[rramadass]

Very True.

This is particularly true when one translates/studies philosophical texts where there are lots of abstract concepts to interpret and more often than not if one doesn't understand the culture and everything it entails, one will make a mess of it.

> In learning a language, you internalize that culture and, even if just a tiny bit, develop an identity as a member of that culture.

This actually explains how Indians practice "Unity in Diversity" via their shared culture. For example, i grew up learning 4 languages viz; Tamil (mother tongue and 1st language), Bengali (since i grew up in West Bengal), English (medium of instruction and 2nd language) and Hindi (3rd language in school). It has given me a certain breadth of mind to appreciate our differences and yet have a shared common identity. A lot of Indians have similar multiple language upbringing and hence it is one of the reasons we can adapt and be successful anywhere in the World.

[DiscourseFan]

Indian philosophy is not translingual though, its all written in one language, Sanskrit, and translated from that language. If anything, Indian philosophy demonstrates hierarchal dominance in its cultural context.

[rramadass]

That is not quite true.

It so happened that much of what has survived under the rubric "Hinduism" (itself an umbrella term for a whole gamut of philosophies, religious beliefs, rituals etc. and everything in between) has been through Sanskrit texts. It does not mean that all the concepts/ideas originated in that language domain. This is why you have the many schools of Hindu Philosophy categorized as orthodox (six recognized) vs. unorthodox (three recognized) and there are still more schools (notably many Tantric philosophies) not recognized under either of the above categories. Given the bewildering diversity of languages in the Indian Subcontinent it is almost certain that Sanskrit texts recast/reformulated philosophies/concepts/ideas from other languages (eg. Tamil and Sanskrit).

The situation is analogous to what happened after the Scientific Revolution where knowledge from German/French/Other European languages got disseminated via the English language through colonialism to the wider world.

[DiscourseFan]

Its possible, but still points towards, as I said, an overall hierarchy rather than a given multiplicity.

[rramadass]

There is no intrinsic "overall hierarchy" but merely a "a posteriori" appearance of one.

[DiscourseFan]

There is no thing in itself here either to which one might ascribe a particular quality. There is a history of violence expressed through the language itself; I am doing my analysis immanently. When I say hierarchy I don't mean hierarchy outside the text.

[rramadass]

Not sure what you are trying to say here. My point was that the fact that most Hindu Philosophy today is studied via the Sanskrit language does not mean all the philosophies/concepts/ideas originated in that medium and by extension in the culture that gave birth to it. It is from an amalgamation of various cultures and their languages from the Indian Subcontinent which has been expressed through Sanskrit texts. One can see this in the evolution of the language itself from Vedic to Classical Sanskrit and influences from Prakrit and Dravidian languages.

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanskrit for details.

Also see Classical Languages of India here - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_of_India