rambabu wrote:

Gulshan Kumar Ajmani wrote:

anil wrote:

chinmoymukherjee wrote:Saffronizing education is nether a goal worth striving for nor is it feasible in today's realities.Verification is just one click away!! Similarly laying importance on Sanskrit is not saffronization. Its literature continues to captivate the imagination of the cerebral world by being an ocean of knowledge encompassing all brunches of it,accommodating all strands and shades of views and philosophies.However it has lost its spoken status as a language for ever.

Sanskrit is a language like other languages. First, how many students are interested in reading languages. Maths, English, is much more important for students. 

Sanskrit is not like other languages. This is extinct and used only for ceremonial, decorative or religious rituals. 

Sanskrit cannot be dismissed simply as a dead language. It did not lose its relevance even today. It is listed as one of the 22 scheduled languages of India. It is the official language of Uttarakhand. The Sahitya Academy if India has given an Award for the best creative work in sanskrit every year since 1967.

I said this is merely ceremonial, extinct language used only for religious rituals. Uttranchal Govt. declared Sanskrit as associate official language. This is also just decorative as not a single govt communique seems to have been issued by Uttarakhand govt. so far in Sanskrit. Neither govt. nor legislative assembly does anything in Sanskrit. This is listed in constitution but not in use anywhere. So does this not imply that this is just symbolic or decorative. However I agree that Sanskrit may be useful for study of ancient books or topics written in ancient period in this language. Even then this will be restricted to select scholars in ancient studies and this will never be of common use in present days. This suffices to say that this is extinct.  

 

Extinct!! It is gone and dead??? Truer than truth itself!!

When millions of homes and houses still reverberate,resonate with the mellifluous chanting of slokas and mantras with occasions of births,death and

others in between in this language.When millions flock to temples and other places with prayers on their lips in this language. When some of our grratest modern literateurs drew and still draw inspiration from original Sanskrit literature. Yet we are funnily claiming it is extinct!! As I have already held it has lost its spoken status as a language but India won't be Bharat without Sanskrit!!!

I guess people have started to believe that we live in India that was Bharat once. The day we have faith in ourselves, everything will be back on track including some of the lost tolerance which we keep talking about but having only one-way lane, leading to nowhere.

chinmoymukherjee wrote:

Extinct!! It is gone and dead??? Truer than truth itself!!

When millions of homes and houses still reverberate,resonate with the mellifluous chanting of slokas and mantras with occasions of births,death and

others in between in this language.When millions flock to temples and other places with prayers on their lips in this language. When some of our grratest modern literateurs drew and still draw inspiration from original Sanskrit literature. Yet we are funnily claiming it is extinct!! As I have already held it has lost its spoken status as a language but India won't be Bharat without Sanskrit!!!

I have not denied that this language is used for rituals on birth, death etc. You have your self admitted that this has lost status of spoken language. Also nobody uses this for any purpose other than rituals or prayers. That is why this is extinct. 

Also how many understand what is being said?

If someone labors under his or her misconception as to the true status of a language and obstinately claims that the loss of spoken status of it as a measure of its importance in the historical perspective to the point of pooh-poohing it as an extinct language ,there is hardly anything left for me to defend my stand! The entire problem owes its genesis to the judgemental fallacy of

equating it with a particular religion which it essentially and factually is not in complete disregard of its historical and civilizational value.

As a spoken language and practical use, there is no doubt that Sanskrit is a dead language. This lives only as a symbolic religious language used for rituals on birth, marriage and death. I don't know whether any one can explain its more use in contemporary India. Something that is not used is called dead or extinct,howsoever you may love that.

However there is controversy.  The fact of its use on ceremonial occasions, in rituals and declaration as official language in some states though not actually used in any official communication are considered as evidence of living language. Ut will be interesting to readfollowing extract from wikipedia: 

"There are a number of sociolinguistic studiesof spoken Sanskrit which strongly suggest that oral use of modern Sanskrit is limited, having ceased development sometime in the past.   

Sheldon Pollock argues that "most observers would agree that, in some crucial way, Sanskrit is dead". Pollock has further argued that, while Sanskrit continued to be used in literary cultures in India, it was never adapted to express the changing forms of subjectivity and sociality as embodied and conceptualised in the modern age.^[18]:416 Instead, it was reduced to "reinscription and restatements" of ideas already explored, and any creativity was restricted to hymns and verses.^[18]:398 A notable exception are the military references of Nīlakaṇṭha Caturdhara's 17th-century commentary on theMahābhārata.^[50]

Pollock's characterisation has been contested by other authors like Hanneder and Hatcher, who point out that modern works continue to be produced in Sanskrit.^[51]

On a more public level the statement that Sanskrit is a dead language is misleading, for Sanskrit is quite obviously not as dead as other dead languages and the fact that it is spoken, written and read will probably convince most people that it cannot be a dead language in the most common usage of the term. Pollock's notion of the "death of Sanskrit" remains in this unclear realm between academia and public opinion when he says that "most observers would agree that, in some crucial way, Sanskrit is dead."

— Hanneder^[52]

Hanneder has also argued that modern works in Sanskrit are either ignored or their "modernity" contested.^[53]

When the British imposed a Western-style education system in India in the nineteenth century, knowledge of Sanskrit and ancient literature continued to flourish as the study of Sanskrit changed from a more traditional style into a form of analytical and comparative scholarship mirroring that of Europe.

It is another tragic aspect of our character that we continue to look to Western scholars for sanction of our own legitimate logical and valid ideas and thoughts.Even an overwhelming majority of them ,initially committing the error of judgement of treating it as the language of the priests and astrologers,stumbled upon its vast literature depicting the life  of people who were gifted with deeper insight,creativity and imagination.Their open-minded and none-judgemental approach to life encouraged thoughts on non- religiou

chinmoymukherjee wrote:

It is another tragic aspect of our character that we continue to look to Western scholars for sanction of our own legitimate logical and valid ideas and thoughts.Even an overwhelming majority of them ,initially committing the error of judgement of treating it as the language of the priests and astrologers,stumbled upon its vast literature depicting the life  of people who were gifted with deeper insight,creativity and imagination.Their open-minded and none-judgemental approach to life encouraged thoughts on non- religiou

 

Nobody denies the richness of Sanskrit. But how can you say that a language no more capable of communication is alive. Being rich and containing valuable knowledge does not amount to status of living language. Language is a means of communication and medium of instruction and administration. Sanskrit is not spoken language. Sanskrit is not used in govt offices even if declared as second or third official language.  Sanskrit is not medium of instruction in any school. In this scenario, I wonder how you call this living language. A rich language can also be instinct. This is just as Dhirubhai Ambani is not living though very rich.