,
8 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
RAM MOHAN ROY wrote following letter to British Prime Minister William Pitt asking to replace Sanskrit with Anglicized education in India. This was 12 years before Macaulay's campaign. Roy did many good things also. But what do you think of this action? groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/…
RM Roy PIONEERED the de-Sanskritizing of Indian education by arguing that Sanskrit was anti-intellectual. Macaulay implemented this. Attached excerpt from @sanjeevsanyal book shows he blindly follows RM Roy. I dont want fight with Sanjeev - he is also doing good things. 
Let us focus on policy issues: Do you agree with the Roy-Macaulay-Sanyal camp that removing Sanskrit was good for India?
While Indian education was de-Sanskritized thanks to Roy-Macaulay, in parallel most major European universities started Sanskrit Chairs. Thus began the Western data-mining of shastras & digestion of Vedic knowledge into Western intellectual property.
I am writing a whole series of book on how Indian knowledge got DIGESTED into Western IPR. I have formulated in detail "The Theory of Digestion". Volume 1 almost ready. This work keeps me from spending time on SM.
Please read my article on GEOPOLITICS & SANSKRIT PHOBIA - delivered in 2005 at World Sanskrit Congress in Bangkok. This started the fight with the Pollock camp, culminating in my 2016 book, "The Battle for Sanskrit".
ERRATA: Roy's letter of 1823 was to the Governor-General of India, NOT to the Prime Minister.
Banning sati is good but how does that require hating Sanskrit & replacing with English medium? Pls see issues separately
