Brief on Sanskrit and its Literature – Sanskrit is no ordinary language. It is called Dev-Bhasha – the language of Devas. Why is it so? There is no language that is technically more sound and perfect than Sanskrit. It is also natural language – from Varna (alphabet) to Shabd (words), Vakyansh (phrases) to Vakya (sentences), it flows in a natural and logical flow. The Varnas are intricately linked to the deeper aspects of Yoga, and Tantra and act as koot-mantra. For a longer version, watch this video by Dr. Sampadanand Mishra https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=40uaJAGj3bc&t=12s.

A rich and wide variety of Sanskrit Literature is available to us today. Starting from most ancient Vedas to the more recent Ramakirtimahakavyam by Satyavrat Shastri - Jnanpith Award winner for 2006 - Sanskrit literature has the longest tradition of impactful and highest quality literature. It can be classified into following general areas:

#1 The Puranas: Several Puranas and Up-Puranas including Srimad Bhagvat Mahapuran

#2 The Itihas: Such as Ramayana, Mahabharat, Rajatarangini, Madura Vijayam, and several others

#3 The Shastra:

1. Six Astika Darshanas namely Sankhya, Yog, Nyay, Vaisheshik, Mimansa, and Vedant – including all Shrutis such as Ved Samhita, Brahmanas, Aranyakas and Upanishads
2. Nastika Darshan namely Buddhism, Jainism, Charvak and Ajivika
3. Technical texts such as
   1. Vyakaran
   2. Bhasyas
   3. Sutras, Neeti Shashtra, Politics
   4. Natya Shastra, Sangeet
   5. Chikitsa such as Ayurveda, Surgery
   6. Sciences such as Chemistry, Metallurgy, Mathematics, Astronomy, Physics, City Planning, Yantra-Vigyan, Dhanurved, Arth-Shashtra (economics)
4. Others such as Bhakti Sahitya

#4 Kavya and Natak (Poetry, Prose, Drama): Several texts written by Bhasa, Kalidas, Vishakhadatta, Magha, Jayadev, Adi Sankara, Bhattikavya, Narayan Pandit

Most literature that does not strictly fall into the Dharmik category still connects back to Indic traditions that are strictly Dharmik. Thus, Sanskrit is no ordinary language. It is a gateway to Vedic and all Dharmic knowledge. Its literature is intimately tied to Indic thought for millennia and thus it is important to know how to learn it and who can teach it!

Our scriptures tell that the primary goal of learning is “Atmanam Viddhi”, “Mukti”, or “Moksha”. Effective methods of learning/teaching included:

• Shravana – listening (not just hearing)
• Manana – reflection
• Nidhidhyasana – realization via self-research such as meditation

These methods require a certain level of depth and commitment from both Guru (teachers) and Shishya (students) so that learning is not just superficial but deep principles are correctly interpreted and experienced.

A Brief on our attitude and how it helped our attackers

Bharat still holds the best indigenous traditions continuously practiced for millennia. This is despite the repeated attacks, persecutions, and genocides that have been heaped upon us since Alexander (~323 BCE) and Bin Kasim (~711 CE). These attacks continue with new vigor and new methods to this day. For every Mohammad Ghori, we not only have a Jaychand who invites the invader but also a Prithviraj who lets the invader go because we follow certain “code of ethics”.

It is incredible that we have survived the way we have despite monumental atrocities in the past and present. What is this code of ethics? What is the reason of our survival?

Whatever our perceived code of ethics in the past (Do not fight at night, die in the battle – win or lose, pardon the enemy – hoping he learns his lesson), our current code of ethics is our lazy, uncaring, unwise, uneducated, ignorant, deracinated attitude that does not rise above self. This is the “sab chalta hai” attitude.

But this attitude did not help us survive. For every Prithviraj, there was Guru Teg Bahadur and for every Jaychand, there was Banda Bairagi. That is what saved us. That is why we are still here as Hindus following the oldest and grandest tradition in the world. We need more Gurus and role models like Teg Bahadur and Banda Bairagi. This must be our new “Indic” attitude focused beyond self and strengthened by the clarity of Dharma and action.

Attack on our traditions and their effect

Both major history centric religions have a history of aggression and cultural digestion (read works of Rajiv Malhotra). This involves slowly taking over the best from the target, destroying the target so that eventually no trace of the target remains (i.e. digestion). There are many tricks of this trade but the following examples should suffice:

First, the example of various Gurus and their teachings outside of India – our Yogic traditions were initially taught by Gurus as universal values that will benefit everyone. They taught yoga, meditation, Pranayama, and the whole system without expecting the students to ever “convert” into Hindu tradition. For these Gurus, it was not necessary. Raman Maharshi famously told Paul Brunton as much. So many Gurus such as Paramhansa Yogananda, BKS Iyengar, Pattabhi Jois, TKV Desikachar, Swami Sivanand and hundreds more propagated these values in a selfless manner. Many disciples of these groups started their own practices and yoga studios, and slowly “Surya Namaskar” became “Son Salutation”, Yoga became “Christian Yoga”, “Yog Nidra” became “Lucid Sleep” and Hindus became “just another consumers of Yoga” instead of inventors and standard-bearers of Yoga.

On the other hand, there were some Gurus who insisted on purity of thought and on giving up the “old” and embrace the “new”. Prime example of this are AC Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupad and the organization he started called ISKCON. It is now common to see a Vaishnav westerner, comfortable in Saree, Tilak, Kanthi, Kurta, Dhoti and other clothes that are traditionally Indian. These western Vaishnavites follow the true essence of their Guru’s teachings because Prabhupad created a very high bar for them to follow Krishna’s bhakti. In the case of ISKCON, if you want an initiation, you have to be really committed from day one. This is contrary to the first group of Gurus whose teachings were largely digested in one way or the other. Some of those who digested Yoga and other Hindu traditions returned (or never left) to their own faith and attacked the source.

In summary, without controlling the free-form “giving” we invited the outsider to come-in and digest us and attack us through the tools we gave these outsiders. We must learn from this history and our “code of ethics” must evolve to meet modern challenges. Instead of getting digested, we must strive to keep and expand our identity.

Second, in Sanskrit studies itself, both “believers” and “non-believers” in the western world studied Sanskrit vigorously and deeply. The digestion of Sanskrit and its traditions took many forms – from Monier Williams, Max Muller, and William Jones it went to Michael Witzel, Sheldon Pollock, Wendi Doniger, and Robert Goldman. Once taken over and digested, these non-Indic, non-traditional “Sanskrit scholars” created an anti-Sanskrit, anti-India, anti-Hindu narrative, illogically concocting negative meaning where none existed. This alternative narrative is well documented in “Invading the Sacred” and other works lead by Rajiv Malhotra. 

Nityanand Misra documents several errors and corruptions in his lecture here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5c9NiN1i_N8). Story of Shringeri Math almost giving away Adhikar to American Universities is fresh in our minds (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJyJPGmrYjQ). One may ask, what difference does it make to us if they are translating Sanskrit texts?

How does this matter? The narrative is built in such a way that these translations become more authentic than the original source. Slowly we are cut-off from our roots that of course leads to the problems we are seeing every day. We stop learning about our scriptures from our sources ultimately forgetting our real history, values, and ideals. We are playing into their hands by falling for this “sab chalta hai” attitude.

This anti-Hindu narrative is so strong that it takes extra effort to separate truth from fiction and right from wrong.

Insider Vs Outsider

There is a long history of atrocities committed against all Indic traditions. In fact, many of the current perpetrators of these atrocities are yesterday’s targets. There is a great need for every Indic traditionalist to build a repertoire to separate truth from untruth, and what is good and bad for them in the short term as well as long term.

Before deciding to stand with or against an issue, we must separate fact from fiction, good from evil and identify intentions behind a particular narrative of the issue. Our old “code of ethics” needs to be updated to meet the challenge of the day. This means today’s Prithviraj must not set today’s Mohammad Ghori free.

Before we can build our own narrative, we have to protect ourselves and counter the false narrative that has been built. This needs a clear understanding of Drishti (gauge) and Adhikar (ref: Rajiv Malhotra). Drishti is to know “who” is setting the narrative. Are they inside the tradition or outside? Given their Drishti, do they have “Adhikar” or authority to talk about the issue from our Drishti? The idea is that we don’t give away our Insider Adhikar to someone who does not share our own Drishti. In the above example, we must NOT give Adhikar to Robert Goldman to be an authority on Ramayana when his Drishti is of an outsider. The only person who should be allowed to be an authority is someone who not only knows Sanskrit but also lives the tradition that sees Ram as Maryada Purushottam. No-one else will be able to tell the story how it must be told. 

BHU and Sanskrit

Let us analyze the issue of Mr. Khan who is hired as a teacher to teach Sanskrit and Dharma in Banaras Hindu Vishwa Vidyalaya (BHU). Whether Mr. Khan is the right Guru for Sanskrit and Dharma must be seen from this context.

#1 He will not be teaching just benign Sanskrit Literature but will be teaching Dharmic subjects along with it. There is no way to separate the language from the Scriptures as we have seen above.

#2 Mr. Khan is a practicing Muslim and will only have a Drishti of an outsider.  He, as a Guru, will neither be able to practice “Shravan, Manan, Nidhidhyasana” nor effectively teach without the experience of the practice.

#3 His appointment may not have been done to further the anti-Hindu narrative, but it serves that purpose. We are giving away Adhikar when we must protect it.

Mr. Khan’s appointment further weakens our narrative, it allows outsider Drishti to control the insiders’ knowledge about ourselves. It normalizes the anti-Dharmic narrative inside our own institutions.

From the perspective of history of the last 1300 years, slowly taking over Adhikar to teach us our own scriptures becomes the next logical front of attack. It does not matter whether this is a well thought out plan or just incidental. But it sets a precedent and opens the floodgates.  1300 years ago, it started from direct killing, converting,  burning our books, looting our temples, enslaving our men, women and children, defiling our women, corrupting our history books, corrupting our education, instigating us to fight amongst ourselves, taking our land, digesting our culture and our knowledge, creating confusion and division, and now taking over to finally teach us how to learn our own Dharma. Had we not already hit a bottom? Will this down-fall ever stop?

For those who follow the “sab chalta hai” attitude, it is only natural to support Mr. Khan’s appointment and spew the choicest venom on Indic traditionalists. The outsiders and sometimes sympathetic insiders have come up with several lazy arguments to describe us as bigots, intolerants, and alike. Some have publicly wondered “what is wrong in it?” without knowing the nuances of the subject and understanding the deep-rooted problems with this appointment and ultimately where it leads. Some have argued, “what about KK Mohammad, the archaeologist?”. These arguments are either purely malicious or ignorant or both.

Some insiders have rightly opposed this appointment based on “Muslim university does not allow Hindus to teach their theology” or “Christian university requires Baptism certificate”. Their arguments are valid, but those arguments go only so far. Will we allow this to happen if they start allowing Hindus to teach their theology? No! We will NEVER!

This is a time of transition for our society. We have just opened our eyes after 1300 years of slumber and we cannot let our guard down. Dharma Raksha is not going to happen itself. It will happen only when every one of us stands up and fights for it! Learning the tricks of the new and potential modes of attack and the anti-Indic narrative is only the first step. Protecting ourselves in all these fronts and countering it is essential. We need more Prabhupad and Chanakya.