& çâÌæÚUæð´ ·¤è ¥ôÚU Îð¹Ùæ ÁæÚUè ÚU¹ð´ ¥ÍæüÌ ¥ÂÙð ÜÿØ ÂÚU ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´Ð ãæÚU Ù ×æÙð´, €UØô´ç·¤ ·¤æ× ·¤ÚUÙð âð ¥æÂ·¤ô ©gðàØ ·¤è Âýæç# ãôÌè ãñ ¥õÚU ÁèßÙ ·¤æ ¹æÜèÂÙ ÎêÚU ãôÌæ ãñÐ ÖÜð ãè ÁèßÙ ×ð´ ç·¤ÌÙè Öè ·¤çÆÙæ§ü €UØô´ Ù ¥æ°, çÁ™ææâæ ¥õÚU ©ˆâæã ÕÙæ° ÚU¹ð´Ð ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´, ÜÿØ ã×ðàææ ¥æÂ·Ô¤ Âæâ ãôÌð ãñ´ çÁ‹ãð´ ÂæÙð ·Ô¤ çÜ° ÂýØæâ ¥æÂ ·¤Öè Öè àæéM¤ ·¤ÚU â·¤Ìð ãñ´Ð

Islamic Perspective of the Language Movement

Professor Syed Anwar Hossain
A ccording to the prevailing notion, two opposing social forces * were at work during the language movement. The first force, which worked in its favour included the non-communal and progressive segments of society. The other force was an antagonistic one. In its view, the language movement was unwanted for more than one reason. The principal reason was that it was destructive for the solidarity of Pakistan . Besides, Bangla was not suitable as the state language of a so-called Muslim state named Pakistan , as it was historically the language of Hindus. On the other hand, Urdu was the language of Muslims; and because of that, only Urdu could become the lone state language of Pakistan.
Some comments based on logic are pertinent here regarding these divergent social divisions during the language movement. Firstly, the stance and outlook of the supportive force were secular and democratic. This group of people had no doubt that Bangla, which was the mother tongue of a majority of Pakistan's population, deserved to be the lone state language of Pakistan This faction was conscious of the fact that the demand for Urdu, which was the language of only 6 percent
citizens, was farcical and illogical Despite that, they demonstrated their openness for democratic compromise by demanding Bangla as the principal state language side by side with Urdu, instead of discarding Urdu altogether; but the Pakistani ruling class could not absorb its real meaning. But they were forced to come to this realization through successful culmination of the language movement.
The basis of the spirit and outlook of the antagonistic force was so-called Islamic values and an infatuation for the Muslim country of Pakistan , But by becoming submerged in blind religious emotion instead of sincere religious motive, they failed to realize that the essential spirit of the language movement was not against Islam. There was also no Islamic or historical proofs or evidences in support of ridiculing Bangla and accepting Urdu as a language of Muslims. When emotion becomes blind, then facts and logic are not visible. When emotions forge relationship with religion or religious spirit, then religious fanaticism becomes bigger than religiosity. But the difference between religious fanaticism and genuine religiosity is not apparent to these people. Their opposition to the liberation war of 1971 is a big proof that the success of the language movement had failed to generate any such realization among them as well as their descendants.
If the language movement is reviewed from the perspective of Islam, then it becomes clear that it was a just protest and robust resistance against injustices with an appropriate victory in the final stage. The success of language movement represented a shining example of the inevitable triumph of justice against injustice. The liberation war of 1971 was something similar. According to Holy Qur'an and Hadith, injustice, torture, repression and oppressor are not acceptable to Allah. They are abhorred. Holy Hadith had clearly spelt out "If somebody does any unjust act before you, then you shall first resist it with force, if you cannot
do that then resist it with words, if you cannot do that either then you will have to hate it with all sincerity". Needless to say, the Bengalee Muslims (and people belonging to other communities) had applied all these three methods against the injustices of Pakistan in 1952 and 1971. However, the application of force was chosen as the last and final means in both the instances, and that too after being attacked. But the final display of force during the language movement was a democratic struggle; and in 1971, it took the shape of an armed struggle. In the language of Islam, these two episodes of 1952 and 1971 were successful protests and resistance of the oppressed against the oppressor; and in both the cases, the Islamic (and humanitarian) ideals had emerged victorious. Islamic Perspective of the Language Movement
The language movement was not merely a movement for establishing the honour of a mother language (reference; Syed Anwar Hossain. International Mother Language Day and other themes', Sraban Prokashani. 2002); it had multi dimensional attributes. There are strong supportive evidences from Holy Qur'an in its favour.
In a limited and elementary sense, language is the words spoken through man’s mouth, and it is a vehicle for mutual exchange of ideas by men. The Holy Qur'an says regarding the creation of language (Surah Ar-Rahman, 55: 3-4): "He has created man: He has taught him speech (and Intelligence)". This implies that all languages are Allah's creation. That is to say, 6,670 languages presently in vogue in the world (according to a 1993 survey by UNESCO) are the creation of Allah. In this context, the Qur'an says: "We sent not an apostle except (to teach) in the language of his (own) people, in order to make (things) clear to them" (Surahh Ibrahim, 14:4).
The message of Holy Qur'an is quite unambiguous regarding the common ancestry of human race, numbering around 6.50 billion in the present-day world, despite their break-up into numerous communities and countries: "0 mankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that ye may know each other. Verily the most honoured among you in the sight of God is he who is the most righteous amongst you. And God has full knowledge and Is well-acquainted with all things" (Surahh Hujurat, 49:13). Consequently, no human being is inferior or base to others, and no language of man is inferior or superior. And seeking inferiority or superiority in the languages of religious scriptures go counter to the meaning of Allah's message in the Holy Qur’an. Terming a language inferior and ridiculing it is an insult to Allah's creation. No one can be religious by abusing any creation of Allah; that certainly does not bring anybody closer to Allah But the Pakistani ruling class made this mistake during our language movement.
The linguistic variations alongside human and bio-diversities are reflections of God's will. This has been inscribed as Allah's message in the Qur'an: "And among His signs is the creation of heavens and the earth, and in the variations in your languages and your colours" (Surah Ar Rum, 30:22).
From these quotations of Qur'an, a logical conclusion which can be reached is that prayer in any language Is acceptable to Allah, because he is All-knowing. "And fear God, for God knows well the secrets of your hearts" (Surah Maidah, 5:7).
Now let us dwell on the subject of how far Urdu is an Islamic or Muslim language. Urdu is not a self-sufficient language. It was created when the need was felt for a common language for the Mughal army comprising of people belonging to multifarious communities. It was a mixed language created by assorting Persian and Arabic language with local dialects. Urdu was specially created as a routine administrative language. But Arabic alphabets are
used in Urdu script. The existence of Arabic alphabets in Urdu has probably given it an Islamic aura.
But there is a political background to the bestowal of an Islamic character to Urdu.The Hindu leaders had decided at a meeting held In Benaras in 1867 that the state language of an independent India In future would be Hindi.That Is, it was felt that Hindi was the language of the Hindus. But the Hindutva of Hindi language is questionable, because Hindi was also created out of a necessity for a common language like Urdu in the Mughal army. It was done in a similar manner by mixing local dialects with Persian. The English termed this language as Hindustani. In the Nineteenth Century, the Hindustani language was bifurcated into Hindi and Urdu. The Hindi language was meant (or the Hindus, and this language started to replace Persian words with Sanskrit. It started to be written In Devnagri alphabets; in other words, it became the language of Hindus. On the other hand, it seemed to the leaders of the Muslim community after the selection of Hindi as the language of Hindus in 1867 that the language of Musalmans would have to be Urdu. This was how Musalmanatva of Urdu and Hindutva of Hindi had evolved out. The politicisation and
communalisation of languages had taken place in this manner.
That the Bengalees of undivided Bengal could read, write and speak
in Bangla was possible because of the contributions of independent Sultans (1336-1538) of historical Bengal In the kingdom of Sen ,who were overthrown by Bakhtiar Khalji's conquest of Bengal, Bangla was discredited as the language of the lower class. This was done in accordance with the directives of Sen kings. During that period, all languages with the exception of Sanskrit were considered as distortions And the scriptures had stipulated that if tbe Ramayana and the Mahabharata were written or heard in any other language, then one had to go to a hell named Rourab (similar to the hell called Habia of the Muslims). But the lower status of Bangla was overcome because of the patronisation by the Muslim Sultans. It was especially during the reigns of Alauddin Hussain Shah, his son Nusrat Shah and Nusrat Shah's son Alauddin Firoz Shah that the Ramayana, Mahabharata and Bhagbata Geeta were translated into Bangla. Kabindra Parameshwar, who was the royal poet in the court of Paragal Khan, the military chief of Hossain Shah, had composed the Bharat or Mahabharat Kabya. The poetry of Srikar Nandi was written during the rule of Nusrat Shah. Poet Sridhar had composed Vidyasundar Kabya as per directive of Alauddin Firoz Shah,
Bangla language had flourished because of official patronisation during the era of independent Sultans in Bengal. On the other hand, Bangla language and the ordinary people who spoke it were harassed prior to this period during the conservative Brahmanical rule of the Sen. Bangla became the common language of the Hindus and Muslims during the era of Sultans.Therefore, a criminal lack of knowledge about historical facts was evident among the ruling coterie of Pakistan when they termed Bangla as the language of Hindus. On the other hand, it was also observed that this ruling clique tried to repeat the role of the Sen kings instead of following the footsteps of the Muslim Sultans. Their Islamic leaning or Musalmanatva were thrown into doubt by this, not by the action of Bengalees.
Translation: Helal Uddin Ahmed