Amit Shah's Attack on English Betrays India's Pluralist Foundations

The Wire

4 hours ago

Union home minister Amit Shah's outrageous statement that 'In our lifetime, we will see a society in which those speaking English will feel ashamed…' is not only an affront to the legacy of freedom struggle stalwarts like Mahatma Gandhi, Rabindranath Tagore and Maulana Azad, but also a blatant violation of the Constitution, which explicitly provides for the use of both Indian languages and English in several of its articles. That Shah made this remark on the 75th anniversary of the Constitution of India adds an element of contempt to the occasion.
By making such a remark, which borders on hate speech, Shah undermined the very idea of India, an idea rooted in linguistic diversity and cultural plurality. In his statement, he claimed that the languages of our country are ornaments of our culture, asserting that without them we could not call ourselves Bharatiya. 'Our country, its history, its culture, our Dharma — if these have to be understood, it cannot be done in foreign languages,' he declared. This assertion disregards the historical reality that several foreign languages, including English, have helped transmit the treasures of Indian culture to the wider world.
Gandhi and the English Gita
Mahatma Gandhi never read the Bhagavad Gita in its original Sanskrit. His first encounter with it came in London, where he read The Song Celestial, the English translation by Edwin Arnold. So profound was its spiritual impact on him that it played a transformative role in shaping his life and thought – thoughts that later became central to the freedom movement. The Gita's message was not devalued simply because it was rendered in English. Shah's logic, which disparages English speakers, is thus an insult to Gandhi's legacy. While Gandhi strongly championed Indian languages and expressed himself with excellence in his native Gujarati, he was also one of the most articulate Indian writers and speakers in English.
Writing in Young India on 26 January 1921, Gandhi stated: 'I would have our young men and women with literary tastes to learn as much of English or other world languages as they like and then expect them to give the benefits of their learning to India and to the world, like a Bose, a Ray or a Tagore.' He added forcefully: 'But I would not have a single Indian to forget, neglect or be ashamed of his mother tongue or to feel that he or she cannot think or express the best thoughts in his or her own vernacular.' Gandhi's views were rooted not in narrow nationalism or linguistic chauvinism but in a universal, inclusive ethos that rejected hatred.
Tagore and English
Rabindranath Tagore never formally studied English, yet he wrote essays in the language with as much brilliance as he did poems, plays and other works in Bengali. The Sahitya Akademi's publication English Writings of Tagore captures the richness and exuberance of his literary expression in English. Globally, Tagore is celebrated for his creative excellence in Bengali, and his compositions continue to be recited across linguistic and cultural platforms in India and abroad.
Maulana Azad and English
Maulana Azad too had no formal education in English, yet he fully grasped its significance in the modern world. He wrote: 'Howsoever wrongly the English language made its way into our life, the fact remains that it has influenced our mental and educational outlook for the past one hundred and fifty years.' While he acknowledged the harm English had caused in some respects, he also highlighted its contributions: 'The greatest advantage that we gained from the adoption of English was that many of the obstacles were automatically removed from our newly born national life. It has led to the unification of the whole of the country. All the different parts of the country were brought together in spite of distances and different languages. In this respect, it can be said that English has played the same part in cementing and uniting India as did Persian in Moghul times.'
At the same time, he warned that English could not remain dominant forever and that Indian languages must be given their rightful place. 'We have to decide after mature deliberation how to bring about this change,' he said.
A constitutional violation
Amit Shah's remarks lack such 'mature deliberation' and directly contravene the constitution. Article 120 allows members of parliament to speak in Hindi, English or their mother tongue. In state legislatures too, members are permitted to speak in English in addition to the language of the state.
Article 348 stipulates that English can be used in the Supreme Court and high courts, and in the authoritative texts of laws, bills and acts. The constitution also mandates the translation of every amendment, originally drafted in English, into Hindi.
During the 2024 Lok Sabha election campaign, when the opposition raised concerns about saving the Constitution, Shah professed a newfound reverence for secularism and even declared that the word would not be removed from the Preamble. Now that he has poured scorn on English, will he have the courage to propose that all references to the English language be struck from the Constitution?
Shah must move beyond his party's outdated and narrow ideology of 'one nation, one culture.' He must embrace the pluralism that defines India, an essential part of which is linguistic diversity. That diversity includes Indian languages, English and other foreign tongues, all of which have contributed to the richness of our civilisational experience.
S.N. Sahu served as Officer on Special Duty to President of India K R Narayanan.