Dr. Nawa Raj Subba
Explore the deeper origins of the word “forest” through ethnolinguistics, oral history, and comparative linguistics. This article challenges the Sanskrit-centric view of “Vanam” and uncovers potential roots in ancient Kirat, Bon, and Bantawa cultures—revealing linguistic borrowing and the suppression of indigenous knowledge in Nepal.
Introduction
The word forest is commonly recognized as the Sanskrit term Vanam, meaning forest or woodland. However, words such as Bantawa, Banjhankri, and Bon, used in the language, culture, and religious narratives of the Kirat community—particularly among the Rai and Limbu peoples—suggest that the term van/ban may have originated from a more ancient, indigenous linguistic layer predating Sanskrit.
In this context, the article explores the origin and use of the word forest. It draws from comparative linguistics, anthropology (ethnography), and oral history (oral tradition). The analysis suggests that Sanskrit may not be the original source of the word Vanam. Instead, the term was likely borrowed from indigenous languages, such as Kirat-Bon.
As a result, this perspective not only challenges the conventional etymology of a single word, but also raises deeper concerns related to linguistic colonialism and the marginalization of indigenous cultural knowledge. Ultimately, reinterpreting the word forest becomes a meaningful act of restoring indigenous knowledge systems and honoring their historical legacy.
Keywords: Kirat, Bon Religion, Forest Word, Bantawa, Ethnolinguistics, Linguistic Borrowing, Sanskrit Substrate, Mundhum, Proto-Tibetan-Burman, Shamanism, Nepal Indigenous Culture