Nehru’s Legacy: Time to pay tribute

Manto

Re: #750

(After 1974 (and the definition of a Muslim issue), they felt alienated from Zulfikar Ali Bhutto... however discrimination as such was not rampant, nor were they till 1977 persecuted for calling themselves Muslims. )

But if Pakistan were to go back to MAJ (pbuh)`s 8/11 speech, the question of Hindu/Muslim/Ahmedi would be irrelevant to Pak statehood.

Regards

Anil ji

Just for the sake of it, please allow me to do some logical fearmongering.

Would it be fair to say that ever since the arrival of Semitic religions, Hinduism, in fact ALL Indian thought except Sikhism - has been continuously shrinking in its geographical expanse and losing its relative political supremacy? It could well be that we are living through a mere blip on a secular historical trend, that unless matters are consciously changed, over time all Indian thought may completely disappear from its own lands?

What can make anyone so confident that this `fearmongering` scenario is quite unlikely (ofcouse, anything and absolutely anything may happen, but that is not the issue here)?

Re: # 779

Sadna:

What you have presented will stand tests of time.

There is no rationality in beastiality of partition, it can only truthfully chronicled for posterirty that such acts are also done by humans to humans. A generation owes such chronicles to the next. There is no need to explain or reason out, or put a blame on anyone, just truthful chronicle. I know such chronicles bring emotions including anger out, may be Ranjit expressed his and reminded him of some things detesting. If so, the purpose such chronicles serve is worth to be retold.

Re: # 783

Ranjit:

Ranjit, Hindu thought captures mind more than heart. It still conjures a very different image of spirituality than Islamic which sadly today captures the image of jihad and terror. Hinduism surived 800 years of subjugation. No other religious thought has survived such prolonged subjugation. It survived because it remained diffused in the society. It was not institutionalized to be attacked and destroyed. Its only yard stick was what that mind in whose mind space it confined, was decided by that chose it to be. If those idols or temples were the institutions of Hinduism they were destroyed and would have been destroyed forever. 800 years covers over 3,000 generations. You and constitue only two, the longest human link span never more than three or four generations. If Islam was able to destroy Christianity in less than 100 years in Spain and Turkey. Likewise Christianity was able to destroy Islam in Spain in about the same time. Augranzeb thought destroying Vishwanath temple would destroy Hindusim. What you regard its weakness, is its strength.

Think and answer why Hinduism surived?

Re:alephnull#780

[..Is it possible that a majority of those Muslims all over India who would not have had the resources to move to Pakistan had no say in their fate? ....]

It is possible but I havent seen any evidence of it. From what I have heard, in 1947 even muslims in Tamil Nadu supported Pakistan, even though they had no means or interest in shifting there. Pakistan was a scheme concocted by the upper classes, no doubt. But it had an emotional appeal to most muslims at that time.

Re:sadna

[..but is it right to completely prejudge every possible Hindu-Muslim outcome in all times to come because of that period....]

It is the other way around - hindu-muslim outcome for all times have been following a very distinct pattern, which we deliberately choose to ignore. The historical reality is that hinduism stretched from Gandhar in Afghanistan to encompass the entire subcontinent. That reality has been brutally shattered starting with Afghanistan, then the entire region of Pakistan, then Kashmir and even as we speak in Bangladesh. There was a period of 800 years of muslim rule, when muslim leaders tried every trick in the book to bring the subcontinent into the fold of islam, but failed mainly due to the sheer population of hindus and the resistance put up.

Actually I dont blame you for thinking the way you do. This is the hindu way of life - all roads lead to God. We are a pluralistic culture. That is why we never made a big deal of the inroads made by Islam into our social fabric until we realized too late that we cannot live in our own lands. Forget about Punjabis or Sindhis, just ask the Kashmiris who dare not visit their own valley even though it is officially a part of India. It is our collective naivete not to recognize what Islam is all about - a non-stop force that believes in its inhernet supremacy and wants converts from everywhere. If we do not recognize this and think that Islam is just another religion like Buddhism or Sikhism, we are being self-delusional.

We can never implement proper domestic or foreign policy if we do not step out of our traditional hindu mindset and analyze the problem dispassionately. The entire world is in that same process of evaluating Islam and how to deal with it, so it is not just our problem. Within the subcontinent, I fear that over the years, the Pakistanis are going to push more and more for open borders, free movement of people etc. That is because they realize that given nukes, they cannot win militarily, while the current boundaries of Pakistan limits their ambitions. Is it a surprise that suddenly you hear so much about Cabinet Mission Plan, undivided Bengal, Punjab?

Ref sadna #770

[That was more than 60 years ago, why are you and ranjit taking it out on Indian Muslims today? Most Indian Muslims were not even born then, in fact I will bet a majority of young Indian Muslims` parents were not born then.]

Hey, I will go so far as to say that most Indian Muslims` grandparents weren`t born then! The way these madrassah-uneducated, mosque-going, Koran-reciting, ``Death-to-the-US``-chanting momofukus get married young and outbreed rabbits, that is a more likely scenario.

Ref sadna #779

[.... it is Indians` own fault for promoting a false history where the Indians including Indian Muslims resisting the Muslim League were all communal and the Muslim League was alone secular.]

Isn`t that precisely the stance of the Congress and the left wing in India? That Muslim League is secular but BJP is communal? And haven`t you supported that position on Chowk all along... at least that pasrt about BJP being the only communal party in India?

ranjit #778

{{The elections in 1946 had established Muslim League as the representative of majority of muslims all over India.}}

The 1946 elections may have established the ML as overwhelmingly representative of those Muslims who had the franchise and chose to exercise it. What fraction of all Indian Muslims did this enfrachised portion constitute? The right to vote was anything but universal - I gather that there were literacy, property and income qualifications. These qualifications would give grossly disproportionate representation to those Muslims who might actually personally benefit from attainment of the ML’s stated goals – going all the way to a partition - or could plausibly delude themselves into thinking they might benefit. Is it possible that a majority of those Muslims all over India who would not have had the resources to move to Pakistan had no say in their fate?

ranjit
You don`t know whether my family was affected by partition or not so don`t claim to have a superior morality here simply because I posted the record after repeatedly and continuously being accused of lying by Mantolives. I had mentioned these incidents before in my previous posts but he ignored it. Indian Muslims don`t become collectively guilty by one post of mine, it is Indians` own fault for promoting a false history where the Indians including Indian Muslims resisting the Muslim League were all communal and the Muslim League was alone secular.

You yourself said that Muslim League was defunct except for a period starting from 1936-37 onward. Its communal agenda swept Muslims in its wake, true, but is it right to completely prejudge every possible Hindu-Muslim outcome in all times to come because of that period? I think for Indians to do so is like a self-fulfilling prophecy, like fighting stupid, which is completely self-defeating. I thought history as detailed in my post shows how self-defeating such paranoia about the other is, so why is it that you don`t get it?

Re:alephnull#776

[..What is your basis for the claim in the sentence I have italicised (i.e. “full democratic support”)? ....]

The elections in 1946 had established Muslim League as the representative of majority of muslims all over India. A minority still supported the Congress, but a majority had switched allegiance to the League.

Re:sadna#770

[..Whine about today`s problems if you have to, or even the aftermath of Partition on Indian Muslims and ditch this thing about collective guilt where none exists....]

Continuing from #775, Kashmiri Pandits being kicked out en masse from Kashmir is today`s problem. It happened in the 1990s, without the presence of Muslim League or Jinnah within the boundaries of a nuclear India. Even today these poor people are huddled in refugee camps in Jammu and Delhi. And it was done by local Kashmiri muslims in cahoots with their masters from across the border. Did this happen due to right wing hindus taking it out on poor muslims?

ranjit #775

{{The people doing the killing in Punjab and Bengal were your neighbors, not just some Muslim League goons. And anyway Muslim League had full democratic support from majority muslims all over India.}}

What is your basis for the claim in the sentence I have italicised (i.e. “full democratic support”)?

Re:sadna

Were you personally affected by partition? We lost all our property and several people from both maternal and paternal sides who were brutally killed in the violence. My grandfather`s elder brother who used to manage the property was so traumatized that in his later years he lost his mental balance. Consider what you cut and paste in posting #762

[.......Whole villages in the Jhelum, Attock and Rawalpindi districts were put to the sword. About 40,000 people, mainly Sikhs had taken refuge in hurriedly established camps.........Non-Muslims with some justice now regarded the Muslims has little better than animals.........the non-Muslims regarded the Muslims of Rawalpindi and Attock as little better than beasts and hated the League profoundly..........In the Rawalpindi and Attock districts and later in part of the Jhelum district there was an absolute butchery of non-Muslims. In many villages they were herded into houses and burnt alive. Many Sikhs had their hair and beards cur, and there were cases of forcible circumcision. Many Sikh women who escaped slaugher were abducted..............The communal proportions have not been accurately recorded, but I shouls ay that among the dead there are 6 non-Muslims for every Muslim......]

Why are you writing this stuff if you do not wish people to get provoked? Maybe for you it is nothing but an academic exercise to score points against manto, but for a lot of people, it is a sensitive subject.

Hindu-muslim violence in 1947 and even later, is not just some politically managed stage show. It starts out that way but then it involves full participation of the communities. The people doing the killing in Punjab and Bengal were your neighbors, not just some Muslim League goons. And anyway Muslim League had full democratic support from majority muslims all over India.

The problem is that people like you think that hindu-muslim issue is just an aberration, in an otherwise cordial people to people relations. It is not. It is a deep rooted ideological battle between two competing religions, two competing world views and two competing ways of life. The two are incompatible, a fact that has been proven a thousand times in history, not just in 1947. Even as late as in 1990s, we saw all pandits unceremoniously kicked out of Kashmir, ignoring all the ethnic and cultural bonds. We choose to ignore this reality given our basic premise that humanity is universal.

By the way, this does not mean that we have to fight or commit violence against anyone. It means that we should understand reality and adopt a realistic policy to manage the problem. Managing the amount of muslims that we have today is reasonable ane we should avoid letting it get out of hand again from a demographics point of view. Trying to blur boundaries with Pakistan that can cause movement of people is a huge folly. Allowing uncontrolled muslim immigration from Bangladesh is a huge folly.

ranjit:

Though most Indian Muslims (of that time) supported league / Pakistan not many knew what they are getting into..

read this first hand report from C M Naim. a young muslim kid at that time from UP (I think).

... woke up early, probably on my own. More likely I was awakened by the voices of the Congress boys who went around the city that morning -as they had been doing for more than a week - loudly chanting nationalist songs. I imagine I was quite excited. The previous afternoon we - all my friends in the Muslim Students Federation (MSF) and I had celebrated the creation of Pakistan by holding a rally in front of our small office-cum-library. The crescent-and-star-on-green flag of the Muslim League was raised and saluted, poems were sung, and speeches were listened to. Later, as we were dispersing, some one had suggested that we should further display our commitment to the Muslim League and the Quaid-e Azam by `boycotting` the ceremonies at the school the next day. There was an immediate agreement. We were fearless Muslims. Hadn`t we just won Pakistan `laughingly?` (After the announcement of the Partition and the acceptance speeches of the leaders on 3 June 1947, some enthusiastic slogan-maker of the Muslim League had come up with a hot one:

hans ke liya hai Pakistan
lar ke lenge Hindustan.)

The ceremony at the school - Government High School - was at eight, but the students had been told to come early. We would assemble in rows in the front yard of the school according to the grades we were in. Then, to the accompaniment of an anthem sung by a chorus, the principal would hoist the flag, and everyone would salute the flag by folding an arm before his chest. Later, sweets would be distributed.

sadna, mohar, anil, ranjit

The issue of identifiability is one of the toughest nuts to crack. That it is not possible to efficiently and easily distinuish between the crow and the koyal leads to so many problems, and is behind such measures as profiling.

It could be that people from all groups will have to cooperate to crack this very real problem for open societies. Still, we can`t throw up our hands...