Urdu Hindi controversy Notes
Urdu Hindi Controversy
The Birth of Modern Hindi
The birth of modern Hindi and its relationship with Urdu is complex. Linguists consider Hindi and Urdu as two styles of the same language, sharing an inflectional system and basic vocabulary. Modern Hindi, also known as "High" or "Sanskritized" Hindi, drew abstract words from Sanskrit. During the 18th and 19th centuries, there was a movement initiated by Muslim literary figures to purify Hindi of indigenous words, leading to the emergence of Persianized Urdu associated with Muslims.
In contrast, Hindu intellectuals sought to assert a distinctive Hindu identity by developing a Sanskritic, intellectual tradition through "Hindi" at Fort William College. Lallujilal Kavi and Sadal Misra played key roles in this process. Language planning activities in India aimed to standardize Hindi, using Devanagari script and replacing Persian and Arabic-origin words with Sanskritic ones. However, this created a divide between literary "New Hindi" and colloquial Hindi, sacrificing intelligibility for political purposes.
The process of Sanskritization in Hindi was viewed by some as an anti-imperialist activity, reclaiming Hindu identity and separating from the Muslim-influenced past. However, these developments were seen as alarming from the Muslim perspective. This linguistic and identity-related tension played a role in the Urdu-Hindi controversy and contributed to the partition of British India into Bharat and Pakistan.
British Language Policy in Bihar
In 1872, the Lieutenant Governor of Bihar, Sir George Campbell, ordered the replacement of Persianized Urdu with Hindi in the province's courts. This order was strictly enforced in 1880 by Sir Ashley Eden due to non-compliance by the subordinate staff.
Political Determinants of the Language Policy
The British language policy in Bihar during the Urdu-Hindi controversy was shaped by political determinants, including the conciliation of the Hindu majority, pacification of the Muslim minority, and maintenance of public order. While Garcin de Tassy claimed that the British favored Hindi to appease the Hindu majority, their policy was not consistent, and they aimed to make the language of the courts intelligible to the masses.
The policy intended to make the government more popular by opening up employment opportunities to Hindus who lacked knowledge of Persian. However, the British officials were cautious not to alienate Muslims while wooing Hindus. They recognized the potential political danger of disaffecting the Muslim community and creating grievances among them. Hence, the policy sought a balance between using Hindi and avoiding the Sanskritized version, which might also lead to discontent.
In the Urdu-Hindi controversy in Uttar Pradesh, political expediency, particularly the Muslim factor, also played a significant role in shaping the British response.
The Birth and Development of the Controversy
The Urdu-Hindi controversy began with Babu Shiva Prasad's publication of India's history in the Devanagari script, supporting the Hindi movement to replace Urdu in the Persian script with Hindi in the Devanagari one. In 1865, Garcin de Tassy referred to the controversy, highlighting Hindi as a symbol of Hinduism. Supporters of Hindi claimed that Urdu favored Muslims in employment and culture, while Urdu advocates argued it represented a composite culture of Hindus and Muslims. The debate involved claims about script intelligibility, refinement, and moral aspects of Urdu literature.
These pseudo-linguistic and moral arguments were fueled by ignorance and prejudice. Ultimately, the controversy reflected deeper conflicts between different ways of life, historical perspectives, and aspirations for the future, extending beyond mere language and scripts.
Sir Syed’s Response
Sir Syed Ahmad Khan, in response to the Hindi movement gaining strength in Benares in 1867, expressed concern that it aimed to replace Urdu, associated with Muslims, with Hindi and Devanagari script. In a letter from England to Mehdi Ali Khan, he warned that such actions could create division between Hindus and Muslims. This letter, along with a conversation with Commissioner Shakespeare, led biographer Altaf Hussain Hali to believe that Sir Syed foresaw the rise of separatism in India. This has led some to claim that the Urdu-Hindi controversy played a role in the creation of Pakistan.
Pro-Hindi Activities and the Muslim Response to Them
After the initial period, Hindus became increasingly supportive of Hindi. A Hindu society at Etawah opposed Sir Syed's proposal for a university with Urdu as the medium of instruction and advocated for a Hindi-based university instead. W. Kempson, the Director of Public Instruction in NWP, favored Hindi, stating that Urdu and its literature were predominantly Muslim creations. In 1877, the government made either Persian or Urdu compulsory for higher-paying jobs, encouraging the learning of Urdu.
In response, Hindus presented memorials in favor of Hindi, while Sir Syed formed the Urdu Defence Committee to protect the interests of educated Muslims. The Nagari Pracharni Sabha was established in Benaras in 1893 to promote the cause of Hindi. The conflicting views on the issue were presented by Malaviya from the Hindu perspective and Hamid Ali Khan from the Muslim perspective. This intensified the antagonism between Urdu-Hindi and Muslim-Hindu communities in the twentieth century.
The Controversy and the Education Commission
In 1882, the Commission on National Education discussed the medium of instruction, and the Hindi supporters presented 118 memorials signed by 67,000 people from northern India. During question and answer sessions, Hindus argued that Hindi, not Urdu, was the vernacular of the common people and that Urdu gained prestige during Muslim rule. They also mentioned that people taught their children Urdu only due to British government requirements for government service entry.
Even in Punjab, where Punjabi was spoken by Muslims, Hindus, and Sikhs, Hindus supported Hindi, and Muslims favored Urdu. The language issue became highly politicized throughout northern India by the end of the 19th century and continued to play a significant role in Muslim separatism in the following century.
Urdu-Hindi Controversy in UP
The Urdu-Hindi controversy gained momentum in the early 20th century in what is now known as UP. Census figures indicated that Muslims were not a suppressed group in UP, with significant representation in urbanization, employment, and education. Muslims' perception of their condition differed from reality; they saw themselves as a privileged elite and held nostalgia for their past prominence. They believed that their religion, culture, language, and literature were inherently superior to others.
They feared that Hindi dominance would lead to employment disadvantages and significant cultural losses, as they were deeply attached to Urdu literature and way of life. Both rational and extra-rational reasons drove their opposition to Hindi, creating deep-seated conflicts during the controversy.
Role of the Lieutenant Governor in the Controversy
In the early 20th century, the Urdu-Hindi controversy in UP gained momentum. Lieutenant Governor Sir A. P. Macdonnell was known for his anti-Urdu stance. In 1898, a memorial demanding Hindi in Devanagari script be used in courts was presented to him. Macdonnell decided that petitions could be received in both scripts and only those knowing both scripts would get government jobs, causing real hardship for many Muslims.
Macdonnell's actions faced strong opposition from Muslims, including Sir Syed, and triggered significant protests. Muslims perceived him as hostile, reinforcing their belief that the British were biased against them. Macdonnell justified his stance on justice and fairness, stating that British interests would likely be better served by Hindu dominance but acknowledged the political danger of alienating Muslims.
During this time, the Anjuman-e-Taraqqi-e-Urdu was established to defend Urdu, while the Hindi Sahitya Sammelan emerged as its formidable rival. Macdonnell's decision further intensified the Urdu-Hindi controversy and sparked political tensions between Hindus and Muslims.
British Policy after Macdonnell
After Macdonnell's tenure, British policy towards Urdu and Hindi became more flexible. Sir J. D. La Touche, Macdonnell's successor, criticized the acknowledgement of Hindi as a separate language, considering it a collection of dialects, with Urdu being the principal one. La Touche aimed to avoid opposition and promoted the use of both Hindi and Urdu in primary and secondary education textbooks, rejecting excessive Sanskritization.
The British approach towards Urdu and Hindi varied depending on political circumstances and the perspectives of the decision-makers in power. Their policies were driven by political interests, not anti-Muslim or anti-Hindu sentiments.
M. K. Gandhi and the Controversy
M.K. Gandhi's attempts to find a linguistic compromise between Muslims and Hindus were viewed with skepticism by the Muslim community, who already felt that the Indian National Congress favored Hindu ways of life. Gandhi's support for Devanagari script in the Hindustani language worried Muslims, as they feared assimilation into Hindu culture. The change of 'Hindustani' to 'Hindi-Hindustani' by Bharatiya Sahitya Parishad, insisted by Gandhi, further fueled tensions, leading to protests from prominent Muslims, including M.A. Jinnah. Despite efforts for a common language, Hindi and Urdu continued to grow apart, deepening linguistic divisions.
Congress Rule and Widening of the Gulf
During Congress rule in 1937, the All India Muslim League formed a committee to investigate Muslim grievances. The Pirpur Report highlighted the discrimination against Urdu in courts and the lack of Urdu schools in Bihar and the Central Provinces. The Muslim League rejected Hindi-Hindustani and was suspicious of the term "Hindustani," seeing it as an attempt to impose Hindi on Muslims. The Wardha Scheme, associated with the Congress, was seen as promoting Hindi over Urdu. Urdu newspapers like Haqiqat, Medina, and Hamari Zaban voiced anti-Hindi and anti-Gandhi sentiments during this period. These events widened the gulf between Hindi and Urdu and intensified Muslim apprehensions.
The Final Separation
The Urdu-Hindi controversy played a significant role in the context of the Pakistan movement and Muslim identity in India. Urdu became a symbol of Muslim identity, defended by prominent ulema like Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi and Maulana Abul Ala Maudoodi. The All India Muslim League consistently emphasized Urdu as a marker of their identity and opposed any attempts to promote Hindi or other vernaculars. Meanwhile, Gandhi's efforts to propagate Hindi were met with suspicion by Muslims, as they perceived his actions as promoting Hindu dominance.
The controversy deepened in the 1940s, leading to the partition of India and the creation of Pakistan in 1947. Urdu remained a salient symbol for expressing psychological, social, and economic aspirations for the Urdu-speaking elite, while it also served as an identity-marker transcending ethnic and local loyalties for non-Urdu-speaking Muslims. Hindi, being Sanskritic, emphasized the Hindu aspect of Indian culture and contributed to Hindu separatism. The use of Urdu and Hindi as symbols of identity was a modern phenomenon driven by political reasons.
Comments
Post a Comment