Writing to communicate.

[Guest guest]

Dear Sri Sriram,

 

I am glad you raised an important point regarding the standard manner of writing

of Sanskrit and Tamil words in Roman alphabet.

 

The Tamil language being an original and, differing as it does generically from

Sanskrit , it does not need the letter-defined phonemics of Sanskrit. For

this reason, I consider your statement <Unfortunately Tamil is the corrupting

influence etc> as unfortunate.

 

We are now speaking of language-skills in general. The corruption (as you

describe it) does not lie with the Tamil language, per se, but it issues from

the Tamil-dealer politicians of to-day who have so consistently promoted a

pompous illiteracy as has left every single young person (who could be 50 or

less to-day) incapable of speaking, reading, or writing Tamil itself properly,

and to any purpose whatsoever. I trust you would appreciate that the average

Tamil person commits greater offences in Tamil itself than he does in the

Sanskrit language.

 

The Tamils have denied to themselves the additional nourishment of the Sanskrit

stream, and have become total imbeciles in terms of language skills. Their use

of English is so hilarious as could cure the most confirmed melancholic-and-

depressive manic of their malady. (For this reason, the Tamil language will

never have a proper etymological dictionary, and the personnel of the Tamil Nadu

government outfit set up years ago can do nothing other than draw their salary

from public funds, or anything more precious than swatting of flies and enjoying

their own regular burpings !)

 

The Sanskrit which you have 'in the market' to-day is the gibberish which

supplies (thro the pulp press dispensers, jnAna-this, jnAna-that) the emotional

props to the decadent brahmin (whose conceit is so deep and absurd as to believe

that he is 'born' into Sanskrit) for mumbling thro one or the other of his

uncomprehended rites, sandhyA, pitR-tarpaNam, the numerous planet-placating

(graha-preeti) stOtram etc. This kind of pathetic pseudo-Sanskritism of the

brahmin (who truly cannot distinguish between the family-planning handout in

Hindi from a text of upanishad-bhAshyam) is as deplorable as the pseudo-Arabic

complacency which the Tamil Muslim draws from his unnecessary Urdu jabber.

[Just think of the great Tamil scholars we had in the Muslim community !]

 

You cannot properly Roman-write a Tamil or Sanskrit word unless you know the

Tamil or the Sanskrit word itself properly. The popular brahmin scholars

indulge in ignorant prattle of 'janmA', 'karmA', 'nAmA' all the time, whereas

it should be 'janmam', 'karmam', 'nAmam' (when used in Tamil), which is how they

are rendered in our precious 'aruLi-c-cheyal'. The 'sEvA' monthly steadily

refers to some entity called 'bramhA', which seems to be an assault on the

intended 'brahma' or 'brahmA'. Here is illiteracy with conviction.

 

What is the point in labouring to communicate on 'sampradAya' works when the

reader cannot be certain about how to read basically the bare words that the

writer has written ? On one of my visits to the U.S.(when I had not carried

my core books), I went to a well-known vaishNava website (administered by a

brilliant young scholar I admire) and took a print-out of Sri vEdAntAchArya's

hymn, sudarSanAshTakam. The roman-writing of this precious work was execrable

and I had merely wasted my time in reaching for it and trying to read it.

 

The way out is happily available to us for writing non-English words in Roman.

The non-English words / names are spelt as per the Harvard-Kyoto scheme

dispensing with diacriticals, and this is reportedly adopted in the Cologne

Digital Sanskrit Lexicon. Roughly speaking, here the Upper case represents

accenting or voicing (rAma, aruL, pallANDu, aRam, ANDAL, kaNNan) and 'h' is

added for aspiration (sukham, bhAGyam, rAGhavan, atharva vEdam). The three

Sanskrit sibilants can be written as ~ sahasram, Sree, purusha. There are

minor innovations to take care of special Sanskrit (RGvEdam, kRshNa, dRshTAntam)

and Tamil phonemes.

 

aDiyEn rAmAnuja-dAsan,

tiru-manjanam sundara rAjan,

in SriranGam.

 

-

<ramanuja>

<ramanuja>

Saturday, February 14, 2004 5:59 PM

[ramanuja] Digest Number 735

 

Message: 2

Sat, 14 Feb 2004 06:56:42 +1100

<purohit

Re: Standardisation of Spelling

 

Dear Bhaktargal

 

we really need to start paying more attention to spelling

as well as the pronounciation of Sanskrit names and terms.

 

Unfortunately Tamil is the corrupting influence because of the lack of aspirated

and hard consonants.

 

For example: INDRA in Sanskrit is written as Indhira, Indira, Intra, Inthra,

Intira, Inthira in Tamil. RUDRA is written as Ruthira, Ruthra, Rutra, Rutira,

etc. etc.

 

All our sampradaya terms are dealt with in the same

lackadaisical method.

 

This is very confusing as well as annoying showing a lack of attention to

detail. Kumbhakarna intended to ask for IndrAsana but said NidrAsana instead and

got a different result.

 

Some pronunciations by Tamil speaking pandits can also be hillariously funny:- I

have heard on numerous occasions pandits saying "dArA phalam" instead of

"tArA-balam"!! TArA-balam means the "strength of a certain contellation -

dArA-phalam means "the fruit of a wife".

 

Tamil speakers need to be made aware of these problems and to be encouraged to

attend a few elementary classes in Sanskrit pronunciation.

 

Adiyen

Sriram