A group of mostly Indian Americans led by Rajiv Malhotra recently published a book called Ten Heads of Ravana: A Critique of Hinduphobic Scholars. Written in English, the book criticises ten scholars, including Romila Thapar, Irfan Habib, Shashi Tharoor, Ramachandra Guha, Devdutt Pattanaik, Sheldon Pollock, Wendy Doniger, Audrey Truschke, Michael Witzel, and this author.
Malhotra and his team attack these scholars by comparing them to the mythological character Ravana and accusing them of killing Dharma, which they derived from ancient Sanskrit books. In the introduction, Malhotra writes, “The ten contemporary scholars in this book have been chosen because their work includes aspects that many Hindus today consider adharmic, just as the historical Ravana was perceived in his times.”
Notably, the four foreign scholars targeted in the book have worked on Sanskrit and taught the language in various Western universities for quite a long time. On the other hand, Malhotra owns a financial network called Infinity Foundation in America and runs Garuda Prakashan in Delhi, which has published the book.
Now the question is: Why did these Sanskrit-loving Indian Americans not write their book in Sanskrit? They write books in English and attack the language as colonial. They praise Sanskrit as a great global living language but never use it in any text. When Sheldon Pollock called Sanskrit a dead language in modern times, he was not wrong. How many households are there in India where family members communicate in Sanskrit or use it in their daily lives?
The problem with these pseudo-intellectuals is that they think abuse is analysis. By writing this book, they have exposed only themselves, not Romila Thapar, Irfan Habib, Shashi Tharoor, Ramachandra Guha, Sheldon Pollock, Wendy Doniger, Devdutt Pattanaik, Audrey Truschke, Michael Witzel, or this author.
Linguicide, the death of any language, occurs when there are no surviving native speakers of a language. However, Sanskrit’s linguicide has been orchestrated by a group of people who used it to maintain hegemonic control. Historically, Sanskrit was controlled by Brahminic writers who restricted access to it and denied the ancient Shudras and Dalits the opportunity to read or write in the language. Sanskrit was treated as the exclusive property of Brahmins and Kshatriyas, primarily Brahmins.
Also read: India’s Brahmins, Baniyas gained from English. BJP-RSS want to deny that to Dalits, Adivasis
Brahmins killed Sanskrit
Now, they no longer use Sanskrit for writing books with social or academic significance. Essentially, they are consciously responsible for the demise of their own language while continuing to blame the rest of the world for its death. In post-colonial India, no single Brahmin has written any meaningful modern book in Sanskrit.
Contrastingly, other cultures like Jews write globally popular modern books in Hebrew, such as Yuval Noah Harari’s influential work, Sapiens – A Brief History of Humankind, which was originally written in Hebrew and later translated into numerous languages worldwide. Greeks write in Greek, and Arabs write in Arabic. But Brahmins do not write in Sanskrit. Why is it so? Is it because they hate the language but continue to praise it to deceive the gullible Shudra/Dalit/Adivasi masses?
Brahminic intellectuals, supported financially and institutionally by the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), consciously emphasise and glorify only the Sanskrit past while disregarding India’s agrarian and artisanal history. They claim that Sanskrit is the richest and greatest language in the world. These intellectuals propagate the notion that all globally available knowledge in various disciplines was originally stolen from Sanskrit texts—Vedas, Upanishads, Brahmanas, Ramayana, and Mahabharata. Even their scientists claim that all modern science is available in ancient Sanskrit books. Yet, how many of these scholars have actually read those books in Sanskrit?
If Sanskrit possesses such immense creative energy, why do Indian Brahmins, who are now spread across the world, leave the global philosophical and intellectual space to individuals like Harari? They could write remarkable books in Sanskrit and demonstrate its richness compared to Hebrew, Greek, and Arabic. Instead of writing quality books in Sanskrit, why do they choose to write in English, a language they frequently criticise as a colonial language?
Sanskrit was considered a “father tongue” rather than a “mother tongue” throughout its history in India. This applies even to Dwija families (Brahmin, Kshatriya, Bania, Kayastha, and Khatri). It is important to remember that Sanskrit was never allowed to become a “mother tongue” even within Brahmin families, as it was never used as a language for everyday communication or in the household. A language can only be considered a “mother tongue” if it is regularly used in daily life within the home, including communication between a mother and her child while breastfeeding. Was Sanskrit ever used by any mother in India to communicate with her child during breastfeeding?
When Sanskrit was not allowed to become a “mother tongue” even within Brahmin households, the question of its adoption in production fields among the Shudra/Dalit/Adivasi communities throughout history did not arise. There was a severe prohibition on the use of this language among agrarian and artisanal communities since the composition of the first Sanskrit book—the Rigveda. Prior to the composition of the Rigveda, the status of Sanskrit as a language was largely unknown.
Also read: Brahmins on India’s elite campuses say studying science is natural to upper castes: Study
Not your Amrit Kaal
Given these circumstances, one must question why this group of Indian Americans, which identifies itself as a protector of civilisation, does not write their books in Sanskrit. This team aims to decolonise the Indian mindset, primarily consisting of individuals living in America, Europe, Canada, or Australia, and mobilising financial resources. Why do they not send their children to Sanskrit schools and universities established in India? Instead, why do they choose to send their children to prestigious American universities?
These individuals who have written Ten Heads of Ravana accuse the scholars of being ignorant about India’s civilisation that comes from Sanskrit books. But what do they mean by civilisation? Can civilisation be built through books? Interestingly, in their entire discourse on civilisation, there is no mention of the role of agriculture, science, and technology—the very foundations built by ancient Shudras, Dalits, and Adivasis. Even a cursory reading of any translation of Sanskrit books indicates the absence of social forces from the Shudra, Dalit, and Adivasi communities. These books primarily focus on two castes, Brahmins and Kshatriyas, centered around themes of war, yagnas, and kratus. However, the entire systems of food production, gathering, and animal grazing are completely absent from these books.
All Hindutva writers accuse those who view civilisation from an agrarian, artisanal, and animal economy perspective as being anti-national. Since I keep writing about the agrarian, artisanal and animal economy, while living in India, they call me “Bharat Vikhander”. They behave as if they are sustaining themselves solely by consuming the pages of Sanskrit books. It is crucial to acknowledge that all human beings, including these Hindutva writers, survive on the food produced by Dalit, Adivasi, and Shudra agrarian masses. Even during the composition of the Vedas, the composers relied on food produced by Shudras for their survival. How could they have composed books in which the very food producers were absent?
These forces are internationalising their hypocrisy and constructing a literary treasure trove filled with myths. They want the world to believe that India sustained itself by consuming the Amrutam (elixir) that emerged from the churning of the seas. They never write about those who tilled the land, produced meat and milk through animal grazing, or crafted the ornaments worn by the kings and queens who supposedly lived in that “Sanskrit Age”.
Ironically, these Indian American elites, particularly members of the Infinity Foundation who oppose anti-caste laws in the US, refer to themselves as “Intellectual Kshatriyas”. Isn’t that casteism? Dalits, Adivasis, and Shudras are not interested in your Sanskrit Age. They want to move forward into the English Age, displace these forces from all centres of knowledge production, and establish a connection between food production and knowledge production.
This is not the Amrit Kaal; it is, in fact, the Shudra Kaal. In this era, production is not pollution, as depicted in Sanskrit books. Here, production is sacred.
Kancha Ilaiah Shepherd is a political theorist, social activist and author. His latest book is The Shudras—Vision For a New Path co-edited with Karthik Raja Karuppusamy. He is currently working on a book, The Shudra Rebellion—History From Field Memories. Views are personal.
(Edited by Prashant)