The third important development for the case of Sanskrit to be examined is the landmark Judgment of 4th October 1994 by the Supreme Court on Sanskrit. This shows how all was not well or smooth sailing for the teaching of Sanskrit as a part of the Indian school curriculum. The attack against Sanskrit went as far as an appeal against teaching it in the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) on the grounds that it was against secularism. It needed a Judgment of the Supreme Court of India to refute the absurd proposition that it was not against secularism to teach Sanskrit in our schools.
The Court completely refuted the claims that teaching Sanskrit was against secularism because Arabic or Persian were not accorded a similar status in the educational system. The Court said “a secular state is not hostile to religion but holds itself neutral in matters of religion” (Para 16). It quoted from the Sanskrit Commission’s Report to show that Sanskrit was a binding and unifying force in India. Paragraphs 19 and 20 of the judgment spelt out the views of the Court in no uncertain terms:
19. From what has been stated above, we entertain no doubt in our mind that teaching of Sanskrit alone as an elective subject can in no way be regarded as against secularism. Indeed, our constitution requires giving of fillip to Sanskrit because of what has been stated in Article 351, in which while dealing with the duty of the Union to promote the spread of Hindi, it has been provided that, it would draw, whenever necessary or desirable, for its vocabulary, primarily on Sanskrit. Encouragement to Sanskrit is also necessary because of it being one of the languages included in the Eighth Schedule.
20. We, therefore, conclude by saying that in view of importance of Sanskrit for nurturing our cultural heritage, because of which even the official education policy has highlighted the need of study of Sanskrit, making of Sanskrit alone as an elective subject, while not conceding this status to Arabic and/or Persian, would not in any way militate against the basic tenet of secularism.
This verdict was delivered by Justice Kuldip Singh and Justice B. L. Hansaria in response to a write petition filed by Shri Santosh Kumar and others in 1989 against the Secretary, Ministry of Human Resources Development, and Government of India.
The next notable instance of the Union of India addressing the issue of Sanskrit is the setting up of the National Mission for Manuscripts by the NDA Government in 2003. The decline of Sanskrit in India was a direct consequence of colonial rule. The position of Sanskrit as India’s pre-eminent intellectual language was dislodged by English as a direct consequence of the Imperial policy. It might have been expected therefore that sufficient resources and attention would be devoted to the study and revival of Sanskrit in independent India. However, B. Bhattacharya in his book Sanskrit Culture in a Changing World writes that at the time of writing the book there were at least one million manuscripts in public and private libraries in India and abroad. 95% of these manuscripts are languishing unread and non-translated. Today many of these treasures belonging not only to India but also to the world have probably been lost. The Government’s efforts to change this situation of neglect are only as recent as in the establishment of the National Missions for Manuscripts in 2003.
According to the mission statement of NMM:
The National Mission for Manuscripts was launched in February 2003 by the Ministry of Culture, Government of India, to save this most valuable but less visible of our cultural inheritances.
An ambitious five-year project, the Mission seeks not merely to locate, catalogue and preserve India’s manuscripts, but also to enhance access, spread awareness and encourage their use for educational purposes. Working with specially identified Manuscript Resource Centers (MRCs) and Manuscript Conservation Centers (MCCs) in states all over the country, the Mission has collected data on manuscripts located in a variety of places, from universities and libraries to Temples, Mathas, Madrasas, Monasteries and private collections.
Interestingly, the mission statement does not use the word Sanskrit anywhere. But since the majority of the rarest of Indian manuscripts are in Sanskrit, it is assumed that the work will concentrate on Sanskrit. However, the fact that this is nowhere openly stated shows, once again, the ambivalence of our “secular” culture towards our identity and heritage.
Interestingly, contrary to what is popularly thought, the Government recognized Sanskrit as a classical language only as recently as 27th October 2005. Tamil, in fact, had been recognized as a classical language before Sanskrit.
Sanskrit has been since ancient times the link language of the whole subcontinent. Therefore Sanskrit has been a binding force throughout the history of India. Again, like English, Sanskrit is India’s link language, but unlike English it is both native to India and co-extensive with the entire civilizational trajectory of the subcontinent
Sanskrit language has immense potential for every Indian to feel part of one heritage system but at the same time belonging to the rich regional cultural ethos. We can feel proud of a great and magnificent heritage, which is surely the best in the world in every field of arts, culture, science and society and to which every region of India has contributed. With advent of Amrut Kaal we can also look to the future with the confidence that this mighty nation will rise again and attain a glory far greater than ever attained in the past, and in which every Indian has a role to play. Sanskrit has always acted as Sutra in Mala (Garland), called Bharat.