Responding to Ananya Bajpai's article on Sanskrit

[Girish Nath Jha]

Dear Ananya

On a first look, I would have safely ignored your article (http://wpj.dukejournals.org/content/33/3/45.full) as just another leftist rant, but since you mentioned JNU and its Sanskrit center, I had to jot down some quick remarks as response. Here are they (somebody should forward it to the Indology group because I am not a member there) 

First impression - your article appears to be an anti-BJP and pro-Pollock pamphlet and not a scholarly piece at all. A typical Hindu-phobic pro-left rhetoric that's all one can say about your article!

Our building is 'swastika' shaped in the good sense that it is known in the whole of India. Swastika does not become a stigma for India just because some German fanatic misrepresents it. Most other buildings in JNU follow some western architecture. In your opinion should that be preferable to using any native designs for architecture on Indian campuses?

Later in your article, you have faintly suggested Sanskrit center as casteist, communal etc. But you do not know that we have helped in developing the first English-Urdu Machine Translation for Microsoft Bing Translator in the Sanskrit center of JNU. We are leading Indian government's corpora development initiative for Indian languages on a server based platform. Please check it out at at www.bing.com/translator and http://sanskrit.jnu.ac.in for details. This in my view is the meaning and power of Indian swastika and Sanskrit - taking along everyone. Sadly, the brand of scholarship you represent does want to understand this.

Sanskrit studies in India have nothing to do with elitism of any kind whatsoever. You are most welcome to visit our center in JNU to witness it.

The claim that Sanskrit has re-entered the popular imagination in in last 3 years or so is a fiction and smacks of a certain kind of argument that scholars like you take against any well meaning government. Do you have any data to support this argument?

Sanskrit does not represent high caste or culture at all. Please collect data from the 17 universities and 150 departments of Sanskrit and revise your article accordingly.

Sanskrit has done a great job in uniting India. You portray a completely altered image of it for reasons best known to you.

Please read the arguments given by our national leaders who supported Sanskrit in place of Hindi as the national official language. 

Sanskrit does not have 'Brahmin domination'. Dr Ambedkar was a strong votary of Sanskrit and not one as you have projected him to be. 

Though i admire scholars like Prof Pollock for their work on Sanskrit based Indology, but I seriously doubt the capacity of such scholars to read and interpret historical culture texts of Sanskrit. However, you have devoted at least three paragraphs in praising Prof Pollock. And I wonder if this was one of the objectives of your article.

By 'naturalizing' Sanskrit words in English, these words do not 'become' English words. They maintain their identity, as we maintain our identity in a foreign land. If the objective is to mis-appropriate these, then you may be simply day-dreaming.

And again, the rest of the article is simply anti-BJP masala and nothing else. If any government wants to promote Indian symbols and things (every other country in the world does it), then you have a problem. I am sure concepts like guru or yoga or ayurveda or kali-puja will be promoted even by the leftists if they ever come to power in India. 

Please do not link Sanskrit to a fictitious 'cultural battle field'.  Let us say no to paid-scholarship and work towards building a genuine rational logical scholarship which benefits us and also the rest of the world.

Thank you

Dr. Girish Nath Jha

Professor of Computational Linguistics and Chairperson
Special Center for Sanskrit Studies, JNU, New Delhi - 110067
Ph. 91-11-26704128

http://sanskrit.jnu.ac.in

http://www.jnu.ac.in/faculty/gnjha

Director, International Collaboration
102, Convention Centre, JNU, New Delhi - 110067

Ph. 91-11-26738845

Professor & Concurrent Faculty, Center for Linguistics
School of Language Literature & Culture Studies, JNU, New Delhi - 110067

Ph. 91-11-26704199

[Vashishtha Jha]

Excellent and very apt response Girishji. Thank you.

VNJha

 

Prof. V. N. Jha, Former Director, Centre of Advanced Study in Sanskrit, University of Pune, Pune-411007. Residence : C-3, 402 Kunal Icon, Pimple Saudagar, Pune-411027 . India. Phone : 0091-20-27201458 (R) Mobile : 09890215441 E-Mail : vnj...@yahoo.co.in vnjha1946@gmail. com

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Dr. P. Ramanujan]

Dr. Girish Nath Jha!

 

Probably you meant 'does NOT want' ?

On September 16, 2016 at 12:33 PM Girish Nath Jha <giri...@gmail.com> wrote:

 

Later in your article, you have faintly suggested Sanskrit center as casteist, communal etc. But you do not know that we have helped in developing the first English-Urdu Machine Translation for Microsoft Bing Translator in the Sanskrit center of JNU. We are leading Indian government's corpora development initiative for Indian languages on a server based platform. Please check it out at at www.bing.com/translator and http://sanskrit.jnu.ac.in for details. This in my view is the meaning and power of Indian swastika and Sanskrit - taking along everyone. Sadly, the brand of scholarship you represent does want to understand this.

Ramanujan

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[ C-DAC is on Social-Media too. Kindly follow us at:
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CDACINDIA & Twitter: @cdacindia ]

This e-mail is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may
contain confidential and privileged information. If you are not the
intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy
all copies and the original message. Any unauthorized review, use,
disclosure, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this email
is strictly prohibited and appropriate legal action will be taken.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Ramaratnam S.]

I fully agree with Prof Girish Nath Jha's views. The British left India some 70 years back. They have forgotten India. But our Indian friends are still clinging to that colonial mentality. For them anything Indian is degrading. For these half baked scholars. it is fashionable to call themselves as communists or so called rationalists. If you call yourself a Hindu it is communal. On the other hand if you call yourself as a communist or an atheist or a person belonging to any other religion it is secular and fine with them. BJP is a political party. People voted the party to power and they are ruling. Why should you associate  Sanskrit with it? Even during Congress rule many Sanskrit Universities were established. Sanskrit belongs to the people and not to any particular  party.

With a colonial mind and  a superiority complex, Sheldon as well as a number of his predecessors adopt a divide and rule policy. They divide texts into Brahminical, Buddhist, Jaina and so on. We never had such a division in our tradition. We have vaidika and avaidika darsanas,we have astika and nastika darsanas. We never had a system called Brahminical. Are Rama and Krishna brahmins? Is Valmiki a Brahmin? Even Vyaasa was born to a fisherwoman. There were sages from from all castes. With a sinister motive, the western scholars call some texts as Brahminical. Unfortunately our Indians blindly follow them and fall a prey to their evil designs because it is fashionable for them  to ape the  westerners ! Whenever I got a chance, I opposed the use of the term brahminical employed by the so called scholars. In the recently held World Sanskrit Conference also I raised this objection in two sessions. One grudgingly admitted  his fault and the other had no answer and so he simply brushed it aside and passed on to the next question. All Indian scholars, if they have at least a little bit of patriotism should vehemently oppose the term brahminical  with respect to ancient texts and put an end to the divisive policy of the western scholars. I have put these points across with evidences in my paper for the Delhi Conference to be held in February and I hope I will get a chance to air my views and expose the limitations of the 'pro-Pollockists.'

with regards,

Dr.S.Ramaratnam,

Vice Chancellor,

Jagadguru Kripalu University,

Odisha

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

[K S Kannan]

Well said, Sir

Regards

KSKannan

[Jsr Prasad]

Dear Prof. Girish ji,

Excellent reply! It not only answered the issues raised in context of Sanskrit Studies center, but also other false claims made in the 'article.'

सङ्गच्छध्वं संवदध्वं...

Regards,

Prasad

[Jsr Prasad]

Namste All,

Wonderful responses by Prof. Paturi, Prof. S. Ramaratnam besides the one by Prof. Girish. Thanks to them, for the motivation. My following response pertains to some specific arguments by her, though coming late:

Dear Ananya,

If Nazis stigmatized the meaning of Swastika, that doesn't have any influence of its actual sense in Vedic context. Yoga is being patented as Christian Yoga in Amerikas. Does it mean two kinds of Yoga was described by Patanjali? So, Swastika shaped building of JNU, has nothing to do with the positive and negative meanings created by 'scholars' like you! False imagination can never become a reality!!

I failed to understand, how Sanskrit become an instrument during the anti-colonial resistance. It is the patriotism that drove from behind, and of course many Sanskrit scholars wrote, sang poems, play lets to motivate the masses. Though unknowingly, you pronounced correctly – 'post colonial state largely ignored Sanskrit.' True Madam, because, the BJP collision come to majority after 6 decades of independence.

No argument is offered when you said, Modi Government is legitimizing caste and Sanskrit. Sri Modi himself is not from a forward caste, nor he's a Sanskrit scholar like Babu Rajendra Prasad/Vajpayee. If Sanskrit thought to be taught to engineering students (IIT's), that is based on the scientific material the language bequethed. You so-called leftists, show aversion to point to all such indigenous concepts of science in Sanskrit. Because, you might be afraid, that won't fetch any political gain or an employment at leftist 'aḍḍā' like CSDS. There is no ghost of caste or Sanskrit that try to enter the system, rather it is the leftist wing that should leave Indian society hung up here for many decades, like Bhetala.

Remove your western lens and see how women rights have been protected, the woman welfare, respect towards women etc. Kautilya (3^rd B.C.) is a perfect example on these issues. Needless to say the brahmavadinis, other women sages, in Vedic scriptures. Then only one can argue, something like Hindu society was highly patriarchal. We're indebted to you as you reveled that all untouchables are known as 'Dalits' today.

As much as the records go, Dr. Ambedkar did not oppose Sanskrit. He, unequivocally, wanted Sanskrit to become a national language during the constitution days. He adopted Buddhism, as he was quite upset with fundamentals of religions other than Hinduism. Is Buddhism not a modified Hinduism?

Your reference to Pandit Pollock and his textual interpretations establishes that śabdapramāṇa is completely rejected. Here, we traditionalist don't ascribe the idea of 'seeing is believing.' We'll take up on your revered Guru, later at an appropriate context.

In JNU's instance, entire nation has moved, not only your dear dveṣapātras, the 'rightists.' Remember, like there are 'No-Good-Terrorists,' there are 'No-Good-Anti-Nationals.'

It is easy to construct that, when you say, 'significant Islamic aspects of Indian history&culture,' are be-littled, you are in the foot steps of senior leftists like Romilla Thapar etc. Sanskrit academies, or Sanskrit institutions do not receive the huge funding received by Urdu academies or Universities. Not a single Hindu pilgrim is supported by Govt. for his visit to places like Kashi or Tirupati.

I wonder, being a PhD in Sanskrit, how come you are unaware of the distinction between a 'teacher' and a 'Guru.' We use to have Gurus in Gurukulams, unlike the teachers in convents. We'd be living in a fool's paradise, if we did not realize the health potential of Yoga, whose concepts have been thoroughly appropriated with several names in several countries.

You people are suffocated due to the bubbling patriotism these days. Pseudo and paid scholarship, Hypocrisy cannot help one to oppress the facts. One who do not know the true essence of Vedanta, would only label something as 'Brahmanical.' Your band of people better read the books on caste system authored by Karapatri Swami, Mahamandaleswara of Kanakhal. But, sorry, they are written in Sanskrit..

Thank you,
Prasad

On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 3:37 PM, K S Kannan <ks.kann...@gmail.com> wrote:

Well said, Sir

Regards

KSKannan

On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 2:12 PM, Ramaratnam S. <drsram...@gmail.com> wrote:

I fully agree with Prof Girish Nath Jha's views.

On 16 September 2016 at 12:33, Girish Nath Jha <giri...@gmail.com> wrote:

First impression - your article appears to be an anti-BJP and pro-Pollock pamphlet and not a scholarly piece at all. A typical Hindu-phobic pro-left rhetoric that's all one can say about your article!

--

Dr. J.S.R. Anjaneya Prasad,
Associate Professor & Head, Dept. of Sanskrit Studies,
School of Humanities, University of Hyderabad,
Prof. C.R. Rao Road, Hyderabad - 500 046
Tel: +91-40-2313 3803

।। पुरुषोऽयं लोकसम्मितः ।।

[Bijoy Misra]

I learn that Ananya Vajpai is located in India and possibly not in BVP.  

The responses should be copied to her and sent to the journal in which

she published her article.  She appears as a political agent than a scholar.

I admire the consolidated condemnation.

--

[rajivmalhotra2007]

Ananya Vajpeyi writes (in Righteous Republic, 2012, Harvard Uni Press. P. 211) that: 

 

“the thread that keeps Ambedkar tied to India, even as he wants to smash India into smithereens and reconstruct it from the ground up, is his abiding commitment to solving the mystery of duhkha, the suffering of the people – not just his people, the Untouchables, but all people, the people of India”.

 

This thinking comes from Pollock, and it is the single most potent aspect of Pollock that Ananya Vajpeyi picks up into her own scholarly life mission. TBFS explores this in detail.

Excerpt from TBFS, page 316-17:

 

BEGIN EXCERPT:

 

This goal [of Pollock] of intervening in Indian society is worth stating here. He writes:

"… you transcend inequality by mastering and overmastering those discourses through study and critique. You cannot simply go around a tradition to overcome it, if that is what you wish to do; you must go through it. You only transform a dominant culture by outsmarting it. That, I believe, is precisely what some of India’s most disruptive thinkers, such as Dr Ambedkar, sought to do, though they were not as successful as they might have been had they had access to all the tools of a critical philology necessary to the task."[3]

 

After recovering selective memories and (re)constructing narratives using political philology (his first goal), he supplies the methods of liberation philology for achieving social and political change (his second goal). He sometimes puts a Buddhist gloss on his goals to rationalize and justify what he is doing. He says he sees dukkha (sorrow) abounding in Indian society, for which he has found an overarching cause (samudaya). He discusses the question that was asked of the Buddha: How do we overcome this overarching cause of dukkha? To which the Buddha responds by teaching his famous eightfold path. This teaching applies to individual dukkha for which there is an individual cause.

However, Pollock is interested in India’s social/collective dukkha which he identifies as poverty, misery and the oppression of women, shudras and Muslims. Then, he identifies the social samudaya (cause): the hierarchical and othering structures of Sanskrit and Sanskrit-based traditions such as Hinduism. The solution he offers is political philology, that is, the political deconstruction of the language, texts and culture using analytical tools developed in the West.

There are two major target audiences for his strategy: academic and mainstream. The academic strategy is to deploy his particular philological lens to build up his own academic cadre, whose function is to spread his theories. The mainstreaming strategy enables him to win over non-academicians to his views. It is a successful strategy, as witnessed by the support he has garnered from such figures as Narayana Murthy and the top officials at Sringeri Peetham, as well as the Government of India.

 

END EXCERPT

​ I have suggested including Pollock's students in our rejoinders. Vajpeyi and Arsha Sattar are the most serious sepoys of Pollock based in India.

• ·         Sattar is an Indian Muslim who did her PhD on the Ramayana from UChicago under Doniger and Pollock. She frequently introduces him at events in India. Her Ramayana ought to be included in the Ramayana topic being done by some of the SI2 scholars.
• ·         Vajpeyi's focus on the other hand is on the oppressiveness caused by Sanskrit when it gets controlled by Hindus - hence the liberation being sought by attacking BJP, etc. and putting Sanskrit interpretation in the hands of Dalits and Muslims.​

Regards,

Rajiv

[V N Jha]

Very good Prasad. Nice rebuttal !

Hope, you are participating in SI-2. 

Thank you.

VNJha

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Prof. V N Jha,
Former Director, Centre of Advanced Study in Sanskrit, University of Pune, Pune-411007, India.

Residence
C-3, 402 Kunal Icon, Pimple Saudagar, Pune-411027

Phone; 91-20-27201458(R)
Mobile : 09890215441

[V N Jha]

Rajivji, you are right and your analysis is getting vindicated . She is certainly an agent of Pollock in India.

VNJha

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Pravin Pralayankar]

Dear Sir

I totally agree with your views. The article is totally biased and have no  ..... its simply wastage of time. I was also thinking to write strong reply but dropped the idea.

Thanks and Regards

Dr Pravin Pralayankar

--

[Veeranarayana Pandurangi]

Sir, excellent. But not cced to ananya like the one Girish jhaji. Pl. Send it her also

On Sep 16, 2016 4:36 PM, "Jsr Prasad" <jsrap...@gmail.com> wrote:

--

[Jsr Prasad]

Thanks to Prof. Pandurangi ji and Prof. Bijoy ji for pointing this out. I just realized that Prof. Girish's reply included her email id. Now, I copy this communication to her.

Hope, more insights from scholars may pour in.

Regards

[Jsr Prasad]

Thanks Rajiv Ji. We come to know about another sepoy through your email. Your pointed analysis on these two, is marvellous! I echo the words of Prof. Jha sir.

Regards

On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 5:09 PM, V N Jha <vnjh...@gmail.com> wrote:

Rajivji, you are right and your analysis is getting vindicated . She is certainly an agent of Pollock in India.

VNJha

On 16 September 2016 at 16:58, rajivmalhotra2007 <rajivmal...@gmail.com> wrote:

Ananya Vajpeyi writes (in Righteous Republic, 2012, Harvard Uni Press. P. 211) that: 

[Bijoy Misra]

Even though Rajiv uses the word "sepoy" for ornamentation, I would leave out

such words in BVP.   People do various things to make a living.  They have

a right to have their opinion some of which might not be their own.  Sometimes

I imagine conversion under a sword.  I read the Valmiki's line 

कस्य न आराध्यते चित्तम् उद्यत् असे अरेः अपि || ४-३-३३

We say that we differ than attaching any label to their motive.   

[Jsr Prasad]

True, I agree with your view Prof Bijoy ji!

Regards
Sent from my Motorola phone

[Rajiv Malhotra]

Dear Shri Prasad ji,

it is good we respond to an episode like this. But even better is to go deeper than individual/isolated episodes, and connect the dots to figure out the broader framework.

One aspect is to track the lineages/paramparas being formed by the other side. Often their leader is fighting from behind using others to expand upon his toxic tenets. This approach is well disguised. The different components of their work get published by different members of their team, making it more challenging for us to figure out what is going on. Meanwhile, their leader goes on doing sama-dana to raise funding and prestige for his school of thought, while his team does the bheda-danda aspects. But you must connect all this to know the big picture.

rm

On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 8:31 AM, Jsr Prasad <jsrap...@gmail.com> wrote:

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/bvparishat/fackx0LXJN8/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

[Bijoy Misra]

Rajiv,

That is the standard politicking.  Any person or group would resort to division techniques

in order to keep ruling.  I admire you that you blew the whistle when most were sleeping.

India awakened would be a much larger force that the world has ever seen.  Thank you 

for helping to engineer it through your instinct and methods.  I am amazed at Pollock's

hypocrisy and disrespect to the culture that he wants to study!  While these parasitic

invasions would continue, the best defens(c)e is to build up the native scholarship and

communication in the modern day methods.

Best regards,

BM

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

[Jsr Prasad]

Dear Sri Rajiv ji,

I appreciate adding more views to the context. I feel, responding to this kind of episodes would help us in realizing the full picture, as you said rightly. Indeed, when education/academia is contaminated with vested interests, and political intervention, it's the dharma of the lovers of this beautiful language and culture to confront, at various levels, from several platforms.

It seems, rather these indologists have thoroughly  studied Machiavelli (1498 AD), than Kautilya, whose book was not based on Dharma. It is heartening to know that one of the few great exponents of shaastra, Sri Satavadhani Ganesh ji would join the SI-II.

Regards,
Prasad

Sent from my Motorola phone

[rajivmalhotra2007]

On Friday, September 16, 2016 at 7:39:48 AM UTC-4, vnjh...@gmail.com wrote:

Rajivji, you are right and your analysis is getting vindicated . She is certainly an agent of Pollock in India.

VNJha

Thank you, Prof Jha. Below is my summary analysis of Pollock's thesis and how he locates Ambedkar and his own movement:
 
Pollock develops a history of social abuse in India, and the solutions developed at various stages, leading up to the present time with his latest solution.

The first breakthrough came with the Buddha, he says, arguing that it was a successful revolt against the Vedic Brahmins. (TBFS gives a detailed summary of his thesis on how this happened.) Buddha had examined the nature of individual dukkha. He diagnosed the cause (samudaya) at the individual level; and he prescribed the solution as the eightfold path, again at the individual level.

But Pollock is not interested in spirituality of any kind whatsoever. He wants to bring social revolution.

Therefore, says Pollock, Ambedkar arrives at the scene to examine the collective/social dukkha. His diagnosis is that it is caused by Hinduism, and hence his cure is the Dalit movement. This may be seen as the second revolution in liberating Indians from their Vedic heritage, as per Pollock’s history of social liberations in India.

However, Pollock explains, Ambedkar could not finish his job properly because he did not have the tools of Western philology available to him. Pollock sees himself and his movement as the third phase, in which Ambedkar’s dream would get fulfilled. This is why Pollock invests so much on his own patent thesis of political philology.

To sum up Pollock on his contribution as the successor to Ambedkar:

• ·       India’s social/collective dukkha is poverty, misery and the oppression of women, shudras and Muslims.
• ·       The samudaya (cause) he identifies as the hierarchical and oppressive structures of Sanskrit and Sanskrit-based traditions.
• ·       The solution he offers is political philology, that is, the political deconstruction of the language, texts and culture using analytical tools developed in the West.
• ·       This will lead to what he calls “liberation philology”.

His students are taught this scheme very thoroughly. They are inspired to build careers to take it forward as their own work.

But we are outsiders to his school of thought and its secrets. So we must work very hard to decipher his codified, heavy jargon. It is not meant to be understood properly by people like us. This is an intentional road block he has built in order to discourage someone from exposing him. It is not a matter of discovering one isolated statement where he lays bare his entire thinking. One has to read vast works very closely and connect the dots.

After all, it is risky to talk this way about him, because he is so highly regarded not only among Western Indologists, but also by our own authorities – government awards, industrialists’ grants, and Sringeri peetham type of places (almost) giving him authority as their global academic ambassador.

RM

 

[K S Kannan]

Dear Bijoy Mishra,

Apropos your displeasure with Rajiv Malhotra using the word sepoy, and your choice to refrain from labelling, especially to the accompaniment of the citation from Vālmīki Rāmāyaṇa.

The text you have cited is erroneous, and the sense/implication you have drawn from it is indeed eggregious. I guess you have missed the context. Let me supply the same, and clarify the meaning/intention.

When Hanūmat meets Rāma and Lakṣmaṇa for the first time, Rāma is already impressed by Hanūmat's speech. Listing the excellences of his eloquence, Rāma tells Lakṣmaṇa:

"... Even the heart of an enemy with a raised sword, would be pleased by the oration of Hanūmat ...".
(The same is put, for an intenser effect, as a rhetorical question "The heart of which enemy ... would not be propitiated...?).

There is no question whatsoever of converting another into a different opinion striking fear with a raised scimitar here.

As to the text itself,

the 4th and 5th words are

udyata-aseḥ

(not udyat-ase).

Regards

KSKannan

[Bijoy Misra]

Yes the text is wrong.  The intent is right.

I am doing it as a musical here.

I am not displeased with Rajiv's use of any word, I thought to advise

not to use labels personally against people through a forum.

The moderators and other participants might have different opinion.  

[Vashishtha Jha]

I fully agree with you analysis. We need to take it very seriously and expose these designs.

VNJha

 

Prof. V. N. Jha, Former Director, Centre of Advanced Study in Sanskrit, University of Pune, Pune-411007. Residence : C-3, 402 Kunal Icon, Pimple Saudagar, Pune-411027 . India. Phone : 0091-20-27201458 (R) Mobile : 09890215441 E-Mail : vnj...@yahoo.co.in vnjha1946@gmail. com

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

[K S Kannan]

Dear Prof Jha,

A small confusion.

You agreed with the analysis of Kannan, or of Bijoy Misra?

Regards

Kannan

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

[V N Jha]

Dear Prof. Kannan,

I agreed with Rajivji.

VNJha

Prof. V N Jha,
Former Director, Centre of Advanced Study in Sanskrit, University of Pune, Pune-411007, India.

Residence
C-3, 402 Kunal Icon, Pimple Saudagar, Pune-411027

Phone; 91-20-27201458(R)
Mobile : 09890215441

[K S Kannan]

Attempting a musical may be fine. But understanding the text properly is a first pre-requisite. Mere good intentions cannot take us afar.

[Bijoy Misra]

Friends,

Exposing the "design" is different than calling names to people.

Our own children could differ from us since they are exposed to different

literature. Personally we could have strong feelings, but we should have 

restraint in a forum like BVP.  So is my opinion.

Any way, I have spoken enough.

BM

[Bijoy Misra]

Dear Prof. Kannan,

I don't wish to argue with you about how I interpret text.

You are free to abandon it in scholar's scrutiny.

Thank you.

BM 

[monica kanwar rathore]

Respected Sir...monica here.....from Sanskrit centre (JNU)....

Well said sir...we should respect our own treasure...Sanskrit is not a political issue...it's our treasure...I hope Ananya ji will understand this...

With regards

Monica

On 16-Sep-2016, at 12:33 PM, Girish Nath Jha <giri...@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Ananya

On a first look, I would have safely ignored your article (http://wpj.dukejournals.org/content/33/3/45.full) as just another leftist rant, but since you mentioned JNU and its Sanskrit center, I had to jot down some quick remarks as response. Here are they (somebody should forward it to the Indology group because I am not a member there) 

First impression - your article appears to be an anti-BJP and pro-Pollock pamphlet and not a scholarly piece at all. A typical Hindu-phobic pro-left rhetoric that's all one can say about your article!

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

[K S Kannan]

Dear Bijoy Misra,

My only concern was your understanding of the Ramayana text : in case you thought there was something in the context you cited bore any kinship to any "conversion at the point of the sword".

What the text says, quite to the contrary, is that even the heart of an enemy who, ready with an uplifted sword, is about to strike, would be so touched and moved, that he would throw his sword away, and hug dear Hanumat - so palatable and delectable his speech is.

Foes turn into friends when they notice benignance of heart reflected in benevolence of eloquence.

Nothing could be more abhorrent to the sage-author, then, should his above words, aptly cited by you, be construed as kindred to conversion at the point of the bayonet - is all that I wanted to say.

Please ensure that your interpretation does justice to the original author.

The original author is, for Pollock, after all dead. He says, in his three-tier philology thesis, that a new interpretation by a moderner is as valid as that of the original. The impunity he brazenly exhibits in respect of his wild interpretations of ancient Sanskrit texts is, honestly speaking, beneath contempt.

Let us only ensure that our artistic freedom does no violence to the sweet and suave spirit of the sayings of the sages such as Valmiki.

Hope you do not mistake me.

Regards,

KSKannan

[Bijoy Misra]

Sorry that you mistook my observation.

For me, this thread has ended.

[sunil bhattacharjya]

Dear Bijoyji,

The word "sepoy", was originally used by the colonial masters to mean a native soldier, who was in their payroll and whom  they could order to fight for them. One can, of course, try to find out if Pollock could have exerted any kind of pressure, directly or indirectly, on his follower Ananya to raise voice on his behalf, so that it would appear that his (Pollock's) actions are supported from India. . In that sense the word "sepoy" may properly fit in, though the word may not appear to be a polished one. May be, we can think of a more polished word, in such a case, where a representative feels obliged to do certain thing on behalf of the represented.

Regards,

Sunil KB

[Bijoy Misra]

Sunilji,

Please feel free to use whatever word you feel like.

To call names is not a taste to me.  We possibly can

differ without resorting to name-calling.  To me, the

latter is a political domain.  We probably can do better.

Please excuse me.  I have to leave to teach a class.

BM

[sunil bhattacharjya]

Bijoyji,

I appreciate what you wrote, as the vidvans are expected to use polished language.

Regards,

["Director, Cif"]

Hari Om
namaskar.
I appreciate n like the reply of prof. Girishji. we, all bharatiyas should understand our own culture and heritage.

Thanks

--
Sent from myMail app for Android

Friday, 16 September 2016, 10:49PM +05:30 from monica kanwar rathore monicarat...@gmail.com:

[BVKSastry(Gmail)]

Namaste

 

What is this sub-thread post about?  (a)   To get a clarity on the scope and meaning of the word ‘Sepoy’ (b)  To get the suggested Samskruth Equivalent word for the word ‘Sepoy’.     

 

Why a sub –Thread ?  This is an offshoot of the thread ‘ Responding to Ananya Bajpai’s article on Sanskrit’, in which context, the meaning of the word ‘Sepoy’ came for a discussion.

                                             Rajiv ji has used the word ‘(the most Serious)  Sepoy’  as a ‘label’ in the post to identify and label two individuals, by their mindset and active writings.  

                                             And some are sensitive to this word as an   Intentionally  used ‘label’  against the ‘Chosen Few ’  Or  as a   coverage for a licentious ‘ libel’ to demarcate ‘WE and Others’ on  a line of ideology .

                                            

                                           In this thread of  responses,   the word ‘Sepoy’ is  perceived  in all these  meanings and several shades of  sensitivities !  

-           ‘ Sepoy ’ = Agent ( V N Jha ; JSRA Prasad) ;

-            ‘ A word of Ornamentation’,  ‘People who do various things to make living’ (Bijoy Misa)

-           ‘Sepoy was originally used by the colonial masters to mean a native soldier, who was in their payroll and whom they could order to fight for them’ expressing the need to find a ‘ polished word’ for the communication – <‘a representative feels obliged to do certain thing on behalf of the represented.’> . (Sunil KB)

 In this context, it would be imperative to understand or technically define the meaning of the word ‘Sepoy’, with a set of criterion to tag the multiple meanings along with a suggested Samskruth Equivalent. With this exercise, the current posts can be reread for a better assessment of the situation.

 

Requested Focus for response to this post :  What is the literal, lexical and  technical meaning for this word ‘Sepoy’ – a Persian word  sepāhī (سپاهی) meaning "infantry soldier"  in the Mughal Empire? What would be the  suggested current Sanskrit  word for ‘Sepoy’ ?    

 

(Note:    Let me just point in advance that I have a fairly good acquaintance with Sri Rajiv Malhotra’s writings, views and blogs  and appreciative of  the evidence based arguments  he has developed.

                 Here it is a slightly different yet a fundamental word related issue, that is raised   in the context of Samskruth Scholars  group. )

 

Why I consider this as an important point to discuss here ?    This will help to grade who is an ‘Agent Sepoy’,   a ‘Serious Sepoy’,  and a ‘ Potential ( mole) Sepoy ’.  

 

       (1)    When ‘Words’ are used as ‘Labels’, the ‘Word Meanings’  lose their ‘ Culture-Context, Content and Intent, Precision of Communication pointers’. This transforms the given word to become fuzzy in social usage defying any scholarly chance to firm up the ‘meaning sensitivity’ for the given word – literally, lexically or through technical philological argument build up. The shifts in meaning alters sensitivities in communication.  ‘Sepoy’ has become one such word , needing clarification.  

 

     (2) ‘Words, like a river flowing, acquire new meanings, flavors, and also loose sensitivities over a period of time in social usage in different lands and contexts’. One is familiar on the changing meanings of the word ‘Gandhi’ in social usage in Indian context!  The word ‘Sepoy’ , a post 17^th century word has undergone many shades of meaning. A perusal of the available meanings associated with the word ‘Sepoy’  in many sources point to the fuzziness and ‘Catch-All / Cover Any and All – Fuzzy nature of this word’.  

     

                              sepoy ;  (formerly) an Indian soldier in the service of the British, a horseman, an infantry person,  native of India in British military service,"  ,  "infantry soldier" in the Mughal Empire, cavalry troopers in the Ottoman Empire,    a cavalry trooper as a 'sowar'- horse -man;  one of many, such as peons, gentoos, mestees and topasses used for various categories of native soldiers   without regular uniform or discipline, all native soldiers in the service of the European powers in India.  debates on the themes and writings

 

Probable complex Implications of  invoking fuzzy meanings associated with the word ‘sepoy’ :  When one is labeled or labels another person as a ‘Sepoy’,  or placed /Get placed  in a block called ‘Sepoys’, there has to be evidence to establish and justify the labeling, if it is to be serious academic beyond ‘ fuzzy social talk’  and  opinionating’.

 

 

Thanks in advance for all  scholars  for  help  in clearing this fuzzy word ‘Sepoy’, which is apparently being used like the popular American expression ‘ I love you’ for which the user or listener are not bound to attach the same meaning or purpose.  

 

Regards

BVK Sastry

[Rajiv Malhotra]

Thanks BVK ji. 

Sepoy today is the Indian serving the American Empire just as the earlier one served the British Empire. 

But today's sepoy is a mutation of the earlier one, as the method of service today is largely intellectual. While the Brits used Indians in lowly posts  only, the American system is more sophisticated, and this requires the colonized to serve in higher level capacities. 

What is common between the Brit and American varieties of sepoys is that:

1) both are set up to command prestige among fellow Indians; for this they have been given superior symbols, decorations and limelight;

2) both are trained, compensated and directed by their respective foreign nexus;

3) both have dual identities and cultures as this makes it easier to perform their role;

4) both types feel they are doing good to their fellow Indians because they are civilizing them by uprooting/reforming primitive ways from their own heritage.

The term sepoy has roots from Mughal times, and it evolved in the Brit era and now further in the American era.

American history has a well-known phenomenon called the "frontier", an era in which "others" like Blacks and Native Americans were "domesticated". These methods were later exported by the Brits to be used in Ireland, followed by India. Even many centuries earlier than this, the Romans deployed local men from the conquered nations to help them govern indirectly. This system later turned into Roman Church appointed bishops with sweeping authority.

In the case of India, the notion of zamindar had similarities. Indian post colonialist scholars (who are largely staunch leftists) did a great job explaining this phenomenon, including branding certain India Leaders  as zamindars.

But in the process of their post-colonial studies, Ford Foundation and others appropriated them with money and stature, and hence turned them into sepoys. This is why the term is so troubling for them - as it makes them conscious of their own sell out.

My book "Breaking India" explains these things in more details.

Sent from my iPhone

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/bvparishat/fackx0LXJN8/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

[Vishal Agarwal]

Reading Ananya Vajpeyi's article, her two books and other newspaper articles and so on, it is clear to me that she is a part time 'scholar' (if she is one at all) and full time political propagandist. Let me get personal here - she is a victim of Love Jihad married to Basharat Peer, who is a self-professed supporter Islamic terrorism in Kashmir. Her posts and writings clearly reveal that she is suffering from several irrational fears, and therefore needs psychiatric help for ailments like persecution complex and the like. A quick google search will reveal that others like Arundhati Roy (of whom I am not a fan either) have been attacked by her viciously too in the past - all that email conversation was outed by someone. 

Perhaps there is a simpler explanation for her hysterical behavior - that she is a rabid Hindu hater, an RNI (resident non Indian) who is hell bent upon projecting India as a violent nation with her constipated prose. A reasonable dialogue with a hate filled irrational person like Ananya Vajpeyi cannot yield much results. Nevertheless, rebuttals are needed for the sake of the record.

Sorry for this post - but having followed her considerably, this is the only conclusion that one can draw about her. 

I am told by her co-students that she has often been asked not to defend Pollock (with friends like her, he certainly does not need enemies) and that she is not highly regarded in her peer group for her scholarship.

Let me leave it at that.

Vishal

[Jsr Prasad]

Thanks Vishal ji, for uncovering some hard and dreadful facts. In that case, we might be seeing just the tip of the ice berg, much is awaited from other corners of the personality. Hate speeches in the name of freedom of expression. Your last comment must be true, since she titled her article 'Return of Sanskrit.'

Regards

[Ajit Gargeshwari]

Yet another bizarre view she has without any factual documents. Looks like she dislikes elected governments without valid reasons

 

From: INDOLOGY <indology...@list.indology.info> on behalf of Nityanand Misra <nmi...@gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, September 17, 2016 4:08 AM
To: Ananya Vajpeyi
Cc: Indology
Subject: Re: [INDOLOGY] New article on Sanskrit

 

 

 

On 16 September 2016 at 12:50, Ananya Vajpeyi <vaj...@csds.in> wrote:

 

Minorities have never been so vulnerable at any time since Partition and Independence, nor has media discourse been so muted and stifled. (This reportedly happened during the Emergency in the mid-1970s as well -- but at least then, it was a properly declared period of emergency, and people were aware that the rule of law had been suspended in favour of a state of exception). 

 

 

Regards

Ajit Gargeshwari

[BVKSastry(Gmail)]

Namaste

 

Thanks Rajiv ji .

 

I hope the clarification provided by you in ‘Clarifying the scope and definition’ of the term ‘Sepoy’ which covers the following features will be summarily and appropriately applied by debating scholars to the case analysis using supporting evidence, more so in Battle: Sanskrit and Swadesi Indology .  Please reconfirm if I am missing any shade of the ‘Sepoy’  Word meaning  in the summary below ? in your discourse to form a checklist ?  This would help to firm up the word-meaning-scope specificity.

 

Today’s  ‘Sepoy’,  in the context of this discourse,  for identifying and grading and hand picking   ‘ more serious- Sepoys’  (where you have started with Professor Sheldon Pollock) is one who is:.    

 

-          serving the American Empire (just as the earlier one served the British Empire) where  the method of service  is largely intellectual.

-          The purpose of being a 'sepoy' is seeking  'command prestige among fellow Indians' using the   given superior symbols, decorations and limelight;  using the  training provided; accepting the compensation ; and allowed to be directed by their respective foreign nexus.

-          Sepoy carries  dual identities and cultures as this makes it easier to perform their role.

-          Sepoys feel they are doing good to their fellow Indians because they are civilizing them by uprooting/reforming primitive ways from their own heritage.

-          Sepoys deployed help govern indirectly.

-          Foreign Money and agenda was used in creating a cadre of 'Sepoys'.

-          The word 'Sepoy' is troubling for it is pointer to the 'awareness of conscious sell out'.

 

And getting back to my start up  post, Do we have a appropriate Samskruth Word to cover all this ? OR do We look at ‘ linguistically – philologically – using literration’  appropriate the word ‘Sepoy’ in to ‘Samskruth Vocabulary fold’  by wrapping it with some ‘ Paniniya – pratyaya –Decoration and Ornamentation’ ?  

 

Regards

BVK Sastry

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

[Rajiv Malhotra]

BVK ji, once a concept like sepoy (as I use it) is clear, the actual term to be deployed is a pragmatic choice. This choice requires first knowing who is the target group we want to impact, and what impact we want.

The choice is often made by experimenting with various terms to see what works. It is not some formal decision. The "market" decides. In our traditions also, many terms got introduced by various proponents, and some of them went viral while others did not. 

So what might be the Sanskrit term is not necessarily the term I use.

In the example of sepoys, the impact I wanted and have achieved is with the Anglicized indians who are enamored by these high and mighty personalities. The purpose is to bring down such "too big to criticize" Hinduphobic personalities. 

Remember the story of the small boy who publicly announced that the emperor had no clothes. This impact is not about "correct" Sanskrit.    

Sent from my iPhone

[BVKSastry(Gmail)]

Namaste

 

1.   Thanks for the clarification and clarifying your  reason for pragmatic selection of the word ‘Sepoy’ in the discourse  intended for the target group, to achieve the two specific impacts.

2.   Thanks for clarifying that the issue was not about the ‘word/ Sanskrit equivalent’ but mainly based on the ‘market’- ‘ impact’.   

 

3.  I hope that the posts that came earlier with a little bit of animosity and dissenting sensitivity in the main thread will now be understood with a greater clarity.

 

And for a greater part, by training and choice, the ‘Sanskrit traditionalist’  tends to hold the ‘word-meaning association’ in the fairly rigid frame of ‘lexicon- Grammar and philological derivation’, keeping the ‘pragmatic and market issues aside. Your clarification has helped in clearing the air.

[Rajiv Malhotra]

I humbly disagree with you last para because Sanskrit has also enriched itself with loan words. 

Also, could one think of Panini as descriptive (of bhasha at his time) and not prescriptive forever? 

Sent from my iPhone

[Sati Shankar]

"Reading Ananya Vajpeyi's article, her two books and other newspaper articles and so on, it is clear to me that she is a part time 'scholar' (if she is one at all) and full time political propagandist. Let me get personal here -......"

mAnyavar,

I agree. and her purpose as a "political propagandist" is solved as I find some best brains of India discussing her here... she must have found herself in peace....

On constructive side of our tradition, however, I find myself in agreement with Grünendahl, who says,"... it would be futile to exhaust oneself in the tedious correction of factual errors and distortions, because the postcolonial charge gathers its momentum outside the sphere of prosaic factuality, preferably by means of subtle insinuation,"

It is necessary to focus, enrich and strengthen our own heritage and tradition, .... political, ideological and religious have attacks been there, and shall remain in future...

Regards

Sati Shankar

[Shrinivasa Varakhedi]

Dear Scholars,

I really thank all my colleagues - Prof. Girishnath Jha, Prof. Nagaraj Paturi, Prof. Prasad and others who contributed and shared their straightforward thoughts as reaction to the article by Dr. Ananya. Many questions are raised to show the value of her illogical arguments.

Dr. Nityananda Mishra has taken her on Indology list by pointing some data driven facts against her baseless arguments. Instead of answering those questions, Dr. Ananya chose to respond by saying that it is not relevant to discuss about political situation in India. But she only claims in another mail that she and her so called colleagues are facing suffocating situation in India. No evidences. Yes, if right wings are enjoying the good status, what is the problem ? The same situation was prevailing for rightists during left lead govt. Never people said we are in suffocating state and never any demanded for a separate state for them. This is the difference we can see between there politically oriented scholars.

Anyways we need to answer her by showing contradictions within her statements. We also need to show the data to discard her views.

Since I was part of the committee which developed road map for Sanskrit development, i owe the responsibility to justify the Govt policy for Sanskrit. Never we had any agenda behind this report which is accepted by the Govt in toto and being implemented in phase manner. Here I should say it is not this Govt but the previous congress led Govt that appointed second Sanskrit commission to assess the situation of Sanskrit. Later based on the same commissions report, the committee headed by N Gopalaswamy former CEC has prepared action plan. Did this lady ever see the reports of first and second Sanskrit commissions ? Both the communions were appointed by congress led Govt and we must acknowledge that no Govts were against the progress of Sanskrit though they had different opinion. Congress led Govts always supported Sanskrit development. What is the problem if Current BJP Govt continues the same policy for Sanskrit with some more rigorous way ?

I really don't understand the stand of these Ananyas who protest the act of an elected GOVT with some coloured lens when the same policy was adopted by previous Non-BJP Govt. if at all some additions are made it is not hidden. BJP is open for their stand as leftists do. However, Sanskrit language or Sanskrit fraternity had nothing to do with any GOVTs. We are interested in Sanskrit language.

We the Sanskrit scholars need not be right activists to condemn these left oriented scholars. Yes, I am in the right side yet maintaining the distance from the extreme ideologies. I think most of Sanskrit scholars are of the same opinion.

We shall react to such people without any activism. Let us expose their hollowness and preoccupation or prejudice in their arguments. In these we should be logical than analysing their personal matters and issues. (I am least interested in ananyas personal life or her personal likes or dislikes. Better if we keep those matters away from the list discussions). I hope all of you agree that we are against such perceptions, arguments and stands. We shall debate the issues raised by Ananyas (note plural) ; not the issues related to Ananya Vajpayee. (I should spell properly...otherwise she becomes very annoyed)

{Note : And also while supporting views we can express our appreciations, but having personal invitations and mail exchanges related to outside programs becomes burden for other readers. Many have expressed this to me. I request the scholars to send such personal mails to the concerned persons. - as BVP manage-team - no personal}

With these views I request scholars to write on Indology and other blogs also.

With best regards
Shrinivasa Varakhedi

--

[BVKSastry(Gmail)]

Namaste

 

Prior  note:   You have touched on a vital point, which it would be difficult to explain totally as a short response within the frame of this side note. Yet the issue cannot be answered in simplistic, populist or bombastic way by quoting from texts without explanation. Therefore I strive here to find a mid way to balance the response, brining in just enough technicality and leave the rest for a separate discussion.

 

This is an area on which I have  put my three decades of research studies to hypothesize and bring out the Panini-Patanjali-Yaska way of studying Samskrutham. Traditionally it is called ‘Vedanga Vyakarana Paddhati’; Patanjali Calls it ‘Vak-Yoga’; and I am using the word ‘Yoga-Samskrutham :Yoga way of Studying Samskrutham’ .  This is an effort for restoration of  a traditional position critical for Paninian language studies.   For many, this would appear like the  story  of a small  boy < who publicly announced that the emperor (or the queen ?!)  out in public had no clothes, as the ‘clothe’ could be seen only by the ‘ meritorious’ ones > ; and I may end up getting a comment as one of those desiring to push ‘ India’ to dark ages’ ?!

 

Sorry if a  little unintended roughness comes in the language of this response. The pointed question raised by you has many ‘ deep ills and poison pills’.

 

  

Now, for the response,

 

1. On < I humbly disagree with you last para because Sanskrit has also enriched itself with loan words.   >  

 

BVK Sastry(on 1):         Summary of response :  Yes, Sanskrit has been enriched by loan words; But loan word have NEVER demanded or caused any CHANGE IN THE STANDARD of SANSKRITIZATION or Slackening of Grammar Process Rigor. Therefore the same grammar of pre-Christian era continues to hold till date; allowing < Sanskrit Bhashaa –segment to be enriched> and  < Guard the  Sanskrit- Chandas –segment from any corruption>.  The post 1700 writers make a flagrant, willful violation of this standard  of tradition in several modes :  mainly by using incompatible theological  paradigm of Abrahamic traditions to deconstruct and distort the Spiritual  Vedanga –Yogaanga approach to study Samskrutham. It is an error of ‘Sepoys’ !   When ‘Colonial’ master  commands and pays through  ‘Boden fund’  the ‘sepoys’ to eat  Pizza with straws and peanuts with fork, the sepoys find a way to implement the order; and not question the wisdom.  Be it Max Muller or  one that come in that tutelage.   The King /Queen can never be wrong.     Do the natives have the courage to stand up on their feet to fight the ‘ lagaan’ game?

 

                                             Now for the detail:

 

Yes, <Sanskrit, in its ‘Bhashaa’ part->   has enriched itself with words coming in for ‘Sanskritization’ from all languages at all periods.  

 

The language standards and processes covered in Ashtadhyayi by Panini provides two classes of words. One class is called ‘Chandas’ ( Vedic, Accented). The other is ‘Bhashaa’ ( Classical Sanskrit, literary , technical Sanskrit).  In Paninian tradition, the Vedanga unified approach, both these belong to ONE UNIFIED LANGUAGE STANDARD OF YOGA . There are strict criterion for a given word to belong to or fall out of this watertight classification.

 

The addition of words to ‘Chandas’  class takes place by ‘ Yogi’s visioning of Vedas’. The last known such addition to ‘Vedic lore vocabulary ’ in our times was authenticated by Kavya Kantha Vasihsta Ganapati Muni, also known as Kapali Shastri; the person who ‘brought to limelight Sage Ramana Maharshi and Sri Daivarata’.  

 

The addition of words to ‘Bhashaa’  class takes place  continuously by ‘ Poets, Users of all kinds ’ regulary. Each such word needs to be compliant with the Paninian rules and processes <  1-4-14-  Supting antam padam ; 2-1-1 : Samarthah pada-vidhih ;  1-2-45:  Arthavat -adhatuh -apratyayah – Praatipadikah ;  1-2-46: Krit- Taddhita - Samaasascha. > . When any one refers to < enrichment of Sanskrit Vocabulary and social usage standards>, it is the ‘Bhashaa –segment> and NOT  <Chandas-segment>.  

 

                                      The Grammarian has NEVER restricted any new word coming to <Sanskrit –Bhashaa segment >. The Grammarian accepts  the USER GIVEN WORD (Say X)  – with USER GIVEN ASSOCIATED ANY NUMBER OF  INPUTS ( X- 1 to X-n)  OF meaning, gender, pronunciation, accent, which are needed for ‘SANSKRITIZATION’ Under ‘BHASHAA’ rules and Standards. The entry gate is the rule < 1-2-53 :tadashihsyam samjnaa pramanatvaat >.  The Grammarian only plays the role of ‘ ensuring  issuance of a VISA document for Travel or Legal Migration’ for a ‘ Loan word, desiring to under go the Naturalization Process called SANSKRITIZATION’.

                                        A ‘ contemporary  word’ with limited usage- need and privilege’  like a  temporary traveler gets a < wrap around > . Examples are aplenty in Samskrutha Bharati Conversation Classes for ‘Sanskritizing –Simple modalities’. Spoken Sanskrit in families, Villages is an illustration here. It is very  good to promote Sanskrit Awareness and take away the Sanskrit-phobia; but it is not enough to work with high end literature or documents of Samskrutham. A tourist traveler in USA cannot work and get paid legally  for , there is ‘no-Status’. ( =Adhikaar –Yogayataa)  .Ability (saamrthya ) is not the issue.

 

                                       If such a word needs a continued stay and be a part of ‘Sanskrit –Bhashaa Vocabulary’, like an upgrade of an temporary immigrant to  ‘Resident Status’, there are grammar rules to  be complied with.  The ‘word’ should be able to willingly undergo processes to ‘ get unified with the affixes ( Pratyaya samskara)  and respect the processes ( prakriyasa of Kaaraka –Vibhakti)  appropriately under the rule ( 1-4-14).  That is a discipline requirement by language standards for a stabilized continuous, confusion-free, usage.   There are a plenty of such  words which have been used in Sanskrit literature over centuries and have become a part of ‘Sanskrit Vocabulary’. Even Bible Sanskrit Translation can not and did not violate this rule.    One such example – the word ‘Kaashmira –phala’ for Apple used in ritual offerings. Some day the words ‘Pizza, Cake’ may also be effectively find a Sanskritized standard. ; Sanskrit Dictionaries have listed them. Such inclusions and  illustrations can be seen in several Sanskrit dictionaries including ‘ Monier Williams’ and many modern online Sanskrit dictionaries.

 

                 I am aware that many who cannot take the rigor of Samskrutham have provided shortcuts and escape routes for ‘New Word Sanskritization’ .  As Sanskrit teachers in school, for meeting temporary needs, we have done it.  Go to any Sanskrit conversation Course for seven days and you will find learners finding such short cuts.  These do not reset or upset the Standard rule base of Paninian standards.  

 

                                What then is the missing point ? While every ‘ loan’  word  that came in to <Sanskrit- Bhashaa>, starting like an  ‘ immigrant’ and progressing to the status of a  legal residents and  citizens in a nation, the incoming words DID NOT CHANGE THE GRAMMAR PROCESS OF SANSKRITIZATION. The rule base given by Panini has remained stable and robust as a System. The  post colonial linguists and their followers  miss this point on ‘Robustness of SANSKRITIZATION PROCESS’ which inducts the given loan word in to the ‘Class –Culture-Companionship of Sanskrit –Bhashaa Vocabulary with all privileges by making them pass through a rigid rule-compliance process; and if a word does not stand this test, it is mercilessly thrown out as ‘ unfit, unSanskritized – Apaniniya -apashabda’  by the learned (Shishtas). Sorry that Samskrutham does not work by the rule of  lowering standards for mass convenience. Gold is rare in nature; yet when it occurs, it is always pure.  The rigor of Samskruth Class Acceptance for words  also isolates bhashaa words from the exclusively guarded class of <Sanskrit- Chandas Vocabulary and Process> which is integral to the system.

 

                                What is so sacrosanct in this stand of Purist Samskruth linguists ? Why is it so critical ?   Several key issues vital to tradition and history of Sanatana Dharma.  

                                 Key issue: Destroy this  Samskruth Standards rigidity; and  allow India to  lose its  ‘Sacred Thread ( Brahma Sutra / Yajnopavitam)  of linguistic continuity for its own Spiritual heritage. The additional points to note here are :  

 (i)  Traditional Schools  do not accept  Paninian grammar as a  descriptive or prescriptive or collage of several grammars of many languages and documents of historical periods. The entire text of Paninian grammar is based on a specific perception  provided by Vedas and Yoga traditions answering  What Language is ? The origin, nature, and function of Language ? . The totality of six disciplines called Vedanga cover this question, primarily from the Spiritual aspect (Yajna - Yoga). The two fold classification of ‘Apaurusheya’ ( Language Visioned as it is in Nature)  and Paurusheya ( Language as a human process outcome for True and Total Articulation of Thought = Bhaava –Abhivyakti) are used to draw the rules of GRAMMAR PROCESSING.  The rules that helps to understand and get benefit from ‘Apaurusheya’ document is called the Rules of ‘Chandas’. The rules that helps to make True and Total Articulation –Expression of Thought and make Communication benefit  is called  ‘ Bhashaa’ document. And  is  processed under Rules of ‘ Bhashaa’.

The work ‘Ashtaadhyayi’ provides a single document, a compact code unifying these two Vedic perceptions and prescriptions about Language. The key is in Bhagavad-Gita (17-15) which guides on practice of ‘Tapas of Vak’. And the same is further compacted in Patanjali yoga sutra 2-1 and 4-1. The elaboration of this Yoga of Language (Swadhyaya Yoga)  , the language –Tool to understand Vedas is Patanajlai’s commentary on Panini.

 

                       

2. On < Also, could one think of Panini as descriptive (of bhasha at his time) and not prescriptive forever?   >.

 

BVK Sastry (on 2) :    

 

                                  Summary of response :  No. This boxed modeling of understanding Panini is based on errors in understanding ‘Samskrutham :Language Pedagogy and Model’.  

                                  When Panini is NOT writing a grammar of a social language, his work  cannot be classified as ‘ prescriptive or descriptive’ using the hidden hypothesis that ‘Samskrutham, like all Human Languages, more so like Latin, Greek, Aramaic, Hebrew Or even English, which have a compulsive need to be associated with a descriptive or prescriptive grammar. These languages keep  varying from locale to locale, across spoken communities and historical migration periods !   The grammar and lexicon approach in a period specific way becomes critical for these languages. And so is the need for update.

This is the compulsion of a  theological language model derived under the inspiration of  Biblical  reference - Tower of Babel ( https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+11:1-9 ) , the mother seed  of IE- linguistics . and PIE theory.

 

                             Now for detail :    The root error is ‘Thinking that Panini was  a descriptive grammar writer of a language (bhashaa) at his time; and therefore ‘ not prescriptive for ever’.  The unarticulated, hypothesis behind this is analyzed in traditional schools as a part of ‘ Nature and Function of Language, as Thought Articulation, Naming an entity ( Naama-Roopa Vyavahara, Shabdaabhidhanam)  and embedded in to the continuing Hindu tradition of ‘ Naama-Karana Samskara’ ( Child naming). No child comes to this earth with a name.  The name has to be natural, spiritual, social and  Yoga-Compliant.  

 

       Many of colonial linguists theory on ‘ Language / Sanskrit language   is getting a new look from the Scientists, neurosurgeons, Advanced researchers in the area  of Consciousness, Quantum origin of life and the like. The Scientists are slowly appreciating the ‘ limitations of classical indologists and linguists presentation of language theories; and converging to study the wisdom of language classification as ‘ Apaurusheya –Paurusheya’ :: Language of Nature (Chandas) and Language of Human Society resonating to the Truth Standards of Nature and seeking Spirituality (Bhashaa). The rest of the historical local languages are placed in the basket of  Prakrut,  Desi and  Apabhramsha. Samskrutham  Language resources have no parallel to the theological linguistic theory like this ! The word ‘Deva –Bhashaa’ does not map to the story of Tower of Babel’ .

 

The Tower of Babel text reads as follows:  :  Now the whole world had one language and a common speech.  As people moved eastward,[a] they found a plain in Shinar[b] and settled there.  They said to each other, “Come, let’s make bricks and bake them thoroughly.” They used brick instead of stone, and tar for mortar. Then they said, “Come, let us build ourselves a city, with a tower that reaches to the heavens, so that we may make a name for ourselves; otherwise we will be scattered over the face of the whole earth.”

But the Lord came down to see the city and the tower the people were building. The Lord said, “If as one people speaking the same language they have begun to do this, then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them. Come, let us go down and confuse their language so they will not understand each other.” So the Lord scattered them from there over all the earth, and they stopped building the city. That is why it was called Babel[c]—because there the Lord confused the language of the whole world. From there the Lord scattered them over the face of the whole earth.  

 

 

Here is a link of one recent international conference that took place  at Bangalore which touched upon this issue: Fourth International Conference 'Science and Scientist - 2016' : August 26 — 27, 2016, Bangalore University  http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2016 ;   http://scienceandscientist.org ;   http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191 ; Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03;  Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138;  Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science

Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org

 

 

The entire issue is a very complex intertwined one with a deep historical legacy.  Many ‘Sanskrit Academicians’ are not comfortable to acknowledge or address, work as a part of multi-discipline team. And much less fund such serious study, unless it goes for some personal aggrandizement.    Some are comfortable to be safe by making  ‘packaged pointers with quotes from source works’. The deserted key issue is ‘Defining Samskrutham’, restoring the Samskruth tradition of teaching it  as a part of ‘Vedanga  league  of six disciplines’  needing ‘Yoga technical pedagogy’.  This is a critical strategic issue for any  Battle: Sanskrit  to explore ‘ Sacred Spiritual (Mantra) Linguistics of Samskrutham’. 

 

The  proposal to revisit and surface the key premise of tradition creates chills and triggers , several dimensions of  phobias  in  special interest groups holding  three primary apple carts.   The three primary apple cart-owners are :

 

(i) Post colonial Academicians who have held ‘Sanskrit’ to be the  historical social, literary  language of Vedas.   Isolating ‘Chandas and Bhashaa’ as unified tradition of Samskrutham  used in Ashtadhyayi.

 

(ii) Modern Schools who hold ‘Sanskrit’ as the language of the oppressors and preventive of Modern India’s economic progress.  Why then call Sanskrit as a part of 8^th schedule –National language of India ? What will be the mother root of ‘Hindi as Rashtra Bhashaa’ ? And enrich it with English, French, German,  or Latin vocabulary ?

 

(iii) Computational Sanskrit Linguists, who want to push the ‘Sanskrit-Bhashaa part Paninian language rules to be ‘ recoded as a patented - program in English like language’  and deported  it to the barrack of digital devices running OS and Applications running from remote  Servers  to provide ‘Automated  Indian Language Translation Services’ ?      Why then World IT teams are exploring Sanskrit Computational linguistics ? as a part of seeking Non-roman script voice solutions for Indian market , making Digital India dream to generate  a ‘ IT service providing colony’ ?   

 

 

The answer rests in relearning what Panini had in mind in designing the rule book called ‘Ashtadhyayi’  for Samskrutham, where in a fusion of Spiritual and Social dimension of Language is provided without a loophole for ‘any ‘Lord’ to confuse the user’.

[Dr. Yadu Moharir]

Dear BVK,

Thanks for clear elucidation.

One has to remember, that we cannot change what we cannot and will not acknowledge, hope we learn from our errors in that past and apply the necessary correction.

Rgds

Dr Yadu

---

From: BVKSastry(Gmail) <sastr...@gmail.com>
To: bvpar...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2016 9:16 AM
Subject: RE: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} -'Word 'Sepoy' - What does it mean ? - Re: Responding to Ananya Bajpai's article on Sanskrit

[Mārcis Gasūns]

On Friday, 16 September 2016 10:04:09 UTC+3, Prof. Girish Nath Jha wrote:

Sanskrit does not represent high caste or culture at all. Please collect data from the 17 universities and 150 departments of Sanskrit and revise your article accordingly.

Dear Dr. Girish Nath Jha - where does the stats come from? Can they be trusted? What are the 17 universities, is there a list? Thanks,

M.G.