Justifying teaching of Sanskrit

[aklujkar at unixg.ubc.ca]

        It would be very useful, I think, if putting the formidable
intellectual resources of the INDOLOGY group together, we made a collection
of remarkable observations regarding why Sanskrit should be taught (and,
perhaps, regarding why it should not be taught). As there is a huge body of
literature out there on this subject and it is as repetitive as the
writings on ;Sa:nkara's Advaita Vedaanta, we should restrict ourselves to
insightful, original (or original-sounding) and /or charmingly expressed
observations. 

I begin by making the following modest contribution on the basis of what I
could easily recall: 
        1. Oft-quoted: "The Sanscrit language, whatever be its antiquity,
is of a wonderful structure; more perfect than the Greek, more copious than
the Latin, and more exquisitely refined than either, yet bearing to both of
them a stronger affinity, both in the roots of verbs and in the forms of
grammar, than could possibly have been produced by accident; so strong
indeed, that no philologer could examine them all three, without believing
them to have sprung from some common source, which, perhaps, no longer
exists.     Sir William Jones, Third Anniversary Discourse, Asiatic Society
(Calcutta), 2 February 1786.
        2. dharmo brahma raso naama ;siva.m satya.m ca sundaram / yaa
tridhaa tattvam uuce taa.m sa.msk.rta-prtibhaa.m numa.h // "Homage to that
Sanskrit genius which articulated reality in three forms: the Truth that is
brahman, the Goodness that is dharma, and the Beauty that is rasa.    
Professor V. Raghavan, verses on the back of the Sanskrit periodical
Sa sk ta-pratibha, 1959.
        3. "Since the Renaissance there has been no event of such
world-wide significance in the history of culture as the discovery of
Sanskritliterature in the latter part of the eighteenth century.  Arthur A.
MacDonell. A History of Sanskrit Literature, p. 1 of third impression in
1909. London: William Heinemann. 
        4. "In the development of human consciousness India has played so
small part. The student who has ventured into this vast field is indeed
tempted to say that India's intellectual creation is to those of other
lands as the Himaalaya is to other mountains." (p. xii); "The ideals of
Indian civilization are not simply very fine: they are in great part still
desirable, indeed necessary, for Humanity. This is perhaps the main reason
why kaavya is still worth reading. ... Ideals apart, kaavya is a permanent
record of a mighty stream of human experience, and in part a comedy, a
critique, of that experience. ... in the present fusion of world
civilizations it is necessary, if we value happiness and our very
existence, that this inheritance should be appropriated by the whole human
race." (pp. 217-18). A. K. Warder, Indian Kaavya Literatur, vol. I. 

        As I recall, there are some good  passages on the importance of
Sanskrit  in  Jawahar Lal Nehru's  the Discovery of India.  I do not have
the book at hand. 

        Although for the foreseeable future, many of us must spend
considerable energy in (a) educating administrators of higher institutions
of learning regarding why what we do is valuable and (b) pleading for the
inclusion or retention of South Asian languages in the curriculum, the
long-term goal must be the mainstreaming of at least the classical
languages like Sanskrit. There are very few departments in Western
universities in which Sanskrit is taught and researched as a part of the
Classical heritage.  It seems that educating, in this respect, must
regrettably begin with the Classisists. As their own numbers are dwindling
in the new economic and academic 'realities,' will they be interested in
forming an alliance with Sanskritists, Tamilists, etc.?

ashok aklujkar