Persian Script and Mahatma Gandhi

[Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav]

Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav

Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist

Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India

Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229

E-mail- [e-mail];

[e-mail]                                    

Mailing Address- C- 29, Swaraj Nagar, Panki, Kanpur- 208020, Uttar Pradesh, India

 

Persian Script and Mahatma Gandhi 

 

One important matter is implied in this submission and that is that no distinction is made between Hindi and Urdu. Indeed, why should we quarrel with our Muslim brethren? They may use the Persian script. A few among us know the Persian script and more will learn it. So long as our Muslim brethren have not learnt the Devanagari, both the scripts will continue to be used for national work. However, this is a matter we can decide in a fraternal spirit with our Muslim brethren. Right now the chief task is to spread the national language throughout India in the Devanagari script. 1 It is necessary to give some thought to the definition of the Hindi language. I have often said that Hindi is that language which is spoken in the North by both Hindus and Muslims and which is written either in the Nagari or the Persian script. This Hindi is neither too sanskritized nor too Persianized. The sweetness which I find in the village Hindi is found neither in the speech of the Muslims of Lucknow nor in that of the Hindu pundits of Prayag. The language which is easily understood by the masses is the best. All can easily follow the village Hindi. The source of the river of language lies in the Himalayas of the people. It will always be so. The Ganga is arising with the village Hindi which will flow on forever, while the Sanskritized and Persianized Hindi will dry up and fade away, as does a rivulet springing from a small hillock. 2 

The correspondent’s object is praiseworthy. I am of the view that all Indian languages should be written in the Devanagari script, and I do not except the Dravidian languages and Urdu from this. But I see difficulties in getting people to carry out this suggestion. So long as there is hostility between Hindus and Muslims, no Muslim will write Urdu in the Devanagari script. I am not suggesting that the Persian script should be given up, my idea is that common books in Urdu should be written in the Devanagari script. At present, however, even this is bound to remain a mere idea. But, without waiting for unity of hearts to be established between Hindus and Muslims, Gujarat, Bengal and other provinces can make a start if they wish to. 3  Later on a bifurcation took place and Hindi written in Devanagari came to be the speech of the Hindus of the North and Urdu written in Arabic or Persian script came to be the speech of the Muslims of the North. It is hardly true as yet to say that Urdu is common to the Mussalmans all over India. I know that the Ali Brothers and I found it difficult to make ourselves understood by the Moplahs of Malabar through our Urdu. We had to have a Malaya lee interpreter. We found a similar difficulty in East Bengal among its numerous Mussalmans. Both Tandonji and Rajendra Babu therefore meant the same thing absolutely as my friend when they used the word ‘Hindi’. The use of the word ‘Hindustani’ would not make their position clearer. 4

At the same time many Hindus and many Mussalmans will persist in using Sanskrit words and Persian or Arabic words respectively and exclusively. This we shall have to bear so long as mutual distrust and aloofness continue. Those Hindus who care to know a certain class of Mussalman thought will study Urdu written in Persian script, and similarly those Mussalmans who care to know a certain class of Hindu thought will study Hindi written in Devanagari script. 5 They will have to master the Hindi language as defined by Indore Sahitya Sammelan, i.e., the language spoken by the Hindus and Mussalmans of North India and written in Devanagari or Persian script. Mastery of this language will mean mastery not only of the easy Hindi-Hindustani spoken by the masses but also of the high flown Hindi full of Sanskrit words and the high-flown Urdu full of Persian and Arabic words. Without knowledge of these, mastery of the language would be incomplete, even as one could not claim to be master of the English language without knowledge of the English of Chaucer, Swift and Johnson, or mastery of the Sanskrit language without knowledge of the Sanskrit of Valmiki and Kalidas. 6 

That leaves the question of Hindi. This controversy is meaningless and stems from ignorance. No one in the Congress is antagonistic towards Hindi. And no one will suspect me of such antagonism. But I may differ in my policy regarding Hindi. And if this happens to be the case, what would be my position in the Sammelan? I have been dragged into the Sammelan and I can quit this moment. I regard Urdu and the Persian script as included in Hindi. I have been maintaining this view since the Indore session. The man responsible for giving to the national language the name Hindustani and getting it accepted by the Congress is Tandonji. Now what can be done? I think the resolution was all right. And if it was so we should regard Hindustani as a synonym for Hindi. Now tell me if there is anything wrong in it. Rajendra Babu is not in a condition to go to Kashi. And he is certainly not going to Abohar. Kakasaheb and Shrimanji are on their way to meet Dr. Amarnathji. Maybe, now Tandonji himself will come out. Whatever he says will be done. 7

The noble task can be performed by the Hindi Sahitya Sammelan and Anjuman-e-Taraqui-e-Urdu. I have been connected with the former since 19181 when I was invited to preside at its session of that year. I acquainted the audience with my views on the all-India medium. When I presided again at its session in 19352, I was able to persuade the Sammelan to define Hindi as the language spoken by Hindus and Muslims of the North of India and written either in Devanagari or Persian script. The natural consequence should have been for the members of the Sammelan to expand their knowledge of Hindi by living up to the definition and producing literature that could be read by both Hindus and Muslims. This should have meant the members learning the Persian script. They seem to have denied themselves this proud privilege, But better late than never. Will they bestir themselves now? They need not wait for the Anjuman to respond. It will be a great thing, if the Anjuman does. Each Association can, if it will, work in harmony with the other. But I have suggested unitary action independent of the other party. That Association which will adopt my plan will enrich the language it stands for, and will ultimately be responsible for producing a blend which will serve the whole nation. 8

The Persian script is very easy to learn. There are very few fundamental signs to represent the thirty-seven letters. No doubt the joining of the letters causes some difficulty, but learning of the alphabet including the joining is matter of a week at the most, if you give one hour every day. Then it is a question of daily practice for half an hour, and you will have a workable knowledge of Urdu in six months. Surely it is a fascinating study to compare the two scripts and the two styles for the same speech. All this would be true, if you have love of the country and its people. If our minds were not fatigued by the effort to master the difficult English language, we should find it a light labour, or rather recreation, to study provincial languages. 9

There is force in your argument. But I would like you to delve a little deeper into the question. I admit that in asking people to learn the Persian script I have at the back of my mind a contribution to Hindu-Muslim unity. There has been a long-standing conflict between the Hindi and Urdu tongues as between the two scripts. Today it has assumed a virulent form. In 1935 in Indore the Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, while defining Hindi, gave a definite place to the Persian script. In 1925 the Congress gave the national language the name of Hindustani. Both scripts were made permissible. Thus Hindi plus Urdu was recognized as the national language. The question of Hindu-Muslim unity was definitely in the forefront in all these decisions. I have not raised this issue today. I have only given it a concrete form. It is a logical outcome of events. If we want to develop the national language to the fullest extent, it behoves us to give the two scripts an equal status. In the end whichever is appreciated more by the people will be the more widespread. The provincial languages are closely allied to Sanskrit, and it is true that lacs of Muslims are conversant only with their provincial languages, and that Hindi and the Devanagari script will, therefore, be easier for them to learn than Urdu and the Persian characters. My scheme will not interfere with this. In fact the people will benefit more than ever by learning the Persian script. Your trouble arises because you look upon this as a burden. Whether it is a gain or a burden depends on the outlook of the learner. He who is filled with a love of country will never consider such learning a burden. There will be no compulsion by my scheme. Only those who consider it a gain will learn the Persian script or the Devanagari as the case may be.  You are right, but your opposition to the Persian script has no place here. Devanagari is not to be displaced. It is a question of adding to the existing knowledge. 10 

I have learnt the Persian script with considerable effort. As I have not had the practice, I am able to read it only with some difficulty. I manage somehow to write it. Thus my knowledge of Urdu is very rudimentary. What I do have is love and an impartial attitude. Therefore, if God wills it and if I get help from scholars of the two languages, my venture will succeed. I published Tripathiji’s letter only with the idea that he and other would help me in this effort. 11 When I had dictated the above I looked again at Pyarelal’s suggestion and found that the Urdu and Hindi editions of Harijan Sevak are not identical word for word. I must of course admit my negligence, namely, that I don’t go through all the issues. Certainly I don’t compare them. I did so today out of curiosity and discovered this. Pyarelal tried to put up some defence for this difference but he has not so far been able to justify it. Let us see if he can. He told me, however, that the Persian script occupies more space. This I knew and, therefore, I started looking into the issues and inspected the issues of September 1. On doing so, I found that the Hindi edition had eight pages whereas Urdu had sixteen and also that Urdu had nineteen articles and Hindi had thirteen. I will be glad if you explain to me the reason for this difference. If I go further into it, I may discover something more. I shall see what I myself can do. But I do expect it of you that you will not attempt anything beyond your capacity. You will then be able to do full justice to what you do. 12 This can only be Hindustani written in the Devanagari or the Persian script. English has no place in India. The British ruled over India and so English became important. It is a foreign language, not an Indian language. Therefore I say, not reluctantly but proudly, that Urdu is an Indian language formed in India. We are all devotees of Tulsidas. You will be surprised to know that he has used any number of words of Arabic or Persian origin in his Ramayana. He just picked up words spoken in the streets and used them because Tulsidas was writing for you and me. He was not writing for the few speaking Sanskrit. The language of Tulsidas therefore is our language. 13

 

References:

 

1. Pratap, 28-5-1917
2. Thoughts on National Language
3. Navajivan, 26-6-1927
4. Harijan, 9-5-1936
5. Harijan, 3-7-1937
6. Harijan, 17-7-1937
7. Letter to Sampurnanand, December 4, 1941
8. Harijan, 1-2-1942
9. Harijan, 1-3-1942
10. Harijan, 26-4-1942
11. Harijan Sevak, 14-7-1946
12. Letter to Jivanji D. Desai, September 12, 1946
13. Prarthana Pravachan—II, pp. 218