Sanskritization, de-Sanskritization and Colonial Rule

Author,

You keep writing on important issues but u barely cut thru the issues. It appears that u prefer to skate across the issues.

Abt de-Sanskritisation: I see westernisation happening not de-sanskritisation. Western culture is the new age sanskriti in India. Though protests erupt when Gere kisses Shilpa, we ignore that our movies project worse kind of vulagarity (but nobody protests then!).

Ur quasi-definition of DS appear to be made by keeping the electoral politics in mind. Nothing else.

Re: # 4

I`ve read a lot on Buddha and Buddhism including the excellent books of Karen Armstrong and also her biography of Buddha...

If it is so interchangeable why do upper castes still treat the lower castes like shyte?

I agree that British used our internal differences to their advantage but Naqsha had a valid point here.

Overall, I didnt find anything substantial in this article.

Differences, institutional or otherwise is natural among any collection of human beings BUT how we meet those issues collectively is the point. I dont think there`s any consensus on the `solution` aspect among Indians.

Re: # 1
Actually you should read the article again. By the way Manu Smriti is a Smriti not a Shruti and therefore can be rejected whenever necessary. Of course I would say the same about a Shruti too if I didn`t like it. -)

Secondly it was the English who gave so much importance to the Manu Smriti. Most Brahmanic communities were not even aware of the damn thing.
Don`t get carried away by Deepa Mehta and other types. It takes very little time to implement a dogma. For example Scottish Highlanders never actually considered kilts a ethnic dress.

And even the Manu Smriti is not dogmatic. This bit is from chapter 10 .

``As the son of Shudra can attain the rank of a Brahmin, the son of Brahmin can attain rank of a shudra. Even so with him who is born of a Vaishya or a Kshatriya``

You see it`s all interchangeable. Just us, who like to hang on to power, like to keep the status quo.

I`d like to know where you got your ideas about Buddhism too.

#2 Almost all Urdu writers are available in Devnagri script.

I am glad that I read this article because from its name “Sanskritization” I thought it has something to do with the Sanskritization of Urdu language. While having a conversation with an Indian friend she asked me that she loves Faiz and can I recommend some good translation of his works? I responded that why don’t you read “Nuskha-hai-Wafa” in original Urdu or Hindi? She told me that she cannot read Urdu/Hindi in Arabic script because she can only understand English and Sanskrit alphabet. Then it occurred to me that probably after independence (or before?) the Indian government has changed the alphabet from Arabic to Sanskrit. Majority of the people of India belong to Hindu civilization and they probably want to revive their ancient civilization. Therefore my objection to this change of alphabet will be undemocratic, but from my perspective it’s a pity that most Indians now can’t read the original works of Ghalib and Faiz. Translations can convey the meaning and substance in prose but poetry is mostly about words and if you change the letter, the beauty of words is lost.

i know it is fashionable to blame the British for all our ills in the Subcontinent but arguing that they were responsible for the solidification of the caste system is a bit much! Excuse my ignorance but aren`t the Laws of Manu responsible? The British in fact were the ones who outlawed many of the more obscene aspects of the caste system.

Buddhism developed as a reaction to the caste sytem--how can you cite that as evidence for the flexibility of it before the British came?!