Are we at the 'effect' of language or at the 'source' of it.
Does language confine us or set us free? Can language be sacred as say Sanskrit (said to be the closest language to Welsh/Cymraeg)is thought to be sacred? Why did it develop and are we any good at using it? Do we communicate well with language? Do we maintain patterns of struggle by using language the wrong way - words such as 'success', 'better', 'best',
'failure', 'achievement', and so on ... patterns of survival?
Should we use language to free ourselves, to explore who we are, to be who we are, or become who we can be? Does language set us free? We are sometimes overly preoccupied with 'getting it right' .. afraid of being 'wrong'ofbeing 'misunderstood', 'misinterpreted', 'confusing',
'too serious', 'too glib'... always this overriding analytical bite attached to it all.. so language becomes an instrument for survival - a stressful interraction - of course once we become emancipated from 'caring' whether or not it all matters, then we are free to express whatever we like - aren't we?
Is there a sacred 'I' that is muted by survival. Is there a way of making language sacred? Who controls the mouth? Language or 'I'?
Vyaas Houston, M.A.
States that "What makes a language sacred is how we use it. If a language is used to discover the sacredness of life, it becomes a sacred language. Whether or not a language is sacred is determined by who is using it. This in turn has a great deal to do with whether a language is being used consciously or unconsciously, whether we use language as an instrument to accomplish our real purpose in life, that is, wake up and find out who we are; or we are unconsciously programmed by language, to maintain patterns of a struggle for individual survival established by previous generations."
