2.5.1 general topics on language

Q: Is humanity's loss of linguistic diversity a natural result of growing cosmopolitanism and to be accepted, or does it represent loss of cultural vitality and therefore should be resisted?

Many cultures have grown up upon this planet due to three factors. One is spatial: they have grown independently due to physical isolation from one and another. That is the primary factor. Secondly, they have grown independently with independent culture, independent language, independent modalities of thinking, due to the influence of the environment. So when people live in the far north, the culture that they develop and the language that they develop will be very different than those people who live in the equatorial region. So you will not find that the people of the far north and the people of the equatorial region are similar in culture. They will be diverse. And why? Not only because they are physically separated, but because there is a great deal of difference in the environment in which they live, the plants that surround them, the animals that they are exposed to. The factors in their lives and the climate differs greatly so that in the far north they may have ten words for different types of snowstorms, and in the equatorial region they may not even have the word for snow in the language. So the needs of one culture and the needs of another are very different, and thus their language has evolved in a different way with different emphasis, different approaches, that reflect the common approach of the people that have been developed collectively over the years. It also reflects the circumstances and situations in which those people are living.

Now, there is a third reason for this diversity. Not only is there a spatial separation and environmental differences, but there are also biological differences. Compare the people in one region and their particular evolution to the people in another region and their particular evolution. One grouping of people may, due to their adaptation to the environment, have developed certain qualities and characteristics which make them best suited to their environment. For example, the people may be very hardy and have a great deal of endurance, and living in the far north they may be able to take the harsh weather of that climate, and they are geared to the climate, they are adapted to the environment. Whereas the people in the southern climate, were they transported to the northern climate, they would be overcome by the harsh circumstance. And the people in the northern climate, were they to live in the southern climate, they would be burnt by the sun, they would develop cancers in the skin, they would have so many problems.

So, over the years, these different cultures adapted to different environments, producing different language, and even affecting the biology of the people who live in the regions as they physically adapted. But as time goes on and the peoples of this world are becoming more and more interwoven and connected through communications, the need has arisen for a common language, a language in which all the people may address each other. And due to modern technology, the people are roaming from place to place, so that the people whose fathers and mothers who have lived in the equatorial region may themselves live in a northern country, and likewise the northern people may live in the southern region.

So the world becomes more and more a mixed environment, and all of these different cultures, different peoples who have grown up in these particular different cultures are coming up against each other. Someone may be coming into the culture who is foreign to that place, and likewise the people are moving from that culture to the foreign places. So what is happening is that there is the development of a world culture. It is not regional, it is not national, but, with the development in technologies which promote communications and ease travel, there is the development of a world culture, and you will see it will grow over time.

But, you know, this world culture will not supersede the roots from which it has come. So though there is a world culture, though the people may mix with each other and develop a one world culture and a common language (because with this the need arises for a common language in which all of the people may express themselves, so uniformity of culture and language comes about), this does not negate the need for identity with a particular clan, culture, or area. This is a basic human need, to feel that there is a place of your origin - a place you may call home. In this way, the sentimental value of culture and traditions is very important to the people for their psychological development.

But, for practical purposes, as the world becomes more and more integrated, the common language and the uniformity of culture will grow and should grow. It is not a loss. It reflects the unity of human beings, and it is better that human beings see their unity with other human beings rather than that they emphasize their diversity.

But it is also important that the cultural heritage of each and every group of people be respected and that no one's culture, no one's heritage be looked down upon. It is very important for human beings to have a place which they identify as their home and the home of their ancestors, to have customs and language and all manner of things which makes them different from others, which makes them unique, which gives them a sense of place and community. These can be important as long as they do not become destructive, as long as there is not the tendency to gather one against the other.

This is why there is the need for a world order, a world order in which all of these different communities may live in peace with each other, no one taking advantage of the other but living in mutual respect for each other. There is the need for more and more closeness between human beings, and this comes through the integration of one group with another. So this breaking down of the barriers between the cultures is a very positive movement, and the development of a universal language is also a positive movement. The human society is upon the verge of becoming a true society, a united society, a conscious society. Given a little more development, this may happen.

This development of universal language and the development of a cultural uniformity is a part and parcel of becoming one human society. The cultural diversity should be maintained - but within this larger context, not opposed to the larger context. Because, if the identification with a regional language, culture, art is so dominant that there is the desire to break away from the society at large, then there is the risk of the degeneration of society into a feudal community in which one small kingdom fights against another until they are all fighting for who is the best, who has got the superior art, the superior language. They begin to think the others are less than human and that their own language, their own people, and their own culture is the best. This kind of sentiment, this geo-sentiment, when it grows dominant over the universal sentiment, becomes destructive.

So it is good and well to have this identity with one's home and with one's place of origin, language of origin, culture of origin. But the greater identity should be universal, with all human beings, with all creatures of this world. So this trend is beneficial, not harmful. And it reflects the progressive movement of humanity, as long as there is not the suppression of local culture.

Q: Is Sanskrit the most appropriate language now for a world language?

Language must reflect the needs of the people, the culture of the people, the different aspects of the people. So if there is a one world government, if there is a culture which develops upon the planet that meets the mutual needs of all the people of the planet, this language must suit the thinking of all the people and reflect their thinking. English is a developed language and does very well in certain areas. But it also lacks in other areas. So for this there needs to be adaptation of the language. Sanskrit brings more precision in describing certain types of phenomenon; it is more scientific in understanding subtle phenomenon. It may be incorporated, or both languages modified together for a future language which will be, perhaps, a conglomerate of many languages and new adaptations. But this will evolve over time.

As the shift in consciousness occurs in people and the desire to express more subtle aspects of consciousness becomes more dominant in the human mind collectively, there will be adaptations of language accordingly.