Spoken Sanskrit and Spoken Sanskrit

[adheesh sathaye]

Dear Profs. Hart, Nair, and Sandahl, and colleagues,

With all due respect, I find it hard to accept that the construction  
of neologisms like 'seva-phala', 'iDDali' or even misuses like  
'mahAla' are in any way indicative of 'ignorant Hindutva forces'. It  
is not at all uncommon  to see vernacular words or forms used within  
medieval Sanskrit manuscripts, and particularly when the concept does  
not occur in classical Sanskrit. Certain MSS of zivadAsa's or  
jambhaladatta's vetAla-paJcaviMzati, for example, appear to be  
replete with north Indian vernacular 'loan-words' and shoddy, Hindi-  
or Marathi-based grammatical forms. This is  just the tip of the  
iceberg. Moreover, contemporary spoken Sanskrit is quite obviously  
and self-consciously a simplification of classical Sanskrit, and this  
has been done in order for the language to be more accessible and  
appealing to young, twenty-first century students, who WOULD like to  
express their thoughts about riding the bus, eating apples, using  
computers, and other modern-day activities. It's actually quite a fun  
thing to do.

One must, it is true, engage in this linguistic practice knowing full  
well that what one is speaking is a hybridized and simplified form of  
the classical parole, and this I think is where some of the Hindu  
nationalist ideological projects are indeed harmful, as Prof. Nair  
points out, in representing spoken Sanskrit to the Indian public as  
being both authentic and Hindu. What's most disturbing to me about  
the Hindu spoken Sanskrit movement is not how the language is  
treated, but how many textbooks attempt to naturalize (and  
nationalize) upper-caste, puritanical Hindu practices through  
language teaching.

On the other hand, may I respectfully suggest that the idea that the  
ancientness of Sanskrit somehow debilitates this language from  
accepting neologisms, or makes it useless for expressing modern  
ideas, itself might be construed as an act of intellectual violence  
on par with 'cutting throats', 'demolishing mosques', or 'raping  
nuns'? Clearly, as scholars of classical Sanskrit, we have an  
obligation to continue to teach students how to read and understand  
kAlidAsa, bANa, or perhaps even the magisterial ZrIharSa--but can  
this teaching not occur side-by-side with an acceptance of a  
consciously different register of the Sanskrit language, albeit  
contrived and manufactured, for contemporary, everyday usage? Perhaps  
the latter might serve as a kind of gateway for the former?

with best regards,

Adheesh
--
Dr. Adheesh Sathaye
Department of Asian Studies
University of British Columbia
408 Asian Centre
1871 West Mall
Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z2
604.822.5188
adheesh at interchange.ubc.ca



On Aug 13, 2008, at 8:49 , Stella Sandahl wrote:

>
> It is very sad to se how the ignorant Hindutva forces demean and  
> make the wonderful classical language into something trivial and  
> ridiculous. How do we stop them?
> How can we rescue Sanskrit from these vandals? I doubt that the  
> sevaphalAni-eating student in his mahala can read and understand  
> even one line by Kalidasa or Bana or Jayadeva.
> But he can cut the throat of those who cannot speak his so called  
> Sanskrit. When he is not busy demolishing mosques and raping nuns.
>
> Stella Sandahl
>
>
> --
> Professor Stella Sandahl
> Department of East Asian Studies
> 130 St. George St. room 14087
> Toronto, ON M5S 3H1
> ssandahl at sympatico.ca
> stella.sandahl at utoronto.ca
> Tel. (416) 978-4295
> Fax. (416) 978-5711
>