丅ᕼᗴ Ǥᖇᗴᗩ丅 ᔕᗩᑎᔕᛕᖇI丅 ᗷᒪᑌᑎᗪᗴᖇ
संस्कृत संवादः
वाग्देवतामाश्रये | 26th June 2024 | Mohit Dokania
Read here : tinyurl.com/2qm9worc
"Speak, even distorted Sanskrit, all of you."
"Even if it is incorrect, there is no need to worry."
"Please let the mistakes not be pointed out."
"Let there be mistakes."
These were the slogans by Samskrita Bharati activists during the Sanskrit Sambhashana Andolana, started in 1981, as revealed by Shri Chamu Krishna Shastry.¹ Before 1981, even a single mistake in Sanskrit was taken seriously and rectified immediately, fostering a culture of pure Sanskrit being spoken in the mainstream. This culture pretty much still survives in Nepal but was suppressed in India using the organizational and financial muscle power of Samskrita Bharati with support from its allies.
Major Sanskrit universities, including Central Sanskrit University (then Rashtriya Sanskrit Sansthan), supported this movement by planning² the degradation of Sanskrit to the level of Hindi, making it accessible to all under the banner of Sarala Samskrutam (Simple Sanskrit). This reduction to the level of Hindi has stripped Sanskrit of its inherent divinity, diminishing its sacred and profound nature.
This push to spread Sanskrit, even at the cost of corrupting it, has resulted in unprecedented distortion of the language. Most of the Sanskrit newspapers, digital magazines, research papers, brochures and such have degraded in terms of linguistic richness. When compared with Sanskrit writings before the 1980s, one might think they are reading two different languages. This distortion has even crept into tools like Google Translate, leading to inaccurate and misleading translations of Sanskrit. The eternally uniform Classical Sanskrit has been reduced to a substandard level.
Simple Standard Sanskrit discouraged the excessive use of sandhi (compound conjunction) and samasa (compound formation), which unsurprisingly instilled more fear in the minds of students. It advocated trimming the ten lakāras (tenses and moods) to only four, replacing past lakāras with kridanta usages, which resulted in a fear of Sanskrit verb forms. Most unfortunately, it tried to eliminate³ the use of madhyama purusha (second person), even when it is mandatory to use madhyama purusha verb forms when Yushmad (second person pronouns) forms are ellipsed.⁴ This ungrammatical approach led to the widespread suffix of तु in every लोट्लकार form (imperative mood). This is just a glimpse of the entire plan.
Shri Shastry further admitted that the knowledge of Sanskrit has remained unchanged even after 20 years in many Samskrita Bharati volunteers. This indicates that their volunteers are no longer interested in speaking Sanskrit correctly. This blunder is now beyond the control of even its planners and implementers. Volunteers who themselves did not know how to speak Sanskrit properly were assigned as teachers in Sambhashan Shibiras (spoken Sanskrit camps). This resulted in a severely flawed quality of education.
Sanskrit education is not a joke where one teaches anything they believe is right and then asks poorly taught students to correct their own mistakes through self-study. Foundational education should be firm, basic, and precisely correct.
This blunder, although unintentional, has caused significant corruption to Sanskrit, a level of damage neither Islamic invasions nor British destruction of the gurukula system was able to achieve. It is often internal decay that leads to the corruption of dharmic elements, eroding their true essence from within.
If we want to bring back that culture of zero tolerance for Sanskrit corruption, we must gently rectify the mistakes of humble Sanskrit speakers but act firmly with arrogant or habitual distorters of Sanskrit.
We must also work to dismantle this flawed teaching system and ensure an alternative method that simplifies Sanskrit without degrading it.
Jayalakshmi
The article is a typical leftist, anti dharmic and break India propaganda.
The so called slogans viz., “let there be mistakes” etc attributed to Samskrit Bharathi are distorted, totally false and out of context. They are meant only for a new entrant who is encouraged to learn and not to excessively worry about likely mistakes in the initial learning stages. That’s all. Is it not the case in learning in every other language?. Whether Samskrit Bharathi has admonished or prevented any one in speaking impeccable samskrit? No. Instead, they recognise and praise such scholars and their numbers are growing exponentially. Thus, the author is keen to spread a false propaganda to suit his agenda.
The article cleverly tells a half truth that before 1981 pure samskrit was spoken in the mainstream. However, it is silent that the samskrit which was in the mainstream was systematically weakened, and ridiculed by Jihadi and Missionary forces and their agents. They even succeeded in destroying thousands of gurukuls and great learning centres. Even after Independence, the much needed support for samskrit education was not forthcoming from government sources. In spite of all these odds, Samskrit Bharathi was able to revive Samskrit to its present glory. The author sheds only crocodile tears. They are unable to digest that in spite of all machinations, Samskrit is flourishing.
सर्पाणां च खलानां च पापानां दुष्टचॆतसाम् अभिप्राया न सिद्ध्यन्ति तॆनॆदं धार्यतॆ जगत्।
The author makes a wild and totally false claim that pure samskrit was “suppressed” by Samskrit Bharathi without giving any verifiable details. The suppression of Samskrit was in fact made by Jihadi and Missionary forces and their agents. However, they failed in their evil design as unexpectedly Samskrit Bharathi revived the same with great tenacity. The author only is sulking their failure.
The author also falsely claims that Samskrita Bharathi has organisational and financial muscle power to suppress the culture. The author should be aware that Samskrita Bharathi does not have even a fraction of financial resources which the leftist, anti dharmic, break India, Jihadi, Missionary forces and their agents. Whatever organisational and financial powers they have is only limited to their selfless part time workers and volunteers.
The author also laments about degradation of samskrit. Well, he could have written his article in pure samskrit with all its rich features. He could have articulated his false propaganda with liberal usage of Madhyama purusha, 10 lakaras, sandhi and samasa. He could have set an example for others to follow. No has prevented him. The subject article is biased and trying to find a fault which does not exist. अशक्तॊऽहं गृहारम्भॆ शक्तॊऽहं गृहभञ्जनॆ ।
--
आपको यह मैसेज इसलिए मिला है क्योंकि आपने Google Groups के "संस्कृत संवादः" ग्रुप की सदस्यता ली है.
इस समूह की सदस्यता खत्म करने और इससे ईमेल पाना बंद करने के लिए, Samvadah+u...@googlegroups.com को ईमेल भेजें.
वेब पर यह चर्चा देखने के लिए, https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Samvadah/CACfXiV6e9EvfAfRVzq-7ta%3DPb_TWOjgmAR8kqWF1h2nYfAKR6Q%40mail.gmail.com पर जाएं.