17

I have read/heard in various places that Sanskrit is considered sacred or true or special. These sources sometimes claim that the sounds used to speak Sanskrit have a beneficial effect on the body.

Except for being the language for Hindu religious texts (scripture), does Hinduism regard the Sanskrit language as sacred/true or special in some intrinsic way?

18

Is Sanskrit regarded as sacred?

Yes, Sanskrit is considered as the divine language. The sages in the ancient time realized the Vedas in the form of sound patterns. Those sound patterns expressed in language form came to be known as Sanskrit after much refinement and addition of meaning to the patterns through the use of syntax and grammar.

So Sankrit language, the way it is, creates unique pattern and sound vibrations when used, especially in the chanting of certain mantras. It is also believed that Sanskrit is the language of communication among the gods. So most hymns and mantras for gods are written in Sanskrit language.

Is sanskrit special in some way?

Yes, it is the oldest living language till today. It is the source of many other languages like Pali, Prakruti, etc. Also many other languages used in the north Indian states came into formation from the gradual corruption of Sanskrit.

Sanskrit has also close relationship with other European languages. For example, English "mother" is a cognate of Sanskrit "mātár'; likewise, father-pitár, brother-bhrā́tar, sister-svásar, daughter-duhitár, etc.

This page lists many other specialties of the language.

Referece:
Wikipedia List

  • It is also believed that Sanskrit is the language of communication among the gods. Not for all the gods, though. Lord Karthikeya is regarded as a Tamil god and the Lord of Tamil language. The first Tamil Sangam was led by Lord Shiva and the second one by his son Lord Karthikeya. – Dharmaputhiran Jul 23 '14 at 19:02
  • Sanskrit is the mother of many languages: Bengali, Hindi etc. Sanskrit words are still used in different forms. The HINDI script has been taken from the Sanskrit form. – Shamayeta Jul 24 '14 at 6:28
  • Actually, English is not derived from Sanskrit. There are many words which have common roots found in Sanskrit, Roman and Greek. google.co.in/… – Vineet Menon Aug 15 '14 at 7:06
  • @VineetMenon yes, those English words are not a direct derivation from Sanskrit. The appropriate word would probably be related or cognate. I don't know why I used the word derivation. Thanks for pointing it out. – Be Happy Aug 16 '14 at 3:32
  • 1
    @Dharmaputhiran Yes, Kartikeyya is the originator of Tamil, but that doesn't mean that he uses Tamil to communicate with other gods. – Keshav Srinivasan Aug 16 '14 at 5:56
15

Yes, Sanskrit is special in some intrinsic way. The sounds of its alphabets are such that uttering them mentally causes resonant vibration with the Chakras of the human subtle body. This idea is the very basis of Mantra Sastra.

The most famous example of a Sanskrit mantra is OM. This is the reason why most mantras are in Sanskrit. Sanskrit alphabets (Varnamala) are actually worshipped by Saktas.

Next time you look at a Kali murthi please look at the garland of human skulls. This garland stands for the Sanskrit alphabets. Sound associated with Sanskrit alphabets is considered to be the source of all sounds in mantra sastra. Swami Chetanananda of the Ramakrishna order mentions briefly about the importance of Sanskrit alphabet in this blog.

  • 1
    The sounds of its alphabets are such that uttering them mentally causes resonant vibration with the Chakras of the human subtle body [citation needed]. Also OM can be pronounced in English (or using sounds in other languages) also, what has Sanskrit got to do with it? – user13107 Jul 23 '14 at 6:51
  • 2
    There are many books on mantra sastra. You may consult the series of books written by Sir John Woodroffe (Arthur Avalon). Yes OM can be pronounced in English but it is not an alphabet of the English language. – Pradip Gangopadhyay Jul 23 '14 at 13:46
  • OM doesn't seem to be an individual alphabet as per omniglot.com/writing/sanskrit.htm It's a combination of alphabets I think. Is that correct? – user13107 Jul 23 '14 at 14:41
  • 3
    @user13107, phonetics are not related to any language, but alphabets are. – Vineet Menon Aug 16 '14 at 4:13
  • 2
    @user13107 Om can be in English- no Om can be neither in English, neither Hindi, nor French, nor Sanskrita. The letters of Sanskrita alphabet are phonetic sounds. These are sounds which always exist- like "clue" has three phonetic sounds- क् ल् and उ . This does not mean you pronounce "clue" in sanskrit. The phonetics never change, irrespective of any language. In fact, what we call "Sanskrita alphabet" is in reality the collection of all possible phonetic sounds. – user9392 Oct 8 '17 at 14:54
14

To add support to the above answers, speaking sanskrit language is also meant to be as a kind of yoga for Vocal system.

From Sanskrit Sounds,

Sanskrit is an exquisite language from ancient India. There it is considered divine, originating from the meditations of ancient sages. The word Sanskrit itself means "refined, well done." The alphabet is perfectly designed for the human vocal apparatus, and is pronounced phonetically. Sanskrit shares its script, called Devanāgarī, with Hindi, India's national language.

From VagYoga,

This unique invention is from Rigvedic source through Vagyoga Kundalini. The many hours of memorization have been reduced to minimum because this technique simply utilizes the natural production of the sound & language. The Vagyoga Technique is dependent upon understanding the intrinsic logic of the Sanskrit language through principles and law of Sound-vibration indicated in earliest Vedic literature.

  • "Sanskrit shares its script, called Devanāgarī, with Hindi, India's national language." Since the 19th century by standardization. The first inscriptions seem to be in Brahmi script. (Wikipedia) – Earthliŋ Jul 23 '14 at 11:45
  • @Earthliŋ, India doesn't have a national language, but 18 official language. thehindu.com/news/national/hindi-not-a-national-language-court/… – Vineet Menon Aug 16 '14 at 4:16
  • @VineetMenon Yes, I know. I was quoting from the answer, my point being that the Devanāgarī script only became the standard script for Sanskrit very recently. That Hindi is called "India's national language" is another problem with this passage of text. – Earthliŋ Aug 16 '14 at 12:50
  • @Earthliŋ, okay. my bad. It seems someone has correctled the wiki. – Vineet Menon Aug 16 '14 at 14:06
  • @VineetMenon The error was in the source cited in this answer, the source being a website called Sanskrit Sounds. I only linked to Wikipedia to show that more complete information is even available there. – Earthliŋ Aug 16 '14 at 17:47
4

Please note that I do not mention about the datings and roots where it came from. I will just try to show some valid points.

Sanskrit is special and sacred in many ways. I will try to cite you some examples regarding its speciality. Regarding the sacredness of it, one has to take the words of mahatmas and acharyas as valid, because often scientific explanation may not be possible.

It is the most beautiful, structured and interesting language to learn. The charm of Sanskrit language can be demonstrated using an example. Consider the following sentence

The 'small boy' hit the 'red ball' 'with his bat'

Suppose I form some sentences by just changing the positions of the words.

  1. The small bat hit the red ball with his boy

  2. The small ball hit the red bat with his boy

  3. The red ball hit the small bat with his boy

  4. The red boy hit the small ball with his bat

The meaning is either changed or there is no meaning at all.

If we write the original sentence in sanskrit, it is

लघुः बालकः (small boy) दण्डेन (with his bat) रक्तं कन्दुकं (red ball) प्रहृतवान् ।

let us jumble the words of the above sentence

लघुः बालकः प्रहृतवान् रक्तं कन्दुकं दण्डेन ।

लघुः दण्डेन प्रहृतवान् रक्तं कन्दुकं बालकः ।

लघुः कन्दुकं प्रहृतवान् रक्तं दण्डेन बालकः ।

रक्तं कन्दुकं प्रहृतवान् लघुः दण्डेन बालकः ।

In all the above sentences, the meaning has not changed. लघुः is in prathama vibhakti, बालकः is in prathama vibhakti, so only those two will join but not others. रक्तं is in dvitiya vibhakti, कन्दुकं is in dvitiya vibhakti, and only those two will join. So in this way the meaning is not changed and all the above four sentences are correct. This is the fundamental enabling feature of sanskrit.

So as far as gramatically sentence is not wrong, you can put the words anywhere, they will attach together. That is why sanskrit students are taught padachheda and anvaya (which ones to put together) for a sloka. Because in English the words are words, they donot relate or attach to their subjects or objects.

In Sanskrit, each letter represents one and only one sound. In English, the letter 'a' for example may indicate many sounds (fat, fate, far,etc), but not so in Sanskrit. The alphabet is systematically arranged according to the structure of the mouth. It is essential to use the correct mouth position and not to merely imitate an approximation of the sound.

There are many such specialities. That is why learning Sanskrit is not merely language, but it is the science of sound. One has to experience it and know it.

3

I would like to mention what Swami Vivekananda said about Sanskrit on various occasions to enunciate its importance:

This Sanskrit language is so intricate, the Sanskrit of the Vedas is so ancient, and the Sanskrit philology so perfect, that any amount of discussion can be carried on for ages in regard to the meaning of one word. If a Pandit takes it into his head, he can render anybody's prattle into correct Sanskrit by force of argument and quotation of texts and rules.

In philology, our Sanskrit language is now universally acknowledged to be the foundation of all European languages, which, in fact, are nothing but jargonized Sanskrit.

God spoke once. He spoke in Sanskrit, and that is the divine language.

Just look at Sanskrit. Look at the Sanskrit of the Brâhmanas, at Shabara Swâmi's commentary on the Mimâmsâ philosophy, the Mahâbhâshya of Patanjali, and, finally, at the great Commentary of Achârya Shankara: and look also at the Sanskrit of comparatively recent times. You will at once understand that so long as a man is alive, he talks a living language, but when he is dead, he speaks a dead language.

The great difficulty in the way is the Sanskrit language — the glorious language of ours; and this difficulty cannot be removed until — if it is possible — the whole of our nation are good Sanskrit scholars. You will understand the difficulty when I tell you that I have been studying this language all my life, and yet every new book is new to me. How much more difficult would it then be for people who never had time to study the language thoroughly!

The one idea the Hindu religions differ in from every other in the world, the one idea to express which the sages almost exhaust the vocabulary of the Sanskrit language, is that man must realise God even in this life.

The very sound of the Sanskrit is musical.

The very sound of Sanskrit words gives a prestige and a power and a strength to the race.

http://www.swamivivekanandaquotes.org/2013/12/swami-vivekananda-sanskrit-language.html

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .