakistan. It is a standard Registration of Hindustani Language developed in neighbouring regions of UP and Bihar. Only about 8% of Pakistani population subscribes to Urdu as a mother tongue. On the Rest of the population, Urdu was imposed.
Speaking about Sanskrit.
One must assert that Sanskrit easily served as a medium of Unity of the entire region. It adapted words from vernacular languages and exported them to other languages whereby maintaining a common terminology and slag from time to time.
The flexibility of Sanskrit is Notable.
You may have innumerable permutations and combinations of a single word based on the grammatical patterns of Sanskrit and yet understand the word and it's etymology. Thus by the above points we can note that Sanskrit has an easy adaptability to foreign terms based on its grammar.
Sanskrit, initially wasnt in a written form thus was passed on by oral tradition, traces of which can still be seen in our Pandits traditions. However, after the development of Scripts, Sanskrit was written down in innumerable scripts. It can be noted that Sanskrit was written in Brahmi, Nagari, Grantha, and also in Indo - Tibetian scripts as well as in innumerable scripts across the India. Nowadays, if we see, due to limitations in the technology that existed before a few years, not only Sanskrit, but all Indian languages have been adopted and used by the Indian Masses in the Roman Script. For example : धर्मः is transliterated easily as 'Dharma' however, one must pay attention to the adaptability of a script. The Roman script is extremely immature in the sense that many alphabets are ill-pronounced in a major portion of its Vocabulary. For example, the alphabet 'C' can be pronounced as क, स or च. Which creates a lot of confusion for a language as phonetic particular as Sanskrit. For that purpose, Devanagari stands the test.
One last point to be noted:
A language is considered dead when everyone ceases to utilise that language. However we have 15 thousand people whose first language is Sanskrit. And about 10 milliom people whose second or third language is Sanskrit.
"It is not the Strongest of the Species that Survives but the Most Adaptable"
ReplyDelete-Darwins
One must note the fabrication and the biased assumptions done by the writer in order to make his point.
There is no proof firstly of an Aryan Invasion theory. Which thereby proves the indigenous character of Sanskrit. On the contrary, an Out of India theory stands more evident.
One must understand that Sanskrit was never denied to any sort of class or sex. We wouldn't have had the Itihaasas and the compilation of the Vedas if that were so. The person whom Hindus Refer to as Bhagwan Ved Vyas was the son of a Shudra. In the first and the second centuries, A Brahmin called Chanakya, picked up a Shudra child and made him the Chakravartin Samrat of India. As it is said in the Gita:
Chaaturvarnyam Maya Shrushtam Gunakarma Vibhagaj
One must understand that there doesn't exist a caste system in Hinduism. Jaatis and Varnas cannot be misinterpreted as Caste. Caste being a western term is extremely weak to be incorporated to explain the Jaatis and Varnas elaborately.
Sanskrit language has been the most adaptable language till date. Had it not been that, languages like pali and other sorts of North Indian Prakrits wouldn't have developed. Noting the antiquity of Sanskrit, other than that, all other languages including Urdu developed with a script. One must note that Urdu is owned by India and not Pakistan. It is a standard Registration of Hindustani Language developed in neighbouring regions of UP and Bihar. Only about 8% of Pakistani population subscribes to Urdu as a mother tongue. On the Rest of the population, Urdu was imposed.
Speaking about Sanskrit.
One must assert that Sanskrit easily served as a medium of Unity of the entire region. It adapted words from vernacular languages and exported them to other languages whereby maintaining a common terminology and slag from time to time.
The flexibility of Sanskrit is Notable.
You may have innumerable permutations and combinations of a single word based on the grammatical patterns of Sanskrit and yet understand the word and it's etymology. Thus by the above points we can note that Sanskrit has an easy adaptability to foreign terms based on its grammar.
Sanskrit, initially wasnt in a written form thus was passed on by oral tradition, traces of which can still be seen in our Pandits traditions. However, after the development of Scripts, Sanskrit was written down in innumerable scripts. It can be noted that Sanskrit was written in Brahmi, Nagari, Grantha, and also in Indo - Tibetian scripts as well as in innumerable scripts across the India. Nowadays, if we see, due to limitations in the technology that existed before a few years, not only Sanskrit, but all Indian languages have been adopted and used by the Indian Masses in the Roman Script. For example : धर्मः is transliterated easily as 'Dharma' however, one must pay attention to the adaptability of a script. The Roman script is extremely immature in the sense that many alphabets are ill-pronounced in a major portion of its Vocabulary. For example, the alphabet 'C' can be pronounced as क, स or च. Which creates a lot of confusion for a language as phonetic particular as Sanskrit. For that purpose, Devanagari stands the test.
One last point to be noted:
A language is considered dead when everyone ceases to utilise that language. However we have 15 thousand people whose first language is Sanskrit. And about 10 milliom people whose second or third language is Sanskrit.
DeleteDear Manan,
Let me first thank for you for your time and the detailed analysis on this subject. It is obvious that you have a read a lot of the subject. Now coming point by point on the issues raised by you.
1. Aryan Invasion theory :
Historical facts are difficult to be proven to the 100% satisfaction of anyone. There are circumstantial evidence on both sides. However, I personally believe that the dice is tilted more in favour of the origin of Sanskrit being from Central Asia ( through in my blog, I have never agreed to any of the positions). The reasons being :
a) Sanskrit bears more similarity to the Indo European languages in many ways than compared to original Indian language like Tamil. It has stark similarities with Avestha and Persian which are of Iranian/ Central Asian origins. The word “Arya” or “Aryan” itself is found in both Sanskrit and Persian.
b) Many Indo-european languages like German/French have genders almost for every object as in Sanskrit but Tamil does not have the same concept. For more on the origin of Tamil, you can read
http://web.madharasan.com/my-life/my-articles/did-tamil-come-from-sanskrit/430
There are many more fats supporting and also many countering the issue but the origin of Sanskrit is not the agenda of the blog. And even if it proven that the origin was from Central Asia so be it. It is now an Indian language and so let us preserve it. And this is a bigger issue.
2. Sanskrit being denied to other castes :
You have very well articulated your points. The only difference is that your example of Mahabharat cannot be taken as a historical proof. Vedas are in Sanskrit and Chanakya making Chandragupta the king does not prove the point that everyone was allowed to learn Sanskrit. Moreover, there are enough historical evidence to show that Brahmins did restrict the knowledge of Sanskrit to themselves.
3. Your comment on caste, varna and jaati :
I have neither used these words in my blog nor do I ascribe to the western thoughts on the same. So I would not like to comment on the same. I only mentioned that Brahmins, in general, restricted the learnings of Sanskrit to themselves. And that remains a historical fact.
4. Development of All Indian langauges with a script :
While I agree that Sanskrit was born and developed in oral tradition and therefore without any script but it is not true that all Indian languages have a defined script. Many languages like Punjabi, Konkani have been historically studied in multiple scripts and are even now being done so. And I agree with your Urdu is more an Indian language than a Pakistani language.
5. Sanskrit easily adapts words from foreign language :
Here, I would completely disagree with you. And it is not the blame of the language but of the people who have tried to ‘own’ it. They have preferred to remain purists and have not adopted words from other language words as many other languages have done. And this is the central point of the blog that if Sanskrit has to become popular and remain in existence it should be more “open source” and less “proprietary” and therefore more adaptable and therefore Darwin’s law.
6. Which script is better – Roman or Devnagari ?
I think this is a debatable issue and every script has its pros and cons. The only reason, I raised this subject was that considering the popularity of Roman script, it is important to consider the proposition that can this popularity be used to make Sanskrit more acceptable in today’s world ? One reason, why Hindi films have become popular nationally and internationally is because the films are promoted in Roman script. Success of Hindi films has also resulted in more acceptability of Hindi language across India and now also in certain parts of the world.
7. Sanskrit is not a dead language :
I agree with you and therefore I have used the term “almost extinct” for Sanskrit.
Thanks a lot for reading and commenting on it.