Extracted from Save Humanity (2007 publication)
I make a small departure from the popular approach, and I need to explain my reasons for that. Popular English spelling "Krishna" Dharma" "Yoga" etc. lead to a specific type of distortion in pronunciation, and therefore, I use "Krishn" "Dharm" "Yog" etc. It is not out of my ignorance that I do so. I am aware, why "a" is added at the end of many Sanskrit terms while presenting them in English alphabet. I have nothing against this approach, in theory. But this approach has led to a serious problem while it has been put into practice. Why do I call it a serious problem? Not to provide extra weight to my view point. It is truly a serious problem though most people do not realize it. Let me explain what makes it a serious problem.
Sanskrit is a scientifically phonetic language, while English is not. What do I mean by scientifically phonetic language? Let me explain. Take any word written in Sanskrit original script and try to read it aloud. The vocal sound it will produce will be exactly as it is written on paper. Needless to mention, that it will happen if you know how to pronounce a Sanskrit alphabet correctly. Thus, scientifically phonetic, or phonetically scientific, would mean in layman's language, that "you pronounce as you see".
In English it is very different. You do not pronounce it as you see it written. There are plenty of examples. You write 'put' and 'but' the same way but pronounce them differently. You do not pronounce the way you write 'metre' or 'litre'. You can fill pages after pages. Thus, English is phonetically unscientific or unscientifically phonetic language. It is a different matter that the English language was developed by people of far less calibre than the people who developed the Sanskrit language.
When we add "a" at the end of any Sanskrit term we forget one important thing. That is, phonetic conventions. Let me explain this. Why we began putting 'tailing-a’[1] for many a Sanskrit terms? What we wanted to achieve by that? We wanted to protect the phonetic integrity of Sanskrit terms. Did we attain our goal? The answer is a big 'NO'. Rather we corrupted it further. How? We will explain. But, let us first explain 'why'?
Each language is governed by its own phonetic convention. Let us take a familiar example: Hindi and Sanskrit. The basic difference in pronunciation tradition of the two languages is what the learned call as something like 'Halant’[2] where 't' is soft pronounced as हलंत. Similarly, English language has its own phonetic traditions. One of such tradition is to pronounce a 'tailing-a' as 'long-a’[3]. When a reader looks at a Sanskrit term spelt in English alphabet with a 'tailing-a', he tends to pronounce it with 'long-a' emphasis. As a result he pronounces it as कृष्णा instead of कृष्ण.
Now, this is done not only by people who do not know as to how कृष्ण should be pronounced but also by those who are learned in Sanskrit. The learned in Sanskrit know it pretty well that it should be pronounced as कृष्ण with fullness at the end, not by application of 'halant' and yet they pronounce it as कृष्णा.
Why does this happen? It happens (probably) because most of them are English educated and they do not visualize the term कृष्ण as it is spelt in Sanskrit script. Instead, they visualize it as it is spelt in English alphabet. And while they visualize it as written in English alphabet, quite naturally they tend to apply the English phonetic tradition of pronouncing 'tailing-a' with 'long-a' emphasis, thus turning कृष्ण into कृष्णा. While doing so, they tend to forget that कृष्ण is a female name, whereas कृष्ण is a male name. कृष्णा was the name of Paandav Queen Draupadi [4]
Younger generations mostly do not know how to read and pronounce Sanskrit script. Quite naturally they follow the others. Among the others we can count those learned in Sanskrit and those who are not. Among those who are not, we may count those who have high visibility like celebrities and television personalities. All these people have contributed to distortion of phonetically scientific term योग into योगा, and कर्म into कर्मा, and धर्म into धर्मा. The list can be endless.
So, what has happened in effect? A phonetically scientific language has been brought down to the lowly level of a phonetically unscientific language English because we all happen to be the English educated. Well, that is certainly no tribute to our heritage.
Sanskrit - the language which treasures the documentation of our lost heritage - is now being thoroughly corrupted beyond recognition, by our own wholesome apathy towards its finer distinctions, like its outstanding phonetic integrity. In effect, we are blocking those roads with 'no entry' signs that could have some day paved the way for our return towards our lost heritage.
The choice is yours. You can follow what you think right. But for me, when I write I shall opt for the lesser evil if I cannot have the ideal situation. And to my mind, a 'halant' affected pronunciation does a lesser harm to the phonetic integrity of Sanskrit than does 'tailing-a' effect. And therefore, I have chosen not to walk along the beaten track, be it the path chosen by the learned[5]. I write for the common man, and I consider myself one among them. So, I do my things the way I believe them to be for common good.