Urdu and Its contribution to Secular Values

Asghar Ali Engineer

Urdu is one of the major languages of India. It finds its place among the
languages included in the VIIIth Schedule of the [Indian] Constitution. This north
Indian language has made significant contribution to promotion of
secularism and secular values in India before and after partition. Its base
has been Khadi Boli which was spoken by the people in the North. In fact
both Hindi and Urdu have a common base - i.e. Khadi Boli. Its grammar and
syntax is common. So much so that many people argue that it is not two but
one language with two different dialects. One draws its technical
vocabulary (say for philosophy, psychology, science, religion etc.) from
Sanskrit and the other from Persian and Arabic. Some linguists even argue
that it is the British imperialists who created two languages out of one at
the Fort William College, Calcutta in 19th Century by heavily borrowing
from Sanskrit and Persian and Arabic languages. Earlier Urdu was often
referred to as Hindavi i.e. a language belonging to India as against
Persian and Arabic. Even the great Urdu poets refers to it as such.
But though grammar and syntax is common, both the languages have different
historical identities. The syntax and grammar may be same but both have
their own ethos and cultural values. Also, though both have common origin
in Khadi Boli both draw their sustenance from different traditions which is
what gives a language a specific identity. Urdu literature, specially its
poetry, has drawn profusely, at least to begin with, from Persian sources.
However, as often argued, that does not make a language foreign. All modern
literature in Indian languages, poetry as well as prose, has drawn heavily
from English and French literature but it never affected the basic
character of these Indian languages. They very much remained Indian.
However, what is worthy of note is that Urdu has drawn heavily from
secular Persian sources, not religious ones. The Persian ghazal drew its
inspiration either from Sufi sources or from secular human values. The
great Persian poetry, specially the ghazal, had imbibed liberal humanist
values right from beginning. Poets like Hafiz and Sadi always mocked at
narrow sectarian approach. They adopted mostly non-religious symbols to
promote liberal humanism. Gul-o-bulbul (rose and nightingale) or jam-i-mai
(cup of wine) or m'ashuq (beloved) are all non-religious secular symbols
through which the major Persian poets fought religious sectarianism. The
Urdu poets also followed suit. It will be unfair to describe Urdu
literature as drawing its inspiration from foreign sources. As the English
literature, being the literature of the ruling class, influenced all Indian
languages, so the Persian literature was the literature of the ruling class
at that time and influenced most of the Indian languages, particularly
Urdu. However, Urdu imbibed the best secular traditions of Persian
literature. The Ghazal genre was, particularly the protest poetry, protest
against all forms of narrow sectarianism.
Urdu literature is basically inspired by humanistic values, both poetry as
well as prose. Ghalib was, and remains, one of its greatest poets. He was
highly liberal in his approach. He had several Hindu disciples like Tafta.
Ghalib was also deeply influenced by Sufi humanism. In one of his ghazals
he says: " We are unitarians and our creed is to wipe out all (faith)
traditions; When all communities died down, they became constituents of my
faith." Thus it will be seen that Ghalib transcends all narrow boundaries
of faith/ communities. He wants to base his faith on universal humanism.
Similarly what matters for Ghalib is certain values like loyalty
(wafadari) to ones belief and not what is ones belief. The priests of all
religious communities stress correctness of their faith whereas Ghalib
stresses value of loyalty, and not correctness of ones faith. Stress on
correctness of ones faith will obviously result in narrow sectarianism and
rejection of all other faiths while stress on loyalty will promote a
fundamental human value. Thus Ghalib says that "The real test of ones faith
is his firm loyalty to it ( and not its correctness) and if a Brahmin
(obviously a kafir in the sight of a sectarian believer) dies in a temple,
bury him in Ka`ba
(i.e. the holy mosque at Mecca). Though a Brahmin, though a kafir, he needs
burial in the holy mosque of Mecca for his loyalty to his faith.
Ghalib also was quite unorthodox in his religious views. He welcomed the
new ideas and scientific research. He even was critical of Syed Ahmad Khan
for bringing out an edition of Abul Fazl's book. He said in his preface to
the book which Syed Ahmad Khan wanted him to write what was the use of
publishing that ancient text when new scientific discoveries and inventions
were being made in Europe. He also considered Dair-o-Haram (temple and
mosque) as 'refuge of the tired mind'. One should perpetually struggle to
discover new truths.
It is a tragedy that Urdu is considered the language of the Muslims.
Nothing is farther from truth. In fact no language can ever be associated
with any religious community. Even Arabic cannot be associated with Muslims
alone though the holy Qur'an had been revealed in that language and all
classical works on Islam had been written in that language. The Christian
Arabs also speak that language in several Arab countries like Egypt,
Palestine, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon etc. It is the language of churches in
these countries. Their sermons are delivered in it and the Bible has also
been translated by them into Arabic. The Christian Arabs are as proud of
Arabic language as the Muslim Arabs.
Urdu was never the language of Muslims alone, nor of all Muslims in India.
In the South, except few pockets in Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh, no Muslim
knows Urdu at all. They speak Malayalam, Tamil, Telugu or Kannada. The
Qur'an has also been translated in these languages and their Friday and
other sermons are also said in their respective regional languages. In
Western India too, Muslims speak Gujrati or Marathi except those who have
migrated from U.P. or Bihar and settled there. Similarly the Muslims of
Konkan region speak Marathi as their mother tongue.
In the same way millions of Hindus and Sikhs from North spoke Urdu until
recently. The largest circulated papers in Punjab were in Urdu. Even the
pro-BJP paper in Punjab - Pratap is published in that language. It is only
lately that Urdu is being given up in favour of Hindi. Some of the greatest
writers and poets have been non-Muslims. Munshi Premchand was a celebrated
Urdu writer. His masterpiece Gaudan was written in Urdu. It was only in the
later phase of his life that he also wrote in Hindi. His celebrated short
story Kafan is also in Urdu besides several other novels. The Urdu
literature will ever be grateful to Munshi Premchand for his rich
contribution to Urdu literature.
There are several other celebrated non-Muslim writers and poets who have
pride of the place in Urdu literature. Raghupati Sahai Firaq Gorakhpuri,
was one of the great Urdu poets who won Janpeeth Award in early seventies.
He was so proud of Urdu that he described Hindi as the 'language of the
rustics'. Chakbast, Dayashankar Nasim, Tilakchand Mehroom were all great
Urdu poets. Jagannath Azad, son of Tilakchand Mehroom, is considered an
expert on the celebrated poet Iqbal, and himself is a noted Urdu poet.
There have been several other great Urdu novelists and short story writers
who were non-Muslims like Krishna Chandra, Bedi and others. Both have
written several novels and short stories in Urdu which can make anyone
proud. Even today when many people are switching over to Hindi ~here are
several non-Muslim writers and poets who are making worthwhile contribution
to Urdu literature. And it is by no means an insignificant contribution.
As pointed out above, Urdu poetry has been essentially a protest poetry.
It has always been highly critical of narrow-mindedness and sectarianism.
The great literature in Urdu was produced by those who are known as
progressive writers. The progressive writers movement started with great
enthusiasm in the thirties. It produced great writers and critics. They
were all committed to secularism and composite culture and fought against
orthodoxy, religious bigotry and traditionalism. Many of them were Marxists
and others nationalists. All the great names of Urdu literature in
twentieth century belong to this group who set great value for secularism.
Faiz Ahmad Faiz, Majaz, Sardar Jafri, Majrooh Sultanpuri, Jan Nisar
Akhtar, Kaifi Azmi, Sahir Ludhyanvi , Firaq Gorakhpuri and others among
poets; and Munshi Prem Chand, Krishan Chandra, Bedi, Saadat Hasan Manto,
Hayatullah Ansari and others among fiction writers, all be longed to this
progressive movement. All of them wrote poems, short stories or novels
which were highly critical of the creation of Pakistan and the dividing
the people of India on the basis of religion. The best stories on the
subject were of course written by Saadat Hasan Manto. His story Toba
Teksingh on partition is a classic and no one has been able to write a
better story on this subject. It is a great satire on the creation of
Pakistan. Similarly Krishna Chandra's Tai Esri is also an important story.
In view of all this the charge that Urdu is the language of Pakistan and
that it promoted the idea of Pakistan is baseless and cannot be sustained
by objective scrutiny. In fact Urdu has been instrumental in fighting
communalism and the idea of two nation.
Also, it was in Urdu that great persons like Maulana Abul Kalam Azad and
Maulana Husain Ahmad Madani wrote. Maulana Azad's Al-Hilal in the early
twenties had stirred the nationalist feelings among Muslims. It was read by
lakhs of Muslims in North and Central India. If any single journal can be
given credit for creating a strong nationalist consciousness among the
Muslims, it was Al-Hilal. The Britishers, of course, confiscated its
security deposit. Al-Hilal rendered a yeoman service for the nationalist
cause. The Maulana always wrote and spoke in Urdu. His speeches after the
Independence instilling confidence among Muslims and exhorting them to
accept secular values were all in Urdu. Similarly, Maulana Muhammad Ali
Jauhar edited an Urdu paper called Hamdard which also was a great champion
of nationalism in those days. It is true that Muhammad Ali's views changed
later but he never gave up his anti-British campaign.
Similarly Maulana Husain Ahmad Madani, who was Rector, Darul Ulum,
Deoband, the great Islamic seminary, wrote his book Muttahida Qaumiyyat
Aur Islam (Islam and Composite Nationalism) in Urdu. In this book he
argued with great force that Islam fully supports composite
nationalism and does not uphold the concept of two nation theory. Maulana
Ubaidullah Sindhi, another revolutionary and great opponent of British
imperialism also wrote large number of essays urging people of India to
fight against British imperialism in Urdu.
Thus it will be seen that Urdu can in no way be held responsible for
partition of India, as some people maintain. It is a language which is
representative of composite culture in India and it has been instrumental
in promoting secularism and secular values.

---

Return to South Asia Citizens Web