The Vanity of Vernacular Inheritance

In a country like ours with a vast and topographically varied geographical extent, it is not unnatural that different parts of it would be endowed with stark differences in their cultural elements comprising of food choices, social and religious customs and of course languages. These stark differences have played a big role in shaping the rich cultural history of the whole subcontinent and also dynamically played a role in aiding the assimilation and absorption of the foreign elements into our own way of life through the passage of time. 

Through this natural course of cultural evolution different regions have been able to identify themselves as strongly knit communities having their own cultural past while belonging to a larger social and political fabric of a nation state. We can as easily identify the differences between the languages spoken in the southern and northern regions as we can contrast the food preferences between the western and eastern states.

As much as these variations are like the different coloured threads of a giant beautiful tapestry, there is a very agonizing outcome of such varied vernacular affiliations that poses a threat to the smooth amalgamation of the elements of such a diverse dynamic. One's identification with his or her own vernacular heritage is no doubt a matter of pride and satisfaction. But problem comes when such a sentiment degenerates to the extent of vanity. Then it changes the whole picture of a peaceful coexistence of varied elements into a struggle for establishing the supremacy of one over the other. Such kind of a cultural tussle does not remain limited to the extent of being a mere cultural debate but gradually percolates into many functional aspects of our everyday lives. It leads us into thinking that the literature from a certain region or language is superior to others, or a certain profession or vocation is a natural home turf of people speaking a certain language. This is where we shift from being an assimilative and tolerant society into one where different regional or linguistic identities function in the manner of cartels. The selfish intent of pushing one's own religious, cultural or linguistic identity over that of others to promote their own agenda creates divisive tendencies which not only hampers a natural cultural flow across regions but also creates an unhealthy environment of fear, doubt and mistrust across communities.

To take an example, merely the fact that Tusli Ramayan is a work in Awadhi dialect does not make it an exclusive heritage of the Awadhi, Maithili speaking region of India. It belongs as much to a Malayali or a Tamilian as much as it does to a Bhojpuri speaking person. A couplet ("sher") from Meer would mean the same if it comes out of the mouth of a Hindu or a Muslim or a Jain or a Parsi. A heritage is a heritage for all who find a reason to associate themselves to it, derive pleasure and solace from it.

In the present tumultuous times where every issue can be coloured in a divisive manner for the selfish gains of a small group of people, we should take extreme care to not lose sight of reason. We would have failed our cultural lineage and inheritance if we start seeing our victory in the plight of others.