Hindi and Urdu, a common tongue
'Language is not religion. Language does not even represent religion. Language belongs to a community,' ruled Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia in a recent landmark Supreme Court judgment. It went on to call Urdu 'the finest specimen of Ganga-Jamuni tehzeeb, or the Hindustani tehzeeb'. One must thank the apex court for reminding us that India has always been a deeply multilingual nation. Each region had a language, each language had its own tradition of oral literature and dialects that fed into the pool. Until the 18th century, Urdu and Hindi were among the various names used for a common spoken tongue in the northern plains, from the borders of Punjab to the principality of Awadh.
The name Urdu means an army camp in Turkic. The language initially grew among the residents of an area where Persian-speaking army personnel were stationed as far back as the 14th century. It was created as they interacted with local citizens speaking a mix of north Indian dialects, which Amir Khusro also termed Hindavi. He used it copiously in many of his poems and songs, mixing various dialects spoken in Braj, Awadh, and also the Khadi Boli of what is now western UP.
Urdu mutated as it moved from Delhi to Awadh. Among the Urdu cognoscenti, it was a subject of debate whether the standardised form of Urdu was the one spoken in the camp area in Delhi or the Awadh durbar. It was assumed that Hindavi was a common base for both Hindi and Urdu. Controversy first began to crystallise around the script. The four clerics or bhakha munshis appointed by the British were ordered to carve out two languages from spoken Hindustani: Hindi written in the Devanagari (or Nagari for short) script borrowed from Sanskrit and Urdu written in a slightly indigenised version of the Persian script.
Interestingly, with literacy levels low in the Hindi belt and more Persian script writers being available courtesy of the Mughal court, by the 1820s, Calcutta, and not Delhi or Awadh, rose to be a major centre for publishing books in both Urdu and Hindi. Two popular newspapers came up under the ownership of not Muslims but Bengali Hindus: Raja Ram Mohan Roy's Persian weekly Mirat-ul-Akhbar, and Harihar Dutta's (originally a publisher of Bengali books) Urdu newspaper, Jam-i-Jahan-Numa. Once cost-effective and portable litho publishing reached Bihar, Agra and Awadh, Urdu publishing began to flourish there as well.
Demand for school texts for Anglo-vernacular government schools created a big market for Hindi and Urdu text books by the early 20th century. Hindus being numerically larger and Hindi script being marked out as 'nagari' by the government, the market for Hindi books began to overtake that for Urdu. In 1868, Raja Sivaprasad, a member of the British-fostered educational elite and an inspector of government run Anglo-vernacular schools, was tasked with writing textbooks in Hindi. He earned handsome royalties as also the coveted title of Sitara-e-Hind (The Star of India). With that, a typically Indian politicisation of Hindi-Urdu was spurred.
Soon, Sivaprasad attacked Urdu as a 'foreign' language foisted on India and, following him, the Allahabad Institute also made a declaration in favour of Hindi. The battlelines were thus drawn. As the commerce in printing popular tracts on religion, medicine and fiction grew, alongside the demand for school texts, literary patrons, educators, industrialists and Indian publishers all began to take sides. Detractors of Urdu alleged it was throttling the indigenous language or bhakha. This charge is baffling. Bhasha or bhakha has actually been the term for an inclusive melange of dialects spoken in the northern plains, including in Braj, Awadh, Mithila and Bhojpur, in both Hindi and Urdu. This was the common language of the Hindi belt trickling down since the 16th century through bands of pilgrims, fakirs and sadhus reciting orally the exquisite poetry of Tulsidas, Kabir and many others.
Like Elizabethan English, this Hindi-Urdu mix has always been more of a liquid bubbling with a certain fury against the system. To call it alien and unworthy of sharing space on government signboards of a municipal council building, like the Akola councillor who filed the petition in the Supreme Court did, defies not only the law of the land but also historical facts about the birth and growth of our very own bhakha Urdu.
Make no mistake, the Hindi that the government today wishes to crown as the national language is a vastly associational Sanskrit with many of its caste and gender biases intact. Also, while daggers are out on both sides over the language issue, the young in the Hindi belt are willingly abandoning Hindi en masse for English. Their parents, including the most vociferous supporters of the BJP leadership, and of Hindi, will root for an English-medium education in (relatively expensive) private schools when it comes to their own children. Parents and children are in agreement that superior job opportunities and upward social mobility are accessible only if they master English first.
Various filmmakers and musicians from Bollywood are disturbed by the shrinking popularity of their films colonised by English-speaking actors and pop singers of no great talent. If there is any hope for popular Hindi films to regain their lost glory, writers, musicians and film/TV makers and mediapeople must master their Hindi-Urdu once again and translate more and more. As for literary historians, they have remained trapped into writing angry competing historical narratives of Hindi and Urdu for too long. What we now need is a calm, composite, comprehensive history of Indian literature that spans both Hindi and Urdu as people's languages, differing little but in scripts.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
22 minutes ago
- Time of India
Ayodhya, Barabanki admins say no to two Urs over law & order concerns
Ayodhya: Local administrations in Ayodhya and Barabanki have refused to grant permissions for organising two separate 'Urs' ceremonies that have been held in the districts for the past several years on grounds that the two events could lead to breach of peace and a law & order crisis. One of these Urs was an annual affair held at the shrine of Dada Miya in the Khanpur Masodha area of Ayodhya. The other relates to the Urs of Syed Shakeel Baba, which, too, has been an annual event for the last 75 years, held at Phoolpur area of Barabanki. Following a complaint from the activists of Vishwa Hindu Parishad , the Ayodhya administration cancelled the permission for the Dada Miya Urs. The complainants claimed that a gathering was being organized in the name of 'Ghazi Baba' (a reference to Syed Salar Masood of Bahraich) at these Urs events. Subsequent police investigation revealed that the organizers obtained permission from local administration for organising an event under the name of 'Urs Dada Miya' but they were found collecting donations by printing receipts under the name of 'Ghazi Baba Urs'. The permission granted under the name of 'Urs Dada Miya' has been revoked as it was found that 'Urs' was under the name of Ghazi Baba, said Ayodhya circle officer Ashutosh Tiwari. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Giao dịch vàng CFDs với mức chênh lệch giá thấp nhất IC Markets Đăng ký Undo In Mohammadpur Khala police station area in Barabanki district, the four-day Urs of Syed Shakeel Baba that was traditionally being held for 75 years, has also been denied nod due to concerns over law and order and potential unrest. Barabanki additional SP Vikas Tripathi said, "Some disputes have emerged that may lead to communal tension and unrest. IN view of this, the administration has refused to grant permission for the Urs." In May, the Bahraich district administration had denied nod for the annual Jeth Mela, held at the dargah of Syed Salar Masood, citing an LIU report flagging law and order concerns. Before this, the state government had denied permission for holding the Sambhal's Neja Mela, also in the name of Salar Masood. In Gorakhpur, the iconic Bale Miyan fair held in memory of Salar Masood—locally called Bale Miyan—was scheduled to begin on May 18. However, the district administration did not grant the necessary security clearance, effectively stalling the fair. This was followed by CM Yogi Adityanath's assertion that glorification of invaders amounted to treason which an "independent India will not tolerate". Salar Masood, a semi-legendary figure, is believed to be the nephew of Mahmud of Ghazni and served as his military commander. The main source of information about him is contained in Mirat-i-Masudi, a Persian-language hagiography written by Abdur Rahman Chishti during the reign of Jahangir. According to Mirat-i-Masudi, Ghazi was killed in a battle with Maharaja Suheldev of Shravasti at Bahraich in 1034 CE. Where he is believed to have been buried is now the Dargah Sharif in Bahraich. On June 10, Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath inaugurated a 40-foot-high statue of Maharaja Suheldev, an icon of the Rajbhar community, in Bahraich. Speaking on the occasion, the CM said no event celebrating foreign aggressors should be allowed in the state. He proposed that a three-day 'Vijayotsav' should be celebrated from next year onwards to commemorate Maharaja Suheldev's victory over Syed Salar Masood in the Battle of Bahraich. Follow more information on Air India plane crash in Ahmedabad here . Get real-time live updates on rescue operations and check full list of passengers onboard AI 171 .
India Today
27 minutes ago
- India Today
Plea seeks interim aid for victims, top court's probe into Air India plane crash
A plea has been filed in the Supreme Court seeking urgent intervention and action in connection with the tragic crash of Air India flight 171 in Ahmedabad, which killed 265 plea was filed by two medical professionals who called for immediate steps to ensure justice and adequate compensation for the victims and their urged the Supreme Court to take note of the incident and direct the Centre to announce and disburse interim compensation of Rs 50 lakh to each family of the victims, including resident doctors who were present at BJ Medical College in Ahmedabad, where the Air India plane The plea sought the constitution of a high-level expert committee comprising retired Supreme Court or High Court judges, aviation experts, actuaries and economists. The committee would be tasked with assessing and awarding final compensation, in line with the principles laid down in Triveni Kodkany vs Air India Limited (Supra).The petition also called for directions to Air India Limited to expedite settlement of compensation claims, avoiding prolonged litigation for grieving families. Additional reliefs requested include government-provided rehabilitation measures such as employment opportunities for eligible family members of the the plea demanded a thorough investigation into the cause of the crash and necessary action to prevent similar tragedies in the India plane tragically crashed moments after taking off from Ahmedabad airport on Thursday afternoon. There were 230 passengers, including 169 Indians and 53 British nationals, and 12 crew members on the flight, of whom only one person far, at least 265 people were killed after the London-bound flight hit a resident doctors' hostel InMust Watch IN THIS STORY#Supreme Court#Ahmedabad Plane Crash#Ahmedabad
Indian Express
35 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Why Israel struck Iran, what it targeted
In what is its most ambitious military operation in recent years, Israel launched a series of air strikes against Iran on Friday, targeting nuclear sites, missile facilities and other military infrastructure. The attack killed some of the country's key military and civilian personnel as well. These strikes came after the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Board of Governors on Thursday passed a resolution declaring Iran as being non-compliant with its non-proliferation obligations — the first such resolution in two decades. The resolution came on the back of a recent IAEA investigation that found Iran was conducting 'secret nuclear activities' at three locations. Explaining Israel's 'pre-emptive strikes', Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Iran had 'taken steps that it has never taken before… to weaponise enriched uranium,' and 'if not stopped, Iran could produce a nuclear weapon in a very short time,' perhaps even 'within a few months.' Israel has always considered a nuclear Iran to be an existential threat; preventing Tehran from developing an atomic weapon has been Netanyahu's signature platform for decades. Notably, this latest development comes while Tehran and Washington are negotiating a deal that would prevent Iran from developing atomic weapons in exchange for sanctions relief. In its attack on Friday early morning, Israel claims to have deployed 200 aircraft — around a third of its active fleet — to hit more than 100 targets across Iran, including both strategic infrastructure and key personnel. Natanz nuclear facility: This is Iran's main uranium enrichment facility, where the country produces most of its nuclear fuel. Located in the central province of Isfahan, the Natanz facility is 'the beating heart of the Iranian nuclear programme,' analysts say. Reviewing satellite images taken before and after Friday's attack, The New York Times reported Israeli airstrikes had caused severe damage to the facility, and that 'several buildings and critical energy infrastructure either destroyed or heavily damaged'. It is still unclear whether these strikes damaged the all-important centrifuge halls, where uranium is enriched, that are buried deep under the Persian desert and protected by metres of reinforced concrete. The IAEA on Friday afternoon said Israel had not yet struck Iran's other major nuclear enrichment plant at Fordow in the northern province of Qom. This facility, unlike Natanz, is entirely underground, and much harder to hit, according to analysts. One expert told The NYT, 'If you don't get Fordow… you haven't eliminated [Iran's] ability to produce weapons-grade material.' On Friday evening, however, Iranian media reported explosions at Fordow. Key personnel: Israeli strikes in Tehran took out Iran's top military leadership. Among those killed were Maj Gen Mohammad Bagheri, chief of staff of the armed forces, and Gen Hossein Salami, chief of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, arguably the most powerful institution in the country. While Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei has already announced replacements for the two top commanders, these deaths, along with those of more than a dozen others, leave a vacuum in Iran's military leadership ahead of what may be a protracted regional conflict. Israel also killed top nuclear scientists, including Fereydoun Abbasi, the former head of Iran's atomic agency, and Mohammad Mehdi Tehranji. This is not the first time Israel has gone after Iranian nuclear scientists. It is, however, the first time that it has done so through conventional military means and not covert operations. Another significant casualty on Friday early morning, especially in the light of ongoing Iran-US nuclear talks, was Ali Shamkhani, one of Iran's top politicians who was appointed by Khamenei to oversee negotiations with Washington. Shamkhani's killing could severely jeopardise the possibility of a deal in the near future. Military infrastructure: Israel also targeted a number of military sites across Iran. These include a nuclear research centre and two military bases in Tabriz in northern Iran; the missile development and production facilities in Bid Kaneh, on the southern edge of Tehran; a missile base in Kermanshah in central Iran; and multiple military bases in and around Tehran. Note that this is not an exhaustive list, and Israel has maintained that its attack is 'ongoing'. Friday evening saw a fresh wave of strikes on Tabriz and Tehran. For Iran, this is possibly the gravest threat ever to the Islamic regime. In a letter to the UN Security Council, Iran Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said Israel had 'now crossed every red line,' and that it would 'deeply regret this reckless aggression'. But as things stand, Israel has painted a rather sorry picture of Iran's military strength, raising serious questions on both its defensive and retaliatory capabilities. While Iran did send more than 100 drones towards Israel on Friday, there has been no reported casualty or damage thus far. Some analysts say Israeli strikes against Iran's missile facilities may have seriously hurt its ability to strike back. The biggest question now is how Tehran will strike back. Put simply, Iran is caught between a rock and a hard place. It can, as it has done in the past, activate its proxies and even launch more drone and missile attacks. But Israeli attacks over the years, and rather muted responses from Tehran, have repeatedly exposed Iran's limitations in this regard. While Israel claims that the Islamic regime in Iran poses an 'existential threat' to the Jewish nation, the opposite might be more true. At the end of the day, Tel Aviv stands with steady support from Washington, which establishes a fundamental asymmetry between itself and Iran on the battlefield. US President Donald Trump on Friday said Israel's 'next already planned attacks' could be 'even more brutal,' and warned that Tehran 'must make a deal, before there is nothing left.'
