I have problems with Sanscrit grammar in a similar way to some people with meditation. I can't really see the point of it. Whereas with meditation the result is - or should be - a matter of indifference, with Sanscrit grammar there's a definite aim: to learn the language.
Why do we have to do this? What has Sanscrit got that can't be found in English? There are words, it is true, to describe states or conditions that can't readily be expressed in English, but the grammar itself is said to yield a mysterious knowledge, along with its cohort - the sounds themselves.
Mysterious certainly for me, obscure, floundering and the light never seems to dawn. It's a long hard path, a puzzle, more like a maze. And I never remember how I got there or where I'm supposed to be going. All the usual signposts have been turned around. Nothing very useful is retained.
I have asked others if they have experienced knowledge simply in the sound of Sanscrit. One said he did once but was not able to describe it.
HH has said we need to study Sanscrit - do we all have to do it? If we do, what do we need to do to make it comprehensible to those like me? If we don't all have to do it - are there other ways to bring the benefit?
And if the sound of Sanscrit alone brings knowledge it should be possible to demonstrate this. Now that would really make the point.
Monday, September 11, 2006
Sanscrit - grrh .... or wonderful!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
The result of meditation should be a matter of emotional indifference, but not mental indifference. I think that's what I was trying to get at with the previous post. We confuse the two - we think that 'not being concerned with results' means that the result has no meaning that can be reflected on and considered. And so we don't consider the result, and we don't speak of it.
Anyway ... it seems that our knowledge of Sanskrit is at an early stage. The old material used to be frustrating, because it presented philosophical interpretation as straight translation, trying (it seemed to me) to short-circuit the process of understanding.
I have to say that having reached reasonable proficiency in the language (by our standards) I can't answer your questions. I have had at least one extraordinary and incontrovertible experience of "the meaning of the word is what it does", but I don't think that that is the whole story. I will ask someone who knows.
Some things that arise in response:
- I was present at a lecture on Sanskrit at Sarum Chase many years ago. When the perfect prayer was chanted by the speaker, I and seemingly the whole room fell deeply still. The speaker commented on the effect, that he hadn't expected it. That sticks with me as evidence of the direct effect of the sounds and is not the only experience of this kind. The barrier to the continued occurance of this is the mind making things habitual and various blockages lowering the sensitivity of the being (in my experience).
- as regards the technicalities of the language, I can empathise that I have not as yet experienced mystical significance in the grammar either. What I will say though is that study and reflection upon root meanings in the original language has commonly led me to a deeper, subtler and usually gentler understanding than any English translation conveys. I think the way we hear English words in translation is very much affected by habitual and historical understanding. Why I say 'gentler' is for me, concepts heard without the baggage of harsher religious interpretations. I would go as far to say that no English translation can do justice to the Sanskrit. You get to see that any English word chosen is only 'one angle' on the Sanskrit concept and not the whole concept which gets more and more difficult to even express.
- I also question whether the technicalities can get in the way of the kind of 'innocent' experience related in the first point. I have yet to really reconcile this.
- I am sceptical that learning/memorising hundreds of rupani is going to help much. If you want an authority in support of this view read the first verse of Bhaja Govindam by Shankara!
- bottom line is, I enjoy Sanskrit. It might not be your cup of tea but a small amount of it probably wont harm you too much? I personally view it as a tool to more deeply penetrate the Indian philosophical tradition. It is inevitable, in my view, that even an inspired translation is only partial. Hence, this is the value of the study.
I should say also that a basic understanding of Sanskrit helps enormously if one wants to read the Upanishads or the Gita.
To give just one example, the Brihad. Up says of the self:
Now therefore the description: “Not this, not this.” Because there is no other and more appropriate description than this “Not this.”
Now its secret name: “The Truth of truth”. The vital force is truth, and It is the Truth of that.
There are several points of interest here. Firstly "neti, neti", which most people know is "not this, not this". But if you know Sanskrit you will be aware that what it really says is Na Iti Na Iti. And since "iti" functions as quotation marks, you have the optional translation "No", "No" - just a pure negation.
Secondly, the word translated as vital force is "prana", which could be "breath" or "life", and can be related to the Greek word for spirit "pneuma", which also means "breath" ... and we have the idea of "the breath of God moved on the waters".
Thirdly, the phrase "the Truth of truth" is satyasya satyam, which could also be "the Reality of reality".
Fourthly, the word translated as "secret name" is "Upanishad"
... and so on.
All of this is only open to someone who has Sanskrit. For me, that makes it worthwhile.
Some of us are so ready to bully ourselves with 'the teaching' as received -- 'Sanskrit is the Holy Grail -- why don't I enjoy it ?.. Is there something wrong with me... ?'
There's Sanskrit as grammar; there's Sanskrit as sound; and there's Sanskrit as spiritual information. Some may like one or the other for a start.
I'm all for being laid-back about it; but also, keeping up 'intellectual curiosity' -- let's try it out and see what it does for myself... I guess it's the old 'Don't accept and don't reject, but test it'... I loved it when I sang it to music in ashrams, very devotional under those conditions, and I've never forgotten that experience, so I'm hoping to rekindle that...maybe one day it will be True and Good and Beautiful in one glorious gift-wrapped unity !
And HH does say in another conversation that what is in Sanskrit can be found in other languages -- but, he implies, you have to look harder for it... so we don't have to diss English !
Thank you for all your responses - I feel quite inspired!
Post a Comment