” While Hindu writers are being shown such appreciation, just look at how devoted the Hindus are to the Muslim poets [of Hindi].
New editions of Rahim’s and Ja’isi’s works continue to appear, and they are as assiduously read as the writings of Surdas and Tulsidas.
And, “Why couldn’t Muslim writers be found for the job?
” In his view, no Hindu writer can write in Urdu even if he spends an entire life doing just that; while a Muslim, according to him, knows naturally how to write in Urdu.
This praiseworthy gentleman has invented a style of writing in Urdu that may be called confusing or confused.
At first he wielded his pen on such path-breaking topics as “The Dancer,” “The Songster,” and “Cupid.
8] Hindi soil and water have given Urdu its inherent shape, and that cannot be altered by inserting into Urdu a few Arabic and Persian words—a change of dress does not change anyone’s race or nationality. Niyaz might get, the Hindu cannot discard his rightful claim on Urdu, nor can he refrain from writing Urdu in his own way—no less than the Muslim who writes Urdu in his own manner. Niyaz may loudly complain that the Hindus were butchering Urdu, but so can the Hindus claim that the Muslims were slaughtering it, and more brutally at that.
9] A division or separation can take place only if the Muslims began to write [exclusively] for the Muslims, and the Hindus similarly for the Hindus.
But I can say this: God alone may save the language whose writers are so narrow-minded and egocentric.
It is a common enough charge against the Muslims that they have never duly acknowledged the Hindu writers and poets of Urdu—even [Daya Shankar] Nasim and [Ratan Nath] Sarshar were excluded from among the masters of Urdu. I am willing to concede that the Muslims have done Urdu relatively many more favors, but I shall never accept that the Hindus did nothing for it.