Urdu, Hindu Attire, Abrahamisation | It’s much ado about nothing

(Reuters)

Reacting to the Fabindia’s ‘Jashn-e-Riwaaz’ advertisement, on October 18 Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Tejasvi Surya, who is also president of the Bharatiya Janata Yuva Morcha, and a member of the Lok Sabha from Bengaluru, called it a ‘deliberate attempt of abrahamisation of Hindu festivals, depicting models without traditional Hindu attires….’. For those who are unfamiliar with the term ‘Abrahamisation’, a simple explanation, as conceived by some in the Right wing, is: ‘the process by which tenets of Hinduism are modified to have features of monotheistic religions (Judaism, Christianity and Islam)’.

In what way does the advertisement amount to abrahamisation? Surya says the models are without traditional ‘Hindu attires’. This is not true by any stretch of imagination, as none — none — can have or provide a single monolithic picture of what constitutes ‘Hindu attire’. This argument in itself is both ambivalent, and supercilious. We shall get back to the attire squabble in a bit.

What to Surya’s mind is more abhorrent, and prompts him to utilise the moniker ‘abrahamisation’ could be the phrase ‘Jashn-e-Riwaaz’, which undoubtedly is a Urdu phrase. Unfortunately, anything that is even remotely connected with Urdu raises the hackles of the Right wing in India. The entire rub as regards the advertisement has to do with this Urdu phrase, as by extension, anything that relates to Urdu gets identified with Muslims.

It is that what appears to prompt Surya to mark out the advertisement as an attempt at ‘abrahamisation’. If this is the case, the attire has been used as a camouflage to attack the Urdu rendering in the advertisement. Let us dwell deeper on this association of Urdu with Muslims, and analyse to what extent, if any, is such an association (or nexus, depending on how one sees it) valid?

Urdu Speakers

The Muslim population of India is about 14 percent, and the proportion of those who speak Urdu as their mother tongue/first language is just about 4 percent. Interestingly, all of these 4 percent Urdu speakers are not necessarily Muslims. So, an overwhelmingly large proportion of Muslims do not have Urdu as their mother tongue/first language.

Muslims are found all over India, from Kashmir to Kanyakumari and from Arunachal Pradesh in the extreme east to Gujarat in the west. Invariably, all of them speak the local/state languages. So where do Muslims speak Urdu? In a relatively small zone in the central-north areas. Also, small numbers of ‘migrants’ in other states, including the Deccani version, in some pockets in Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka and Telangana.

Urdu Literature And Journalism

The very first Urdu newspaper, Jam-i-Jahan-Numa, was published in Calcutta by Harihar Dutta as early as 1822. The weekly Kohinoor was started by Munshi Harsukh Rai in 1850. In 1858, Manbir Kabiruddin started the Urdu Guide. Munshi Nawal Kishore started the first Urdu newspaper, Oudh Akhbar, from Lucknow, also in 1858.

In 1913 Ganesh Shankar founded Pratap, a famous revolutionary weekly in Kanpur which became a daily in 1920. Now it is published from Delhi. In 1923 Lala Kushal Chand, an Arya Samaji, started the Milap, an Urdu daily, from Lahore. After Independence it was shifted to Delhi, and is still in circulation as the largest Urdu newspaper in India.

Urdu literature has been overwhelmingly patronised by non-Muslim writers and poets. Some of them are: Krishan Chander, Munshi Premchand, Rajinder Singh Bedi, Raghupati Sahay (Firaq Gorakhpuri), Gulzar (Sampooran Singh Kalra), Khushwant Singh, and so on.

Clearly, some of the best patrons of Urdu have been non-Muslims. Given all these, where does the Urdu-equals-Muslim equation come from?

The Pakistan Angle

That equation came into prominence in 1947. After Pakistan came into being, surprisingly Urdu became her national language, though overall an overwhelming majority spoke Bangla. In the western wing the autochthones of Pakistan, namely the five main ethnic groups — Punjabis, Pathans, Sariakis, Balochis and Sindhis — all spoke a different language, and had very little to do with Urdu.

It was just small sections in urban areas, and those who went over as Mohajirs (migrants) from India at Partition, who had Urdu as their mother tongue. It must not be forgotten that the 1971 secession of the eastern wing of Pakistan and the genesis of Bangladesh had a lot to do with the politico-linguistic neglect of Bangla.

Urdu in India seems to have suffered, and has had a decline from the time Pakistan declared Urdu as her national language. No need to go into the political details of that here, except to point out that Punjabi which had till then adopted the Perseo-Arabic script that Urdu uses, gradually shifted to Gurmukhi script subsequent to Partition.

The Attire Conundrum

Now to the ‘Hindu attire’ ingredient of Surya’s assertion. The models featured in the advertisement do not by any sort of contention wear anything that could be thought of as non-Hindu, or anything offensive, or for that matter anything to suggest that these are ‘abrahamic’. Where do we look for those traditional ‘Hindu attires’?

We do not have any comprehensive studies as to what women wore during ancient times in different parts of India, and if there was any unanimity or monolithic depiction as regards their attire. Besides, all over the country there have always been a range of dress patterns, and these did, and still do, cut across the various ethnic, religious and caste groups. To take up just a single example, the dress worn by Kathak dancers is common not just to dancers from various religious groups but also to the different genders. Among many other factors climatic conditions and local availability of fabric — and not religion — often determines attire.

The attribution of Urdu as an Islamic/Muslim language, and the generalisation to define a homogenous ‘Hindu attire’ are both problematic, as at its core both are built on false assumptions. On a related note, the stigmatisation of Urdu by those who are unaware of its rich past can be seen when English is categorised as a ‘foreign language’.

MA Kalam, a social anthropologist, is Visiting Professor, Centre for Economic and Social Studies, Hyderabad.

Views are personal and do not represent the stand of this publication.