The luxury of hindsight… CGL IX
knicq posted in Comments Gone Lengthy, Knicqisms on April 26th, 2006
I happened upon a couple of lovely blogs written by a teenaged Muslim who writes with more wisdom than most people of not only her own age but much older than her. You will see her blogs linked to your right. In her post entitled Al-Lughah Al-Arabiyah, she has hit upon a discussion that was once initiated in knicqland by brother Maranello - a discussion that had wondered what might our nation have been like, had Arabic been made the official language of Pakistan. Below is a comment gone lengthy on that post, which I shamelessly put up here as an update, partly because it is pertinent to the discssuion left incomplete here in the past (in that it was left without my exalted inputs), and partly because this place could do with an update.
“Fact of the matter is Urdu always has been the official language of Pakistan. It was the local language in which most Islamic literature was available, and in which more of it was being written. It was the language of those Muslims who were instrumental in the demand for and the creation of Pakistan, the educated lot which hailed mostly from present day India. The areas that constituted Pakistan were amongst the most backward areas in sub-continent with some of the lowest literacy rates.
Urdu was also the language which the elite of the sub-continent had favored sine the times of Emperor Bahadur Shah Zafar who was himself a distinguished Urdu poet, counted amongst the ‘asatza’ poets. It made sense then to designate Urdu as the National Language. It did not make sense, however, to also make it the National Language of East Pakistan which was several thousand miles to the East with a language of its own, which had a rasm-ul-khat of its own, and a literary history that boasted of the likes of Nobel prize Winner Rabinder Nath Tagore. Why should the Bengalis have liked Urdu better than their Bangla bhasa? Just because the Muslims of West and North favored it? So was sown the seed of discontent and partition.
On the other hand, since Urdu and Hindi, despite their separate alphabet and rasm-ul-khat, are similar enough to the extent where the speakers of either language can hold a conversation between them, all the while talking in their own languages, it was imperative that their cultural history, achievements as well as aspirations have over-lapping areas in Music, and Media.
Of course this could not have been fore-seen then…! The people then did not have the benefit of hindsight that we enjoy today. Who would have thought that the Muslims of Pakistan who created a separate homeland for themselves so they could live their lives according to Islam would usher in bollywood into their drawing rooms and living rooms with such open arms. Who could have predicted the ridiculous care-takers of culture, those ‘artists’ who rush to ignore the vast fundamental cultural differences between the two languages and hence the cultures just so they can emphasize the fact that ‘thumri’ binds the people of India-Pakistan together in cultural bonds!
However, if people had had some more wisdom about them, and if some had considered the very valid points you have made here in support of Arabic, we could perhaps have avoided the East Pakistan debacle. After all the Bangladeshis are Muslims as devout as we like to think we are, and they would have quite likely not objected to Arabic being made their National Language, especially since it could not have been perceived as a language of the big brother.
At the same time, Arabic would have bound us to the Muslim world, and when looking for influences in our ‘art and culture’ we would have had to delve into the Muslim tradition rather than the non-Muslim influences from across the border. You have already covered that ground extremely well – the part about the benefits of learning Arabic. Most importantly, in the last five decades we as a nation could have distanced ourselves from the mushrikana practices that pervade our way of live today, or at least there was a better chance of that happening.
Looking at the possible down-side, however, given our penchant for making the wrong choices, one shudders to think what we would have then ended up adopting from the Arab ‘culture’? The Nahid Siddiquis would probably have taken up belly-dancing instead of bharatnatyam for expression of their ‘art’!
I do seem to be putting ‘art’ and ‘culture’ in inverted commas more and more often…! ”
I have edited above for some spelling errors, and at a place or two to help make it coherent. I strongly recommend, however, that one read the original post to make sense of what I am rambling on about…
I also realize that I might have given the impression that I am one of those India-bashing fanatics, whose Pakistanism is a function of Anti-Indianism. I despise those people just as much as I do those Indians whose Indianism is not complete without Anti-Pakistanism. I am a strong believer in the Two-Nation Thory, however, and do believe that the cultures of Pakistan and India are vastly (and fundamentally) different despite the apparent similarities. I think I had made that point somewhere else also, let me see if I can find where. Here it is.
April 26th, 2006 at 12:14 pm
The luxury of hindsight, huh? As in, learning from the experiences (read: mistakes) of others, and/ or our very own? Experience, by the way, is a hard teacher, y’know: she gives the test first, and the lesson afterwards!!
April 26th, 2006 at 3:32 pm
atleast we would have advatanges infact three, one we would have understood Quran better, two lesser discrimination in Gulf region and Third it would have really helped living in a city like Al-Ain
.
hmmmm ok but I think at the time of independence Urdu had taken Arabic’s place infact wasnt it Farsi before Urdu in sub-continent. I mean to say is Arabic was left far behind by Muslims of subcontinent at that time so It would have been non-realistic to have it as a National Language.
Although cant deny importance of Arabic.
April 26th, 2006 at 4:52 pm
I can still remember the day when I was 8 years old and made a strong argument with my teacher that we should have taken the name “India” instead of “Pakistan” and should not have let the “Hindustan” take it. Cannot forget the answer she gave me – not a good one
. I believed and still do that “India” was the name that we should have taken because it had the majesty and mystic of our history. From the great civilization of Harappa and Moenjodoro to the great men like Buddah, all of these happen in parts that are part of Pakistan.
As a nation we have paid a lot of price for being loyal to Arabs. I believe we share the same basic religious concept – not the entire version of Arabian Islam. Our culture is Indian and we have a long and more successful history than Arabs. We have lot of things to be proud of but unfortunately we because of Arab propaganda (if you do not act Arab you are not Muslim), do not take pride in that, e.g. we are the nation that defeated Alexander the great.
But what makes me happy and excited is that finally in our country people have started to realize that we are not Arab puppets but we are Pakistanis with the richest tradition and culture in the world , off course I am talking about Indian culture. As far as Bangla partition is concerned it again highlights the point that having a common religion is not the basis of making one country, it’s lot more than that. Even all Arabs live in different countries but speak one language and somewhat agree on main basis religious belief.
Recently I had the opportunity to closely observe the Arab culture and I thanked Allah for giving us Indian culture.
April 27th, 2006 at 6:54 am
I’d never even considered this before, what a great post!
While a lot of indian language and culture are borrowed and continue to pervade pakistani society, I am still not convinced that we would have been better off with arabic as our mother tongue.
It’s important to learn it, and it’s the lingua franca of the Islamic world at least in prayer and litreature, but it’s certainly not a requisite to being a muslim. I think the fact that we were made into ‘nations and tribes’ so that we could ‘know one another’ is a testament to how inclusive and beautiful our religion is. the reason of its spread throughout the world was because it’s so easy to adapt to. you don’t have to give up customs or culture that isn’t unislamic (doesn’t include all the shirky stuff borrowed from india) to become a muslim.
alhamdulillah, language isn’t given a religion. if we’d been forced to learn arabic, would we have known the quran better? maybe.. but i know lots of arabs who don’t know much fussha and are only adept at pronunciation. the other blog urges people to learn arabic because it’s beautiful. i think we learn Quranic arabic, which is useful.
April 27th, 2006 at 8:39 am
(Posted by Maranello on linked post
April 26th, 2006 at 1:44 pm. Reposted here on his behalf)
Can’t disagree with a word you say up there bro.
Reading this, I am reminded of something I read 20 odd years ago (does that make me sound ancient?). As I was 8 or so at that point, it is not something poignant or profound or even particularly wise… but here it is anyway, after this promising introduction (now I know what I am not in marketing!).
Ibn-e-Insha, in his “Urdu ki aakhri kitab”, talks about Pakistan, and more fundamentally, what it constitutes of. So he starts of by saying that Inglistan main angraiz qaum rahti hay, germany main german qaum, japan main japanee qaum.
Acha bhai, yeh kia hay?
Pakistan hay
Yahan Pakistani qaum rahti ho gi?
Nahi, yahan Sindhi qaum rahti hay.
yahan Punjabi qaum rahti hay.
yahan Pathan qaum rahti hay.
yahan Bengali qaum rahti hay.
yahan Mirza aur Khan aur Syed aur falanay rahtay hain.
yahan yeh qaum rahti hay aur woh qaum rahti hay.
Magar…
Punjabi toh hindustan main bhi rahtay hain…
Sindhi toh hindustan main bhi rahtay hain…
Pathan toh hindustan main bhi rahtay hain…
Bengali toh hindustan main bhi rahtay hain…
Toh phir yeh alag mulk kion banaya?
Acha ghalti ho gai bhai, aainda nahin banain gay….
Makes you think, doesn’t it?
Our identity is as Muslims, first and foremost, and then as Pakistanis. If we are not the former, we cannot be the latter, in all due honesty. And if we are not the latter…we are, let’s face it, nothing….
PS: apologies if the above is not an exact quote… it almost certainly is not, since I am going from memory of something read two decades ago.. zaib-e-dastaan ke liye
April 27th, 2006 at 9:23 am
BAQ: Welcome back bro. How long has it been since you visited us last? Hindsight is also defined as being able to choose from amongst alternatives, knowing full well, what results at least one of those alternatives would lead to.
Saadie: Fact is, the language of the court was Farsi prior to Urdu…if at all Urdu was ever actually the language of the court. But since the Muslims realized the importance of Arabic in understanding and studying their religion, the alim faazils were scholars of the language as well as Islam. Arabic never was the language of the court, and hence there was no question of leaving it far behind. We had taken it along all along, because we knew it was imperative to our understanding of Allah’s message. It was only after the creation of our homeland that the educated masses discarded Arabic from their syllabi, and relegated it to the syllabi of the madrassas which were churning out Mullahs instead of scholars.
In an Islamic state, you see, there is no room for separation of religion from state, the state is defined by the religion. The default constitution of the state is The Holy Quran. How, then, can an Islamic state/nation function if it does not comprehend the language of its primary constitution. We have tried, and failed miserably, if I may add to teach our masses the English Alphabet and the English Language, why could we not have done the same with Arabic. There was no dearth of ahl-e-zubaan to teach us. The practicality, however, of such a decision is a different matter altogether, and can be discussed separately. Suffice it is to say though that teaching of Arabic to an Islamic nation is far more easier than teaching them all English! I am not advocating discarding of English, mind you. I have suggested discarding of Urdu in favor of Arabic, and this should count for something since I am one of the greatest lovers of Urdu – the language I speak, read, and write in today.
April 27th, 2006 at 9:27 am
For a better world: I had thought you had taken slight at something I had said in one of our previous discussions, and stopped visiting here. Of course, I know who you are. there is only one person I know who could have had that kind of line of thought. Our discussions in your home almost a decade ago seem to have taken off from right where we had left them…a detailed response to your and sister Noodles comments should follow, hopefully if I can find time tonight.
Brother Maranello: You actually quoted from Ibn-e-Insha’s master-peice out of memory! You continue to make a fan out of me bro, each time you bring that Maranello flavor to this other-wise dull place. I look forward to the day I can introduce you to my spiritual mis-guide JB!
May 1st, 2006 at 10:01 pm
I say knicq has the right message here.
It is the “hindu/Indian” contaminated language of Urdu that is holding Pakistan back from its true destiny as the “enlightened/moderate” leader of the “free muslim world”.
Only a Pakistan free of all Indian contamination in language, culture (specially the dreaded “bharatnatyam”) will attain its “Pak” destiny.
Another advantage I can think of is we will no longer have the Kiran More/Miandad or Aamer Sohail/Prasad kind of spats on the cricket field, as we will no longer understand each others abuse.
I say, go for it!
May 1st, 2006 at 11:43 pm
Bongdongs: Its actually nice when someone agrees with me, even if sarcastically so; and even when he/she has completely and absolutely missed the point, while inferred quite a few of his/her own points along the way too.
My friend SA, aspiring for a better world, and sister Noodlez must wait for me to revert with my take on their points; however, I feel I should not keep you waiting too long.
You have somehow skipped the introduction part, always helpful for one trying to understand just where you are coming from when you shoot off those lines dripping with what you must think is healthy sarcasm.
It leaves me with little option but to assume that you are a friend from India; the very fact that you completely miss my point underlines my hypothesis; because only an Indian, or a Pakistani Muslim completely unaware of the very premise behind the creation of Pakistan would fail to see where I am coming from.
Oh, and for the sake of clarification, let me start by telling you that the premise behind the creation of Pakistan was not to assume the leadership of the Muslim World, enlightened or not, moderate or not, even free or not. It was to become the part of the Muslim world, and be free.
Pakistan was created so the Muslims of the sub-continent would have a homeland wherein they could live their lives freely in accordance with the tenets of Islam, without feeling the need to conform to the practices and ways of life of the non-Muslim majority, without having to appease the mahority; without the fear of retribution for practicing their faith from a majority in an undivided India, and without also the risk of, as you put it, contamination of their faith with influences alien to their faith and on a collision course with their faith.
If you are not a Muslim, perhaps you are not aware that the very basic statement of our faith, the Shahadah, “There is no God but Allah (SWT), and prophet Mohammad (SAW) is His messenger” on which is based the whole religion of Islam is a direct negation of the Hindu way of life, and the Hindu thought. The concept of multiple gods, the concept of re-incarnation, the concept of untouchability, and even the concept of nationalism, be it Pakistanism or Indianism are concepts that every Muslim states to be false and untrue in his statement of his faith, in his prayers, and in the way he must conduct his life as a Muslim. How then could there have been peace between the two communities? How could a majority community be expected to be tolerant of a smaller community that lived under the same roof with the larger community but negated everything or most of what the majority stood for.
There is no ill-will, no malice intended towards a non-believer in our statement of faith; however at the same time our faith prohibits us from making concessions on these basic tenets. From belief in one Allah, springs the belief in His prophets, in His book The Holy Quran as the final revelation, as well as the constitution to live our lives by for posterity.
It is part of our belief to distinguish ourselves as Muslims when faced with a situation which requires us to act un-Islamically, and it is that part which will always keep us from total integration into any non-Islamic society.
In your haste, perhaps, to comment, or out of your conviction in your own stereo-types of me and my people, you have completely over-looked the part where I have insisted that I love Urdu. I love it more than any other language, because it is my language, it is the language I know best, it is the language I think in, read in, and write poetry in. (At least, I insist it is poetry, because it is meant to be). I have also clarified at some point that Urdu was the language of the Muslims, so it never was and never will be the Hindu/Indian contaminated language for me.
Yet, it is not the language of the Quran, our constitution, and because we do not know the language of the Quran, we do not understand the message of Quran ourselves. We pray in Arabic, we state our belief in Arabic, we even greet each other in Arabic. Yet, we seldom understand what we say, pray or state. The point of a lesson is lost if it is crammed and not understood. Unfortunately, we are not a highly literate nation, and even if translations were made available to every person, 4/5th of the country would not benefit from them. The repercussions of this sad state of affairs are reflected in our daily lives when we wade through our un-Islamic lives under the fallacious impression that our lives are the very embodiment of the Islamic way of life. On the other hand, because we pray in Arabic, and we do that five times a day, we would even as an illetrate nation at least partially understand the message of Allah.
I did clarify earlier that what I advocate is not an anti-Indian way of life, but a pro-Islamic way of life. Pro-Islamic is not necessarily anti-Indian, niether is Pro-Pakistani the same as anti-Indian; at least as long as India does not expect Pakistan to erase the boundaries and revert to a united India. Too often, I have been offended by this suggestion from my Indian friends; as soon as any bon-homie is established, out comes the allusion to the idea of a united India, meaning no Pakistan. My Indian friends need to understand that just because I share a few of my neighbour’s interests, I do not expect him to demolish the wall between our homes, and hand over his deed to me, and vice verca. I like my home, and he likes his; and as neighbours we like it the way it is.
Thankfully, because we are in Pakistan and not in India, we have the luxury of evaluating our lives in the light of Islam and deciding what is and what is not Islamic, and what should or should not not be a part of our way of life. If pro-Islamic way of life requires us to expunge certain or all Indian influence from our lives, so be it. It is done because we like our way of life, not because we find anything wrong with another’s way of life.
You seem puzzled as to why ‘bharatnatyam’ is dreaded. Let me again tell you it is not because it is Indian, but because it is Un-Islamic. In the Islamic way of life, there is no time for music and dance, and an islamic society is a segregated society, where men and women are intructed to shield themselves from the eyes of the other gender, not shake their bodies in full glory for the benefit of onlookers in the name of art. You seemed to hace missed the fact that Belle Dancing which the ‘enlightened’ Arabs have embraced as part of their repertoire of ‘art’ is just as dreaded as Bharatnatyam, more so in fact because its USP is more lust and less twisting, shaking and tiring of limbs as is the way with most other dances.
Oh, and as for those spats, fear not..we would always have them on field similar language or not…for instance what words did Sohail and Prasad exchange between them? What would anyone in the Indian team make of Afridi or Younis’ Pushto barrages, and what would Sreesanth’s swearing amount to a Pakistani?
Go for it, we shall Insha Allah one day, but for reasons entirely different from those you have understood….
Do keep visiting…:)
May 2nd, 2006 at 12:35 am
knicq,
My post was only partly in jest.
1. I totally understand when you say that Pakistan was created for Indian muslims to live as they interpret their faith without any compromise. I also see how it is offensive to you when Indian’s suggest a “united” country.
2. I also understand how your desire for all Pakistani’s to read and understand Arabic to bring this about.
3. But when it comes to “culture” I feel this is a rather fluid concept. Trying to define what aspect of “culture” is in conformance with religion will always be a slippery slope.
May 2nd, 2006 at 9:05 am
That was an excellent reply knicq bro – surely a contender for “CGL – XIII” or something? I don’t think I can add improve upon your comprehensive and articulate reply so will not try.
bongdongs – Hello mate, thank you for the clarification above. Just one comment on your point 3: I agree culture is a very fluid concept, and even harder to define or pin down. However, I am not sure I agree when you say:
Trying to define what aspect of “culture” is in conformance with religion will always be a slippery slope.
In my (very humble) view, it will only be a slippery slope if one is not sure of what the religion requires or stipulates. In the case of Islam, for instance, the behaviours, emotions and personality traits that Islam encourages and discourages are all well-known and well-established, and have been so for 1,400 years. As such, we have no problem, no ambiguity and certainly no confusion in concluding on whether certain aspects of ‘contemporary culture’ are in conformance with Islam, or not. In fact, any Muslim who knows her/his religion should be able to do that.
I appreciate that the above may appear impractical, even a tad far-fetched to a non-Muslim; but for a Muslim, it is completely natural and part and parcel of being a Muslim.
May 2nd, 2006 at 4:07 pm
Knicq bro, your articulation of this particular area of Islamic thought is impressive. You may also note that the use of ‘Non’ as a prefix rather than ‘Anti’ might help in clarifying further some of the related points in this very enlightening discussion.
It may also be emphasized that cultural practices of any Muslim community may be retained as such in its life, provided that these practices conform atleast to the minimum framework of Islamic law. To be precise, these practices must not include those which come within the ambit of the prohibitions enforced by God in His Qur’an. This genuine apprehension aside, culture, like language, belongs to that group of factors which highlight the diversity of mankind, while yet mankind remains a single species, sharing the same primordial conscience, the same abilities, and the same potentialities.
Indeed, it is this diversity in unity that has been projected repeatedly throughout the Quran as being a veritable Sign (or ‘aayah’) of the same and single Creator of Man. As the Quran says,
‘Verily, in the differences in your colours and your tongues (i.e., languages), there is a sign for you.’
Thus, while Arabic needs to be respected, and studied, for the guidance that it offers us (it being the language of the Quran), the importance of other languages of mankind, or of the diversity of the human tongue, cannot be diminished at all. In fact, to lessen the importance due to any language is to indirectly
contest the truth of the Quranic verse cited above.
In some ways, culture often develops as an extension of a language, and, doubtless, few things bond a people together like a common language. As such, and with the revelation of the Quran, the diversity of human culture need not be necessarily frowned upon as long as all cultural practices respect the framework of Quranic law, and strictly stay away from the prohibitions made in the Quran. Granted this minimum conformance, the diversity of culture in itself might be encouraged inasmuch as the Quran says:
‘O Mankind! Fear your Lord who created you but from a single soul…..And made of you nations and tribes so that you may know each other (not that you fight each other). Indeed, the most virtuous amongst you are those who are the most God-concious.’
It is not without reason then that a genuine discussion prevailed, and continues to prevail, amongst the scholars of the Ummah (or the worldwide Islamic community) with regard to the norms and factors that go in to the legitimization of a prevalent cultural practice (termed ‘urf’ in legal parlance) in a Muslim-majority area outside of Arabia proper. The realist that he was, the Prophet was also reported to have made a famous statement to the effect: ‘Do keep in mind that I am a human like yourselves. If I bring you anything in Religion (or Deen), then do accept it. But in matters other than religion, you are (or might be) better aware of your own affairs.’
Granted all these issues, it may be said, in conclusion, that Islamic legislation, in keeping with the Quran and the practices of the Prophet, has, more by design than by accident, engendered a certain minimum model for Muslims in all lands and times to emulate for purposes of their salvation in the Hereafter. This is not without its obvious benefit of uniformity: uniformity in diversity!
Therefore, as a faith-community with clearly missionary purposes, the Muslims must stand out no matter what their culture, what their language. Given the critical importance of positing Good against Evil, and Truth against Falsehood, it was the intention of the Prophet to make the Muslims a very obviously separate entity amongst mankind in that the others might easily be led to them in their soul-searching for virtue in a world of vice, for light amidst darkness and for the benefits of Peace right within the very fog of War. Indeed, this was perhaps the reason why the Prophet discouraged the Muslims from a blind, carefree, imitation of all and sundry through his cryptic comment: ‘He who imitates a people is from them.’ Religiously therefore, and even culturally (where culture crosses the prohibitions of Islam), the good Muslim will forever shy away from imitation that strays away from the pattern of the Prophet: the role model – the complete man – for those who look towards their accountability before God in the Hereafter.
May 2nd, 2006 at 6:44 pm
I think I choose the wrong words upar
, apologies. All I meant kay as you wrote too Arabic should have been in the syllabi. But I doubt it would have been the spoken language of the masses.
So a question comes apart from reciting Quran and prayers where else in practical life would we have fitted Arabic?
or maybe I am missing the bigger picture here.
May 2nd, 2006 at 6:48 pm
ofcourse I also missed this point understanding and implementing the whole Islamic law would have been a lot easier.
May 3rd, 2006 at 12:38 am
Bongdongs, Maranello, BAQ and Saadie: Thank you for your comments. Were it not for half of a head-ache, or to be more precise a complete head-ache concentrated in half of my head, I would have loved to tell all of you how much I agreed with pretty much all of you guys have said…:)
For now I take the easy way out, and direct you to an articulate presentation of the questions I had wished to raise here in this post, questions that were originally raised by Maranello in his comments on a post entitled Ad. Woes in knicqland…subsequently the comments have appeared as a post in his own blog….:)
https://bakkah.wordpress.com/2006/04/30/mind-your-language/
There are, to borrow an expression from that all time great P.G. Wodehouse, wheels within wheels…:)
May 18th, 2006 at 1:45 pm
how and why do you expect me to comment on your cgl’s? they take too much of thinking and i told you my brain’s been missing. if found, please feed to the nearest annoying cat and if i am any lucky, the cat would die with my brain in it.
May 18th, 2006 at 9:14 pm
Oh, but its a start. Your coming here is. With your brain in its system, the cat is bound to go around picking cat fights, and snubbing even the oncoming 18 wheelers!
It might come to be a good thing if they actually do have nine lives!
May 19th, 2006 at 7:36 pm
Dear Knicq:
I always visit your web site, some times I do post to remind you I am still here and alive
Your logics very closely resemble to another friend of mine, who was raised in Dubai and my arguments with him pretty much remind me of our conversations. I hope you do not have any stupid person like me who argues with you over there with my kind of stupid ideas and beliefs
But finally I have decided to try to stay away from controversy and controversial remarks especially in these (knicq land) posts.
May 20th, 2006 at 1:18 am
Dear FABW:
My logic has little to do with where I was brought up, it has a lot to do with who I am…a Muslim and a Pakistani.
We all know you are anything but stupid..anyone who scores a 3.94 on a 4.0 scale is anything but stupid.
I really do not mind your controversial remarks, as you put it. They stimulate honest discussion and that is always a good thing. Do keep visiting…there is of course that unfinished response to your previous response that I need to complete and put up here…but there will be lots more I am sure you will find worth commenting.