Pronunciation
This is the correct pronunciation of my name. If the audio is not working, just try refreshing the page.
Etymology
Akshānsh (Devanāgarī: अक्षांश) is an amalgamation of two Sanskrit words.
अक्ष् (Akṣ) + अंश (áṃśa)
- अक्ष् means to be present throughout OR to pervade
- अंश means part / portion [usually of something grandiose]
On combining these two [base] words, we get the meaning behind my name. It means something that permeates through every fundamental part [of the universe].
Meaning
I'm going to keep this concise and to the point. My name is a synonym for a very prevalent concept in Ancient Vedic Philosophy — Brahman (Sanskrit: ब्रह्मन्). Brahman (not to be confused with Brāhmin, Brāhmana, Brahmā, or Brahmānd) is an all-encompassing abstract, formless, and transcendent reality that underlies and permeates every little part of the universe. Wait a second, these words sound familiar, right? If not, refer to the Etymology section above. Brahman is beyond the limitations of time, space, and causation. It is seen as the source and essence of all things, and therefore, there is a fundamental unity underlying the apparent diversity in the world. This unity is expressed in the famous Vedic aphorism, “Tat Tvam Asi,” meaning “Thou art That,” emphasizing the identity of the individual self (Ātman) with Brahman.
I have barely scratched the surface of this vast topic. Brahman is discussed in the Vedas, the Upanishads, and even the Bhagwad Gitā. Ancient Vedic philosophy was ahead of its time — diverse schools of thought, each with a unique interpretation of metaphysics, epistemology, and logic. These texts also significantly influenced and shaped Western Philosophy as we know it today, but perhaps that is a topic for another day.
Writing Style
Although my name is ‘Akshansh’ as per official government records, I prefer to use ‘Akshānsh’ (with a macron on the second ‘a’; see IAST) wherever possible. It's not a stylistic choice per se.
Firstly, using a macron clearly differentiates the two phonetic variations of ‘a’. Without it, it's ambiguous — it can mean both an open-front unrounded vowel (‘आ,’ e.g., Taj) or a near-low central vowel (‘अ,’ e.g., Mahal). Adding the macron makes it obvious that both vowels are to be pronounced differently.
Secondly, I'm a massive advocate of lossless transliteration. Transliterating abugida scripts like Devanāgarī to Latin without a standard like IAST loses enormous phonetic information. There are 48 letters in Hindi compared to 26 in English — a lossless one-to-one map is simply impossible. Standards like IAST, the Hunterian system, and ISO 15919 do an excellent job of preserving phonetic fidelity and cultural identity.
Misnomer
If you translate my name from Hindi using any popular translation service, you'd most likely get ‘ latitude’. How? Lines of latitude are a part of something big (Earth) and are present throughout it — which maps perfectly to my name's etymology. So latitude is one of many meanings, and since it happens to be the most widely used one, it's often assumed to be the default — which is simply not true. In most geographical texts it is explicitly ‘akshānsh rekhāein’ (Hindi: Lines of latitude), and even when it's not, it's just colloquial omission.