Colonisation of Sanskrit words: Distorting Dharma, Rashtra, and the soul of Bharat

Language shapes a civilization’s worldview, and Sanskrit, the foundation of Bharat’s knowledge systems, embodies millennia of wisdom. Colonial rule distorted key Sanskrit terms through Eurocentric and Abrahamic interpretations, reducing profound concepts like Dharma, Rashtra, and Swarajya to Western equivalents.

This linguistic colonization misrepresented Bhartiya thought and disrupted societal structures and public understanding in post-colonial Bharat.

1. Dharma ≠ Religion

Perhaps the most damaging mistranslation is the equating of Dharma with ‘religion’. In reality, Dharma refers to the cosmic order, righteousness, duty, ethical living, and the path of self-realization. It is not tied to belief systems, deities, or dogmas. Dharma is contextual—what is Dharma for a teacher is different from that of a ruler or a child. It is a code of conduct embedded in time, place, and identity (svadharma). The Abrahamic idea of ‘religion’, based on exclusive truth claims, worship of a single God, and rigid institutional structures, is fundamentally different. By forcefully mapping Dharma onto ‘religion’, colonial and missionary forces created deep confusion, codified personal laws based on rigid texts, and set the stage for communal divisions.

2. Rashtra and Desha ≠ Nation or Country

The Sanskrit Rashtra does not merely mean “nation” in the European sense. A Rashtra is a sacred, cultural, and civilizational entity rooted in Dharma and shared spiritual values. It is not bound by geopolitical boundaries but by a consciousness—Bharat has been a Rashtra long before it became a “nation-state”. The European model of a nation—emerging from treaties, colonialism, and power politics—views the state as a legal and administrative structure. This model was imposed on Bharat, diminishing its deep-rooted civilizational unity based on spiritual and cultural coherence, not political uniformity.

Similarly, Desha simply refers to land or region, and was never a fixed nationalistic construct. By equating Rashtra and Desha with “nation” or “country,” we began to measure Bharat using foreign yardsticks, erasing the soul from the body.

3. Swarajya ≠ Freedom

The word Swarajya, made famous by Bal Gangadhar Tilak and later echoed by Sri Aurobindo, was not just political independence. Swa-rajya means “self-rule” at both individual and collective levels. It implies inner sovereignty—the mastery of one’s senses, mind, and actions—as well as freedom from external domination.

Colonial powers reduced Swarajya to mere political ‘freedom’, akin to European notions of liberty or civil rights. But Bharatiya thought considers freedom incomplete unless it is accompanied by Swatantrata (self-dependence) and Atma-nirbharta (self-realization and self-sufficiency).

Today, even after political independence, the absence of Swarajya in intellectual, cultural, and economic spheres reflects a deeper bondage. True Swarajya begins with cultural decolonization.

4. Sanskriti ≠ Culture

Sanskriti refers to refinement, inner evolution, and civilizational maturity. It comes from the root “kr” (to do) with the prefix “sam” (well) — meaning “well-crafted” or “refined behavior and thought.” Sanskriti embodies values, traditions, ethics, arts, sci ences, and collective memory rooted in Dharma. The English term ‘culture’ is often limited to external expressions—art, music, food, fashion, or festivals. It is secular, often aesthetic, and lacks the depth of inner evolution that Sanskriti demands.

By substituting Sanskriti with “culture,” we risk trivializing the soul of Bharatiya civilization, reducing it to “cultural programs” or tourist-friendly “heritage” rather than a way of life shaped by spiritual philosophy and lived wisdom.

5. Darshan ≠ Philosophy

Darshan literally means “to see” or “vision”. In Bharatiya tradition, it refers to experiential systems of viewing reality—not speculative philosophy but intuitive insight into the nature of existence. The six schools of Darshan (Nyaya, Vaisheshika, Sankhya, Yoga, Mimamsa, Vedanta) are both logical and experiential.

Western ‘philosophy’ derives from philo (love) and sophia (wisdom), but is often academic, analytical, and detached from practice. When Darshan is translated as “philosophy,” the spiritual and experiential core of Bharatiya knowledge is lost.

For instance, Yoga is not a “philosophy” or “exercise” routine—it is a Darshan, a living system to experience and attain liberation (moksha). Reducing Darshan to speculative thought undermines its transformative potential.

6. Jāti ≠ Caste

Jāti refers to community, often based on occupation, locality, and shared customs. It was never a static or rigid birth-based system. With thousands of jātis across Bharat, the system was fluid, and social mobility was possible. The British censuses and legal codes rigidified jāti into “caste”—a term borrowed from Portuguese casta, meaning breed or race. This racialized the Indian social structure and created a hierarchical system that aligned with colonial control mechanisms. The distorted caste system we see today is a colonial construct, not a native one. By fixing jātis into permanent social categories, colonizers divided our society to rule it more easily. This division still exploited today for political gain.

7. Karma ≠ Fate

Karma means action. It is a law of cause and effect, empowering individuals to shape their destiny through their actions, thoughts, and intentions. It places moral and ethical responsibility on every being.

Colonial translators, unfamiliar with the concept, portrayed Karma as “fate” or “destiny”—a passive acceptance of suffering. This misinterpretation painted Bharatiyas as fatalistic, submissive people who accepted oppression as karmic justice.

In truth, Karma is not about helplessness but accountability. The colonial view undermined agency and created the illusion that Bharatiya society was inherently submissive.

8. Guru ≠ Teacher

A Guru is not just a teacher, but a remover of darkness (gu = darkness, ru = remover). The Guru leads the disciple on a spiritual journey, imparting not just knowledge but wisdom, transformation, and inner awakening. Western education views the teacher as an instructor, often limited to subject matter expertise. The colonial system replaced the sacred Guru-shishya parampara with formal classroom models, devoid of emotional bonding, spiritual connection, or ethical training.

9. Moksha ≠ Heaven

Moksha is liberation—freedom from the cycle of birth and death, realization of the Self, and unity with the infinite consciousness (Brahman) which is the ultimate goal. ‘Heaven’ in Abrahamic faiths is a reward for belief and good conduct, often a physical paradise. By equating moksha with heaven, the colonial mindset turned a deep philosophical goal into a simplistic post-death reward. The colonization of Sanskrit terms was not accidental; it was a deliberate act of erasing indigenous worldviews and replacing them with Western frameworks. This has led to decades of misunderstanding among foreigners including Bharatvasis.

Correcting the colonial distortion of Sanskrit terms requires educational reforms, responsible media and academic usage, active efforts by cultural institutions to decolonize vocabulary, and a shift in public discourse beyond colonial binaries. Reclaiming the true essence of words like Dharma, Rashtra, Sanskriti, and Swarajya is not just about language, it is key to Bharat’s civilizational revival through authentic reinterpretation and not mere revivalism.

(The writer is an Expert, Creative Economy)