AMONG the controversies that have been raging in Urdu since long, one concerns Lughat-e-Kabeer.

This Urdu-Urdu dictionary was published by Anjuman Taraqqi-e-Urdu Pakistan (ATUP) and Moulvi Abdul Haq’s name appeared on its title as compiler. But Shanul Haq Haqqee claimed that Lughat-e-Kabeer was not compiled by Moulvi Abdul Haq, and his father Ehtishamuddin Haqqee was the real compiler, but was denied his rightful authorship.

The idea of a greater Urdu dictionary popped up in the minds of many when Oxford English Dictionary’s project, the multivolume, most comprehensive English-English dictionary ever written, was eventually completed in 1928 after a long-drawn herculean effort spreading over 70 years. In 1930, the Nizam of Deccan approved the compilation and publication of Urdu’s most comprehensive dictionary on the lines of Oxford’s great lexicographic feat. Moulvi Abdul Haq was made its editor.

As noted by Syed Hashmi Fareedabadi, Ehtishamuddin Haqqee Dehlvi was appointed as Moulvi Sahib’s assistant and a committee headed by Moulvi Sahib was formed to review the manuscript. Abdus Sattar Siddiqi, Pandit Dattatreya Kaifi and Hashmi Fareedabadi were the members of the committee. Only a few fascicles had published in Hyderabad Deccan’s government press when all hell broke loose in the wake of independence in 1947. Anjuman’s Delhi office was ransacked, looted and burnt by fanatics. A large number of books, rare manuscripts and proofs were burnt down, including the manuscript of the proposed dictionary.

When Moulvi Sahib migrated to Pakistan to re-establish the Anjuman here, he had to begin work on the dictionary from scratch. Though the work on Lughat-e-Kabeer remained unfinished as Moulvi Sahib had fallen ill and died in 1961, its first and second volumes were published by ATUP in 1973 and 1977, respectively. But Shanul Haq Haqqee in his book Nukta-e-Raaz (1972) raised the issue and claimed that his father had done almost the entire work on Lughat-e-Kabeer and Moulvi Sahib did not bother to give his name even as co-compiler. In his book, Haqqee has described in detail how his father devoted his entire time to compiling Lughat-e-Kabeer for about 15 years.

But Jameeluddin Aali in the preface to Lughat-e-Kabeer’s first volume said it was an exaggeration to attribute the entire work of the dictionary to Ehtishamuddin Haqqee and it was a part of mischief-mongering launched by the adversaries of ATUP.

Haqqee senior was assigned to rearrange the entries, find citations from literary works and, if needed, to explain the meanings further. He used to add idioms and phrases but most of them were considered redundant by Moulvi Sahib, who would axe them from the manuscript.

On the other hand, there are some scholars, such as, Abdul Majid Daryabadi and Akhlaq Ahmed Dehlvi, who believed the dictionary was Ehtishamuddin Haqqee’s labour of love. It is a fact that there were two groups at Urdu Dictionary Board (UDB), one favouring Moulvi Abdul Haq and the other taking side with Shanul Haq Haqqee who was the moving spirit behind the mammoth task of compiling a 22-volume Urdu-Urdu dictionary.

This controversy is discussed in a new book recently published by ATUP. Penned by Irfan Shah, it is a doctoral dissertation on Shanul Haq Haqqee. But the entire thesis tries to portray Haqqee as a perfect man. It proves all of Haqqee’s opponents were hatching conspiracies all the time at UDB. The title itself suggests how eulogistic this ‘research’ work is: Naabgha-e-Lisaan-o-Adab Muhammad Shanul Haq Haqqee (genius of language and literature Muhammad Shanul Haq Haqqee). No doubt, Haqqee was a real genius — a great lexicographer, master wordsmith, genuine poet, amazing translator, credible critic, meticulous editor and a meritorious storyteller — yet a research work is supposed to be an objective, unemotional and impartial study based on facts, logic and evidence. It is not supposed to be a poem eulogising each and every aspect of a personality.

The title suggests that it is not a research work but a panegyric ode. Most of the arguments are based on one-sided statements abstracted from interviews of UDB’s employees considered a part of Haqqee’s group.

Typos are numerous and raise many questions, for instance, everywhere the word mansoor (spelt with Urdu letter ‘se’, meaning prosaic) is spelt as manshoor (with Urdu letter ‘sheen’, meaning manifesto) (pages 5and 255).

Some factual errors show that the writer did not bother to verify some pieces of information. For example, he says Oxford English-Urdu Dictionary compiled by Haqqee Sahib “is most complete English-Urdu dictionary” (page 265).

The fact is the most comprehensive English-Urdu dictionary is the six-volume dictionary with about 250,000 entries, compiled by Kaleemuddin Ahmed and published by Delhi’s National Council for Promotion of Urdu Language.

Works mentioned in bibliography are not in proper alphabetical order and one struggles to find any particular book. The book describes history of Urdu lexicography and history of UDB as well.

drraufparekh@yahoo.com

Published in Dawn, March 7th, 2022