This is a post on the Partition of India and I felt like writing on this topic after watching a documentary named "The Day India Burnt" by BBC.
Some people said that the partition of India was needless as it led to a gigantic human migration and numerous loss of lives and property. On the other hand for the Muslims in the Pakistani area, the partition was the realization of their dream of a separate nation for the Muslims, where they would never have to be a minority, unlike India. For them it meant the creation of a nation that they could "really call their own".
WHAT A HINDU SAYS?
If asked from any Hindu nationalist in India today, he would quiet confidently give facts to prove that the partition was needless. Pakistan was built on the grounds that in a Hindu majority India, the rights of the Muslims get crushed. The truth has been quiet opposite.
WHAT A HINDU SAYS?
If asked from any Hindu nationalist in India today, he would quiet confidently give facts to prove that the partition was needless. Pakistan was built on the grounds that in a Hindu majority India, the rights of the Muslims get crushed. The truth has been quiet opposite.
- The rights of Muslims have been protected quiet ultra-secularly, to such an extent that ironically at times Hindu interests have been sacrificed or neglected for the sake of impressing the minorities. Thus, where on one hand Tasleema Tasreen continues to be insulted and ostracized by the Indian Government for her criticism of the minority laws in Islamic nations, on the other hand MF Hussain is being presented with State Awards, even when he has quiet openly painted nude pictures of Hindu goddesses with very shameless themes.
- Moreover, the status of Muslims is India continues to be much better that their counterparts in Pakistan and Azad kashmir(POK) with greater democratic rights.
- Moreover the strength and the unity of Indian Muslims has been reduced to one third of the what it could have been had India not been partitioned.
BITTER FACTS-
No matter these facts are true and put up a very strong case in support for "Partition was a failure" theory but there are some uncomfortable realities that cannot be undone. Muslims in India, no matter enjoy political freedom , they still feel a little cut off from the mainstream India, as Hindus still fail to mix with the Muslims completely. There exist stereotypes against the Muslims in Hindu minds, like
No matter these facts are true and put up a very strong case in support for "Partition was a failure" theory but there are some uncomfortable realities that cannot be undone. Muslims in India, no matter enjoy political freedom , they still feel a little cut off from the mainstream India, as Hindus still fail to mix with the Muslims completely. There exist stereotypes against the Muslims in Hindu minds, like
- "Indian Muslims are more loyal towards Pakistan than India."
- "Muslims by having more children, dream of claiming a minority one day and turn India into an Islamic State."
- "Muslims prosecute the kafirs(Non Muslims) wherever they come to a majority."
- "Islam is a religion spread out of the sword and Muslims in general are violent."
- "Muslims are beef eaters and thus should not be socialized with."
- "Muslims have disrespect for Hinduism as they consider it to be Polytheist and Idol Worshiping (exactly opposite to Islam)
Even though constitution has provided many safeguards to the minorities, and Hindus are more secular and adjusting than any other community of the world, but living in a society as a Muslim where the majority has in general not-so-nice feelings for you, any person may feel a sense of alienation from the mainstream society. What Jinnah did was to make these dormant communal feelings active and use it for his own political interests. There was a problem of alienation(the the Congress never accepted) amongst Muslims but it should have been solved by accepting the problem and sincerely working towards religious harmony, rather that bluntly calling for creation of Pakistan.
HINDU EXPLANATION-
Indians may say that India was Partitioned only because of Muhammad Ali Jinnah who was jealous of Mahatma Gandhi's popularity and wanted a separate country where he could become some sort of Father-of-the-nation and he and his party hoodwinked the Muslims for a separate Muslim State. A Hindu may say that Hindus did not have any such not-so-good feelings for the Muslims. They will prove this point by bringing examples of love they shower in present times to their former President Dr Kalam, or movie stars like Shah Rukh Khan. But this is a very incorrect justification, as if this justification is applied in case of women emancipation, Indians would end up being the biggest protectors of Women Rights.
The point that I wish to stress on is that the root cause for the partition of India was the incapability of the Hindus to absorb the Muslims in their society which made Muslims feel like aliens in their own country and the subsequent use of this alienation by Jinnah for own political interests.
BUT INDIANS ARE FLEXIBLE
But historically speaking Hindus have been the most flexible religion of the world. They accepted Buddha as their own and instead of prosecuting him(Like the Jews did to Christ) they included his teachings in their own. Buddhists in the country in spite of being critical of Hinduism are considered to be one amongst them. The Jains have not only been absorbed in the society, but have gradually been included by the Hindus in the Hindu Community itself. Sikhs too are welcomed by the Hindus in their houses and are not seen differently from other Hindus. Christians though are seen from a religious angle, but in general are accepted by the Hindus and harbor normal or nice feeling. Even though Christian Missionaries are at times disliked for their "Conversion Propaganda" but Christians themselves and Christian institutions are also a part of the mainstream India. In fact even Kashmiri Muslims are accepted culturally by the Indians as their own with they being seen as a Kashmiri(like a Bengali or a Bihari) and not as a Muslim.
Unlike Islam, other religions have mixed very well with the Hindus of India. Thus it is not uncommon for Hindus to study in a Christian School, have Jain and Sikh friends and worship Lord Buddha.
WHY WAS ISLAM NOT WELL ACCEPTED?
Thus one question comes up. Why is it so that Muslims and Muslim society has not been absorbed by the Hindus of India?
Indian Architecture has definitely been influenced by Islam(Taj Mahal is its shining example), and so has the normal Indian kitchen(Kebabs and Biriyanis). The influence of Islam over India is overwhelming and it has not just revived but enriched the Indian Music(Hindustani) and Dance forms(Kathak). Thus even though Islamic Culture has had a great influence over India, the Muslims have not been able to mix with the Hindus of the nation.
The reason is the stereotypes that Hindus have about the Muslims. The cause for the creation of these stereotypes has been the History of Islam in India and the suppression of information on the topic amongst the people.
There exists a stereotype in the minds of Hindus and the rest of the world, that Muslims are violent and dislike and disregard non Muslims and have expanded their religion by sword.
Islamic History and Fundamentalism-
7th Century Islam, had either been more progressive than other religions of the world or else had been as violent. But with time as the rest of the religions evolved and adjusted themselves to the modern principles of Liberty, Equality and Fraternity, a section of Islam couldn't. While Christianity could go through a period of Renaissance that reduced the authority of the rigid Roman Catholic Church and made it more flexible, Islam hasn't had the chance to go through such a period of religious revolution. The orthodox sections of Islam have such a strong grasp over the religion that the religion is unable to change with time, and reflect the aspirations of the young Muslim men and women. Islam had at the time of partition and still continues to have some of those rigid, inflexible socio-political-cultural laws, and Muslims in some parts of India still continue to live with old 7th century Arabic social values in 21st century India.
The time when Islamic scriptures had been written, Arabian desert was a battlefield. Thus it was natural for these Islamic scriptures to have references of these battles, and praise the victory of the Muslims. With time further wars with other Abrahmic Religions, made Muslims more war-centric and prolonged wars with other religions made Muslims disregard and disrespect other religions, making them more orthodox and fundamental with the values of Jihad and Martyrdom gaining the center stage of Islamic principles. War based ideals of martyrdom and crusades have taken center stage in almost all religions but while these ideas have gradually faded out in today's stable times, in Islam they still hold importance. The automatic question that comes to our mind is, why has Islam been left out?
Why has Islam been left out?
The chief reason for the persistance of fundamentalism in Islam even in times of peace is the exceptional amount of mingling of social and political laws with religion. The different laws in the Sharia hold a devine position, and being devine they are never challenged or revised. While other religions of the world keep politics and society away from religion, having only a set of guiding moral values, Islam has had an authoritaive control over everything.
Islam was a lot more than a religion at the time of its growth. It was a socio-political-cultural movement in the 7th century Arabia and that's the reason why Islam and Prophet Muhammed had such a profound effect on everything.
Somethings are wternal truths that never change with time. The values and the teachings of Quran may be eternal, uncahnging and thus the truth, but the laws and the customs of Sharia are not. They are not truths, they are just directives based on these Quranic teachings for the conduct in the Society. But as society changes with changing circumatances(invasion, mingling with new cultures) the laws too need to change so that they can do justice to the eternal truths of Quran. The inflexibility of Islamic laws is the chief reason why an Islamic revolution(within Islam) still is in the waiting.
Spread of Islam in India-
Even though this is a false blatant lie that all Muslims were converted by sword in India there is no point denying it partially. Though spiritual movements like "Sufism" might have had influence a small section of population to convert, a large population converted to Islam due to economic and political reasons. The biggest reason for conversion in Islam was the oppression of the Lower Castes in Hinduism. Conversion to Islam, not only liberated these lower caste Hindus from their hereditary bonding, but also gave them a better standing in the society under a Muslim ruler.Add to this the "conversion by sword" policies of rulers like Aurangzeb, the reasons for the huge conversion of Hindus to Muslims become clearer.
Arabianism-
Any religion of he world has to change with the region. This is the biggest reason why Hinduism has failed to expand outside of India, while Buddhism that has been termed by many as "Hindusm for export" is the world's fastest growing religion. The orthodox Muslim clerics tried to force the old obsolete Arabic customs in the minds of Indian Muslims. Arabia being a desert is bound to have an extremely different set of customs and values as compared to India that has had a settled civilization for millenniums. Thus eating of beef in Arabia might have been accepted, owing to the scarcity of food there, but in India, it had no place as cows held an extremely respectable position in the development of the Indian civilisation. Moreover praising the names of Arabic political rulers who had no connection to India, while leaving out great Indian figures like Rama and Buddha, might have been an extremely bizzare scene for rest of the Indians.
As few generations of converted Muslims passed by the Arabic traditions became a fundamental part of their lives and they began to defend it, amidst the Hindus who had not-so-nice feelings for these customs. Thus began a polarization in India, with a section of Indian population having extremely alien customs. Islam as a religion was not alien to the Hindus, but the orthodox Arabianism that it brought along with itself, definitely was.
I would like to state that Kashmiris are definitely a different class of people in this case. Because Muslims in Kashmir accepted Islam as a religion and enriched it with their own social customs that were very much Kashmiri and not at all alien. This is the reason there has been such a great harmony in between Muslims and Hindus in Kashmir. There existed a deep understanding between the two communities and their sensitivities.
HINDU EXPLANATION-
Indians may say that India was Partitioned only because of Muhammad Ali Jinnah who was jealous of Mahatma Gandhi's popularity and wanted a separate country where he could become some sort of Father-of-the-nation and he and his party hoodwinked the Muslims for a separate Muslim State. A Hindu may say that Hindus did not have any such not-so-good feelings for the Muslims. They will prove this point by bringing examples of love they shower in present times to their former President Dr Kalam, or movie stars like Shah Rukh Khan. But this is a very incorrect justification, as if this justification is applied in case of women emancipation, Indians would end up being the biggest protectors of Women Rights.
The point that I wish to stress on is that the root cause for the partition of India was the incapability of the Hindus to absorb the Muslims in their society which made Muslims feel like aliens in their own country and the subsequent use of this alienation by Jinnah for own political interests.
BUT INDIANS ARE FLEXIBLE
But historically speaking Hindus have been the most flexible religion of the world. They accepted Buddha as their own and instead of prosecuting him(Like the Jews did to Christ) they included his teachings in their own. Buddhists in the country in spite of being critical of Hinduism are considered to be one amongst them. The Jains have not only been absorbed in the society, but have gradually been included by the Hindus in the Hindu Community itself. Sikhs too are welcomed by the Hindus in their houses and are not seen differently from other Hindus. Christians though are seen from a religious angle, but in general are accepted by the Hindus and harbor normal or nice feeling. Even though Christian Missionaries are at times disliked for their "Conversion Propaganda" but Christians themselves and Christian institutions are also a part of the mainstream India. In fact even Kashmiri Muslims are accepted culturally by the Indians as their own with they being seen as a Kashmiri(like a Bengali or a Bihari) and not as a Muslim.
Unlike Islam, other religions have mixed very well with the Hindus of India. Thus it is not uncommon for Hindus to study in a Christian School, have Jain and Sikh friends and worship Lord Buddha.
WHY WAS ISLAM NOT WELL ACCEPTED?
Thus one question comes up. Why is it so that Muslims and Muslim society has not been absorbed by the Hindus of India?
Indian Architecture has definitely been influenced by Islam(Taj Mahal is its shining example), and so has the normal Indian kitchen(Kebabs and Biriyanis). The influence of Islam over India is overwhelming and it has not just revived but enriched the Indian Music(Hindustani) and Dance forms(Kathak). Thus even though Islamic Culture has had a great influence over India, the Muslims have not been able to mix with the Hindus of the nation.
The reason is the stereotypes that Hindus have about the Muslims. The cause for the creation of these stereotypes has been the History of Islam in India and the suppression of information on the topic amongst the people.
There exists a stereotype in the minds of Hindus and the rest of the world, that Muslims are violent and dislike and disregard non Muslims and have expanded their religion by sword.
Islamic History and Fundamentalism-
7th Century Islam, had either been more progressive than other religions of the world or else had been as violent. But with time as the rest of the religions evolved and adjusted themselves to the modern principles of Liberty, Equality and Fraternity, a section of Islam couldn't. While Christianity could go through a period of Renaissance that reduced the authority of the rigid Roman Catholic Church and made it more flexible, Islam hasn't had the chance to go through such a period of religious revolution. The orthodox sections of Islam have such a strong grasp over the religion that the religion is unable to change with time, and reflect the aspirations of the young Muslim men and women. Islam had at the time of partition and still continues to have some of those rigid, inflexible socio-political-cultural laws, and Muslims in some parts of India still continue to live with old 7th century Arabic social values in 21st century India.
The time when Islamic scriptures had been written, Arabian desert was a battlefield. Thus it was natural for these Islamic scriptures to have references of these battles, and praise the victory of the Muslims. With time further wars with other Abrahmic Religions, made Muslims more war-centric and prolonged wars with other religions made Muslims disregard and disrespect other religions, making them more orthodox and fundamental with the values of Jihad and Martyrdom gaining the center stage of Islamic principles. War based ideals of martyrdom and crusades have taken center stage in almost all religions but while these ideas have gradually faded out in today's stable times, in Islam they still hold importance. The automatic question that comes to our mind is, why has Islam been left out?
Why has Islam been left out?
The chief reason for the persistance of fundamentalism in Islam even in times of peace is the exceptional amount of mingling of social and political laws with religion. The different laws in the Sharia hold a devine position, and being devine they are never challenged or revised. While other religions of the world keep politics and society away from religion, having only a set of guiding moral values, Islam has had an authoritaive control over everything.
Islam was a lot more than a religion at the time of its growth. It was a socio-political-cultural movement in the 7th century Arabia and that's the reason why Islam and Prophet Muhammed had such a profound effect on everything.
Somethings are wternal truths that never change with time. The values and the teachings of Quran may be eternal, uncahnging and thus the truth, but the laws and the customs of Sharia are not. They are not truths, they are just directives based on these Quranic teachings for the conduct in the Society. But as society changes with changing circumatances(invasion, mingling with new cultures) the laws too need to change so that they can do justice to the eternal truths of Quran. The inflexibility of Islamic laws is the chief reason why an Islamic revolution(within Islam) still is in the waiting.
Spread of Islam in India-
Even though this is a false blatant lie that all Muslims were converted by sword in India there is no point denying it partially. Though spiritual movements like "Sufism" might have had influence a small section of population to convert, a large population converted to Islam due to economic and political reasons. The biggest reason for conversion in Islam was the oppression of the Lower Castes in Hinduism. Conversion to Islam, not only liberated these lower caste Hindus from their hereditary bonding, but also gave them a better standing in the society under a Muslim ruler.Add to this the "conversion by sword" policies of rulers like Aurangzeb, the reasons for the huge conversion of Hindus to Muslims become clearer.
Arabianism-
Any religion of he world has to change with the region. This is the biggest reason why Hinduism has failed to expand outside of India, while Buddhism that has been termed by many as "Hindusm for export" is the world's fastest growing religion. The orthodox Muslim clerics tried to force the old obsolete Arabic customs in the minds of Indian Muslims. Arabia being a desert is bound to have an extremely different set of customs and values as compared to India that has had a settled civilization for millenniums. Thus eating of beef in Arabia might have been accepted, owing to the scarcity of food there, but in India, it had no place as cows held an extremely respectable position in the development of the Indian civilisation. Moreover praising the names of Arabic political rulers who had no connection to India, while leaving out great Indian figures like Rama and Buddha, might have been an extremely bizzare scene for rest of the Indians.
As few generations of converted Muslims passed by the Arabic traditions became a fundamental part of their lives and they began to defend it, amidst the Hindus who had not-so-nice feelings for these customs. Thus began a polarization in India, with a section of Indian population having extremely alien customs. Islam as a religion was not alien to the Hindus, but the orthodox Arabianism that it brought along with itself, definitely was.
I would like to state that Kashmiris are definitely a different class of people in this case. Because Muslims in Kashmir accepted Islam as a religion and enriched it with their own social customs that were very much Kashmiri and not at all alien. This is the reason there has been such a great harmony in between Muslims and Hindus in Kashmir. There existed a deep understanding between the two communities and their sensitivities.
Conclusion-
It is important for both the communities to change. Where on one hand Hindus must throw out some of the blatant stereotypes that they have against the Musilms specially the "conversion only by sword theory" and must realise that Hindus too have many social evils due to which some people willingly converted to Islam. Leaders in India generally stay silent on Islamic Fundamentalism and the war-centric teachings but being silent doesn't stop the rest of the people to cook fancy ideas against the Muslims. There is no point denying that Islam talks a lot about war and martyrdom but insted of suppressing this fact, it must be discussed openly and sincerely. Neither are Muslims bad nor is Islam and nor is martyrdom, but circumstances are such that these facts put Muslims in an uncomfortable position. If no one's at fault everyone is there to gain.
Muslims on the other hand need a dynamic leadership. Soemone who can steer the Muslims away from the rigic laws and customs of their religion. A more moderated and modern civil code is required for Muslims(probably a uniform civil code) that can bring Muslims to modernity and globalism.
Rising up from religion we need to realise as Indians what makes India and its culture. What is our common heritage. We all are proud of our culural heritage post the advent of Islam in India(architecture, food, arts) but what about that heritage of India and those people who came before Islam? Before Islam no body was Hindu either.(the classification came after the rise of Islam in India) India being a religious nation, all its heritage prior to advent of Islam is religious too. It is an impotant question whether Buddha is a Hindu-Buddhist prophet or an Indian icon for the whole of India including the Muslims. Is Ramayana a Hindu scripture or a Indian epic, part of the great Indian Heritage. These are questions that we all need to answer if we want to end this Hindu Muslim devide forever...
