Shiva-Shakti of Language and Impact of Colonialism

The Śiva-Śakti of Language

“I speak Hindī” – millions from north India would say this. But how true is that? Can they really speak Hindī? Do they speak Hindī? If we observe what we speak and how we speak then we will find that we are practically speaking English or some other language by using the grammar of Hindī. All our nouns, adjectives and adverbs have become either English or Farsi, Arabic, Turkish or Urdu. The same is true about any other Indian language including Gujarati, Telugu, Kannada, Bangla etc.

It is as if the very seed of our languages was changed and replaced with an alien seed. It seems as if words from alien languages, like colonists, have invaded our language, taking control of our words and imposing over our grammar. As if the Puruṣa principle, the Śiva tattva of our language is changed.

Our languages are colonised by alien words and ideas, just as our land was occupied by foreign invaders.

This was not always so of course. Before the advent of Christian and Islamic colonialism in India, it was Sanskṛta which provided the seed words to Indian languages. The universal element that Bhāratīya languages across India shared was their Sanskṛta Niṣṭha vocabulary, capable of taking Hindū darśana and Sanātana civilization to each and every corner of Bhāratavarṣa.

When did this change and how; and what impact did it have on Bhāratīya civilization, Sanātana culture and Hindū psyche; and what should we do about it.

The good thing is that our grammar is still our own. The Śakti element of our languages is still intact. To understand that more deeply, we need to take a look at some historical aspects of the problem.

A Beautiful Continuum

Language is not just a means of communication; it is the carrier of culture and civilization. It contains the seeds of our history; the seeds of our philosophy; and the identity of our civilization. Language is most central to our cultural consciousness. In Bhāratavarṣa, the land of Sanātana dharma, the status of language has been even higher. Out of the six vedāṅga, four are related directly to language. In our culture, nāma is primary, not rūpa. Language is not just a carrier of knowledge. We have the concept of śabdabrahma, where language itself is knowledge. The chanting of mantras can reveal the knowledge which is hidden inside words. The entire Indian Knowledge System is based on this concept.

In Bhāratavarṣa, a unique experiment was done with language. Although this country is the birthplace of many great and classical languages, they all carry the soul of Sanātana dharma within them, even though they are very different from each other in many aspects.

The languages which evolved naturally in various regions of this land were completely capable of representing the desīya culture of the region, full of the peculiarities which give them their peculiar flavor. On the other hand, the constant input and guidance of Sanskṛta made sure that they would always carry the soul of Sanātana dharma within them. Thus despite being different, these languages never lost sight of the sacred center of our civilization – Sanātana dharma.

While Sanskṛta inputs made sure the philosophy that these languages conveyed would always be Sanātana, the manifestation of these languages always remained completely vernacular, regional and local, full of the desīya culture. No other culture or civilization can boast of such beautiful harmony between principle and manifestation; classical and vernacular culture; and classical language and regional languages. The classical and the vernacular have always been in conflict in Europe and in most other civilizations of the world. But in India, they were in a continuum.

In the middle ages however, after the arrival of the Islamic imperialism in India, this tradition broke down. Many regions of India came under the Islamic rule. A huge part of this area comprises the regions which are now Hindī speaking. Persian, Arabic and Turkic became the languages of the State. Administration, law and other important branches of the State and society completely banished Sanskṛta. As a result of this brutal linguistic colonialism even in spoken language the FAT (Farsi, Arabic, Turkish) words started creeping in. After that, the advent of British-Christian colonialism in India resulted in the invasion of English words in the regional languages of India.

This process became faster rather than slower after the independence of India, and by the end of the 20th century it was as if the entire seed of Indian languages was changed. We imported entire words, phrases, terms from FATE (Farsi, Arabic, Turkish and English) languages. Our words and seeds were no longer either Sanskṛta or Prākṛta. While the principle of the language became colonized, the manifestation still remained Indic, having the imprint of dharma. It was as if the Śiva tattva, the principle of the language was lost.

The continuum between the principle and the manifestation in Indian languages broke down.

Language and Dharmic Consciousness

There is a deep connection between a language and the culture in which it evolved. And it is not only the language which owes to culture; culture owes to the language too. Some thoughts, some metaphors and core ideas of a civilization and culture are only possible to be conveyed in the words of a language which co-evolved with the native culture. Once that language disappears it is not just the loss of a medium, but also the loss of an entire thought system –linguicide is akin to ethnocide.

For example, ‘philosophy’ can scarcely convey the meaning that the word ‘darśana’ in Sanskṛta cultures and languages can convey. Darśana means ‘to see the truth’. A Dārśanika in Hindū culture is someone who has the experience of the ultimate truth through sādhana and meditation. Darśana in Hindū culture is not confined to the imagination of a philosopher. It is the ‘seeing’ of a ṛṣi.

One can attempt to call ‘ṛta’ as ‘cosmic rhythm’, but can any phrase in English express the truth about a ‘structure which keeps the entire universe and everything in it in dhārmika balance’ sufficiently?

‘Triguṇātīta’ in our culture is impossible to be conveyed in English. Neither is there an exposition of ‘three guṇas’ in the West, nor can they imagine a situation in which divinity or any other entity can transcend the limitations that any being with these three guṇas exhibit.

‘Sankoca’ is a process in Kashmir Śaivism which explains how the indivisible Śiva ‘contracts its supreme consciousness’ and becomes everything and everyone in the universe. The process of individuation here is seen as a process of contraction. In the West something similar would be called evolution. But one thing is clear that this entire idea, explaining perhaps the most central of Hindū concepts is impossible to be conveyed in English properly.

‘Nāgarika’ means someone who has interests in all the arts, like a rasikā, and who remains in the city, and while enjoying all these arts also takes care that they are nourished and protected. Can the word ‘citizen’ and its dry notification of the place of dwelling of a person convey what the word ‘nāgarika’ is capable of conveying?

Authored by Pankaj Saxena. Published by Brhat.