– M A Moid

The journey of Urdu in the Deccan is an important story from the perspective of language politics in south India. Many claims are made about the role of Deccan in the journey of Urdu. The theme of this set of writings ‘from OU to MANUU’ will show us some issues faced by Urdu in its recent journey. The old Urdu medium Osmania University (OU) was established in 1919. After nearly eighty years Maulana Azad National Urdu University (MANUU) was established in 1998. The historical and political contexts of both universities are different though some aspects of their purposes were same and some different. The vision of OU was closely related to the concept of ‘progress’ where as that of MANUU with ‘development’. OU was established by a princely state which was on the modernizing mission. MANUU was established by the independent modern Indian state which formulated its visions and policies on the ideas of socialism, democracy, secularism and also of Swaraj. OU wanted to make Urdu a scientific language and make it a part of a linguistic identity of the larger subcontinent. MANUU want to spread the use of Urdu in order to empower and enable its users according to the needs of the market. For OU, the Urdu programme was a means to a higher end of the renaissance of Urdu language and of the Orient as such, whereas for MANUU the development of Urdu language users is a tool for the national development. Despite these differences both universities were established in Hyderabad which shows the city’s importance from the various purposes of progress, development and identity.

In order to understand the historical travel of Urdu from OU to MANUU, two interviews were conducted with two personalities who have different foci as scholars (though both are associated with MANUU). Dr Junaid Zakir, whose focus is on OU, tries to help us understand the detailed processes that it invented and adapted to make Urdu language suitable for scientific discourse and OU into a university capable of teaching modern science in a vernacular. This kind of project was also a major concern for the Indian nationalists who were concerned with the education of the new generations in independent India. Zakir compares these processes and its outcomes with another institution, National Council for Promotion of Urdu Language (NCPUL) established by independent India – about which he is not impressed. This leads to the sensitive question about the effectiveness of the institutions established by democratic regimes under the demands of the public or due to some political compulsions.

The second interview regarding MANUU is with Professor Khalid Sayeed whose perspectives and experiences are shaped by Central Institute of Indian Languages (CIIL) based in Mysore, an institution established by the government of modern independent India. Innovative and scientific methods were successfully adapted in this institution in teaching of Indian languages. He has used many of these innovative methods successfully to teach Urdu within the university setup as well as outside. His success raises a counter question (to Zakir’s view) about the effectiveness of the government established institutions.

These interviews give two perspectives about the state of Urdu in the Deccan in particular and in India in general and tell us about the Muslims aspirations in a changing environment in relation to Urdu. Urdu is not the exclusive language of Muslims but the identity politics in the last century has created affiliations between language and community. The Muslims are forced to take up the issue of Urdu as if it is no one else’s business. This has created strains among Urdu activists. The demands of ‘development’ and ‘identity’ made them vulnerable to various confusions. For example the question of English and the urgencies of opportunities force a kind of pragmatism that is leading to all kinds of compromises. The conflicting pulls and push on the Urdu walas create self doubts: that are they serving the cause of English as they feel that English is more important to them now rather than Urdu itself. Are they followers of Macaulay in vernacular garb? The challenge for them is how to respond to these conflicting demands. The politics of Urdu that emerged as a result of all these pressures has converted the issue of Urdu into a platform from where various related issues are addressed. The platform serves the purpose of internal criticism, mobilizing, resisting majoritarianism and State apathy.

The two interviews that follow are about the state of Urdu in South India. It also raises many questions about the state of other vernaculars as well which may or may not be travelling the same path as that of Urdu, and finally asks what happens to vernaculars under the developmental democratic setup.