Abusaleh Shariff explodes the myth of Muslims doing better under Modi ruleNehru, Jinah and partition
Submitted by admin4 on 14 August 2009 - 5:00pm
By Asghar Ali Engineer,
Mr. Jaswant Singh, a senior BJP leader from Rajasthan has written a book on Jinnah which is expected to be published shortly. He has, according to a news item on NDTV, called Jinnah a secular person and thrown responsibility for partition on Nehru. Earlier Mr. L. K. Advani had also described Jinnah as secular while visiting Jinnah’s mausoleum in Karachi and paid heavy price for it as RSS asked him to resign as president of BJP. And now Jaswant Singh, a fairly independent minded leader has called Jinnah a secular person.
No doubt Jinnah is a highly controversial figure. He is greatly admired and is father of the nation in Pakistan. He is often referred to as Baba-e-Qaum by Pakistanis. But he is hated by many in India and is considered mainly responsible for creation of Pakistan and hence a villain of the peace. Such extremes can never adequately define a person, let alone being understood adequately.
The motives for describing Jinnah as secular by two top BJP leaders may be different but there is an element of truth in what they say. Shri Advani was speaking as a politician during his visit and may be he tried to please his hosts in Pakistan. Mr. Jaswant Singh is under no such obligation and is speaking as a scholar as he is known to be of fairly independent mind and may not be much concerned about what RSS and BJP leaders might think.
It is not only in India that Jinnah is subject to different interpretations, some hating him as breaker of India and some absolving him of total responsibility for partition. Jinnah is subject to different interpretations in Pakistan itself, some moderate and liberal Muslims describing him as secular and often quoting his speech in the Constituent Assembly as a proof of his secularism. The conservatives and orthodox Muslims, on the other hand, projecting him as believer in two nation theory and true Muslim who created Pakistan for Islam and Muslims.
We have the same problem with Mahatma Gandhi in our own country. Some Dalit and RSS leaders hate him again for different reasons. Dalits hate him as an upper caste Hindu leader who upheld the concept of caste, if not of untouchability. And RSS leaders hate him, though publicly they may not take such position for obvious reasons. They hate him as they consider Gandhi as betrayer of Hindu cause and supporter of Muslims. They even indulge in propaganda that Gandhiji is responsible for partition of the country.
Many people hold Nehru as responsible for partition and among those who hold Nehru as responsible there are all types of people – secular as well as communal. The question arises who is really responsible? We Indians and Pakistanis while holding our own leaders as responsible we have completely exonerated the British rulers of their responsibility for partition.
Though secular elements at times do refer to the role of the British, communal forces in both the countries have completely absolved British. In RSS propaganda main culprits are Muslims led by Jinnah whereas in Pakistani propaganda it is Hindus led by Gandhi who are mainly responsible for partition. If one studies the complex developments carefully in mid-fifties it is difficult to fix total responsibility on any one person or one party. Different actors played different role adding up to partition of the country.
First let us see the role of Jinnah since he is at the centre-stage of partition. Before this we also have to look at him whether he was secular or communal. It must be noted that we cannot go by western definition of secular and communal. We have accepted these terms in our own sense and in our own context. Gandhiji was secular despite being highly religious in his attitude. Nehru, of course, was secular more in western than in Indian sense.
Similarly Jinnah was also secular more in western sense. Both Nehru and Jinnah never were religious as Gandhi and Maulana Azad were. Nehru was closer to Jinnah than to Gandhiji and Maulana Azad was closer to Gandhiji than to Jinnah. Maulana Azad also was deeply a religious person like Gandhiji though he was more liberal in religious matters than Gandhiji.
Jinnah was thoroughly westernized person right from his younger days. He never had any religious training. He did not observe any Islamic taboos like liquor and pork. He never observed religious rituals. He even disagreed with Gandhiji about involving Ulama in politics and he opposed Gandhiji taking up Khilafat question. He believed in separation of politics from religion. He was described as Muslim Gokhale by friends. Gokhale was liberal and so was Jinnah.
Jinnah was certainly secular in this sense. He until 1935 described himself as Indian first and then Muslim. And, until 1937 he had never thought of partition even in his dreams. He even entered into an informal understanding with the congress in 1937 elections in U.P. His differences with Indian National Congress had begun from 1928 onwards when his demands were rejected by the Nehru committee set up by the Congress to solve communal problem. He had even ridiculed the concept of Pakistan initially propounded by Rahmat Ali, a Cambridge University student.
The two nation theory was deeply flawed and Jinnah had formulated it as a sort of political revenge on the Congress leaders like Nehru who refused to take two Muslim League nominees in the U.P. cabinet after Muslim league lost 1937 elections and Nehru was responsible for this. Maulana Azad tried to persuade Nehru to take the two nominees but unfortunately Nehru did not budge. Some scholars suggest that Rafi Ahmed Kidwai, an influential Congress leader from U.P. prompted Nehru. Whatever the reason politically it was unwise not to take two Muslim league nominees. Maulana Azad has pointed this out and has criticized Nehru on this count in his political biography India Wins Freedom.
For Jinnah it was outright betrayal and he decisively turned against Congress and gradually it led Jinnah to propounding two nation theory. Thus two nation theory was a politically contingent proposition rather than any religiously grounded proposition. Had Nehru shown little political sagacity this theory would not have come into existence at all. And in no sense of the word Jinnah ever wanted to establish an Islamic state in Pakistan. Jinnah would not have even approved of Pakistan having Islam as an official religion. That was not his bent of mind. If one goes by Jinnah’s speech in the Pakistan Constituent Assembly it is doubtful if he wanted even a Muslim state, let alone an Islamic state. He was all for a secular state in Pakistan.
Then if we call Jinnah communal in what sense can he be described as one? Or can he be? In those days when we were fighting for freedom of our country communalism was not opposite of secularism, but of nationalism. Anyone who was anti-national was described as communal. Thus if at all Jinnah could be described communal it is in this sense. And as pointed out above, Jinnah opted for partition not as a part of his conviction but as a result of political contingency.
Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru was responsible in a way as he was not very happy with the Cabinet Mission Plan as it would have resulted in weak centre as except defence, foreign policy and communication all residuary powers would have rested with the federating states. Both Nehru and Sardar Patel were not happy with this scheme. And as Azad has pointed out in his book Nehru, on being elected as president of the congress in 1946, gave a statement that Cabinet Mission Plan could be, if necessary, changed. This infuriated Jinnah as Muslim League had also accepted the Plan and a composite Government was formed after 1946 fall elections.
This finally drove Jinnah to accept nothing less than partition. The greatest culprit was British rulers as they also wanted India divided so that they could easily establish intelligence and military base in Pakistan to stem the tide of revolution which by then had become a certainty in China. Nehru Government would have never allowed such bases in United India. Lord Mount Batten got Nehru, through his wife Advina to endorse the partition plan.
Thus it would be seen that apart from Jinnah the British and Nehru were also responsible for partition of the country. In my opinion the greatest responsibility of partition lay on the British shoulder. They cleverly maneuvered the complex situation in a way to make partition a reality. Partition, as Maulana Azad also pointed out, was neither in the interest of India nor in the interest of Muslims themselves.
The ultimate result of partition is that Muslims of Indian sub-continent stand divided into three units and Kashmir problem is also result of this tragedy. And both the countries are spending billions of rupees on their armies and now such powerful interests have developed in keeping conflict between the two countries alive that all efforts for talks fail. Now the only solution is in confederation of nations of South Asia, with no visa and common currency.
If European countries could form a viable union despite the fact that they were at each others throats until late forties why can’t we in South Asia?
FREE REPRINTS
Unless otherwise noted, you can republish our articles for free. You just have to credit TwoCircles.net and link it back to us, and you can’t edit our material or sell it separately. (We're licensed under Creative Commons, which provides the legal details.). For publishing TwoCircles.net photos please contact info@twocircles.net.
Look at this Indian govt representative nuts !!!!!
‘Learn Hindi to understand Hinduism better’
Port-of-Spain, Aug 21: Learning Hindi helps to understand and practise Hinduism better, says an Indian diplomat. Indian High Commissioner Malay Mishra said here, "The study or the full appreciation of Hindi helps one to understand, practise and enhance Hinduism as one of the world’s most major and relevant religions today."
The Indian High Commission has a network throughout Trinidad and Tobago to offer opportunities for everyone to learn, understand and practise Hindi. He was speaking on Tuesday at the 26th anniversary celebrations of the Edinburgh Hindu Temple, Chaguanas where Leela Jugmohan, Indra Juman, Suresh Jaisir and Mohan Persad were recipients of the temple’s anniversary awards. Some 24 per cent out of a population of 1.3 million people are practising Hindus, and there are over 200 temples spread across the country. Mishra said, "Its (Hinduism) teaching is universal and cuts across ethnic, cultural, social or geographical limitations. Hinduism in inclusive and welcoming."
He said that Hinduism has three facets: mythology, philosophy and ritual, all of which combined make it eternal and outstanding. "One must delve in Hinduism for self-discovery and the full meaning and interpretation of life," he said. Pundit Ramesh Tiwari, a spiritual leader, said the Edinburgh Hindu Temple has always provided spiritual and social services to its devotees. "We have been able to do this with a dynamic team of Hindus. We understand that whatever education you might have acquired, if one does not have human kindness then all schooling and accomplishments amount to nothing. Service to humanity is one of the important virtues of a human being," Tiwari told. Hinduism was brought here by immigrants who came between 1845 and 1917 to work on the sugar plantations. Most of the immigrants came from Uttar Pradesh and Bihar. (Agencies)
Brahmins have turn India into its 21st century ’slave soldiers
Brahmins have turn India into US 21st century slave soldiers. These brahmins 2 % never fights but they are using the foot soldiers ( the OBC, BC, and the dalits ) into its 21st century ’slave soldiers. Slaves are enjoying the slavery. Muslims will never let it happen, and sooner or latter - many more changes will come to India.
Brahmins 21st century--Sallahuddin, get a life (and facts)
There are always comments amde on this site how the evil Brahmins are controlling everything - health, wealth, positions not allowing anything for anybody else.
I do not know which planet this guy Sallahuddin lives on. I can tell you that brahmins are very poor and totally powerless in kerala. They are studious, do well in high school, but their financial situation does not allow them to pursue higher studies. Most of thir parents work as temple priests, and unlike in Sallaluddins religion, temple priests do not carry any clout over other Hindus. In kerala, property and wealth is concentarted in christians followed by muslims, then may be the NAir sect of hindus followed by the Ezhava sect of hiindus. Brahmins will be in the lowest 30% in terms of "per capita" income.
Among the richest peopel in India, I would think Brahmins will be nowhere near the top 20 (I m not sure, just making a guess).
Brahmins economic sattus is not much different in otehr southern sattes.
What is this guy yacking about? 2% Brahmins controlling the rest..It will be interesting if somebody takes a tabulation of state cabinet ministers in the four southern indian states and see how many Brahmin ministers are in the four state cabinets..
Get a life man..
KERALA IS NOT WHOLE INDIA
Hi Gopi,
Kerala is an exception. It does not depicts the situation of main stream India.
If u see la anti-hindutva ideologies n movements r very strong in Kerala- like Communist, Jamat-e-islami, Popular Front, Christanity - so it is an accepted fact that Kerala is one of the state where Manuvadis r very weak.
It does not mean that they r weak in other states like Tamilnadu , Maharashtra , karnataka, U.P, M.P , Bihar etc.
They r strong in these states. When somebody talks about INDIA , whole India is consdered there , NOT ONLY KERALA.
AND Yes they r very strong in DELHI, in CENTRAL GOVT.
I hope u now understand what we r telling.
Brahmins/21st ecntury- Khashif/Saluddin
Kahsshif
I was responding to Saluddin's statement that 2% Brahmins are controlling everybody else. I pointed to kerala to show that it simply is not true. You guys are always creating "phantom" enemies and problems.
You state, in other states "they are strong". Even if they are strong, what is wrong with that? Just like Christians (and Muslims) are strong in kerala, somebody else can be strong somewhere else..
And by the way, three Southern States (Andhra, TN, Kerala) have 7 muslim ministers in their cabinet; and no Brahmin minister.
I will be enlightened if somebody can tell me how, in current India, state by state, how Brahmins are controlling wealth, jobs, companies, etc..How many Brahmins are in the top 20 richest Indians? How many Brahmins are in the top 50 landowners?
Muslims in Bihar, UP, MP are faring bad. It is not like others are tarilblazing in those states. All are doing bad in those states.
I have used Kerala Christians as an example to be followed by Muslims for progress rather than constant bitching. As you imply in your note, Christians in Kerala did not campaign against Brahmins or try to "control" Brahmins (you imply some Jama Hhut and PDP and Christians and communism tried to control manu whatever -- what has Manu to do with this, is there a "school" teaching this manusmruthi you guys always complain about, if so which schools and colleges in India?
If one does not take personal responsibility for progress and development, one is destined to be doomed.
My msg for all "UNITED WE STAND, DIVIDED WE FALL"
These are all because of Brahmins, They wrote scriptures and all Hindus are blindly believing those... Once they read & understand the all religious books they start to hate Hinduism(Brahmanism). Our leaders - lets only include the congress - have been power hungry eversince its inception. Nehru was a good freedom fighter but a rotton politician. He created several problems - partition, present J&K probs, our biased constitution, nasty political system, the list is endless...Any way the truth is something else, some people wanted to divide and rule the country in the name of religion from beginning (by the time British entered India) and still they r ruling in the same manner,Indian Muslims have suffered immensely due to the Congress manipulations.. read these books books and circulate among others as fast as u can -- http://www.skidmail.com/hindu/contents.htm#webmaster
http://asimiqbal2nd.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/o-you-hindu-awake.pdf
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Pantheon/4789/
There is so many movements have been failed in anti-Brahmanism read this -- http://www.ambedkar.org/gail/Dravidianmovement.h
tm
Hinduism is not religion read it -- http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/2-19-2004-50729.asp
Ask any question about Islam: http://www.islamicfinder.org/faq/list.php
Dear Muslim brothers, The 2% of people ruling 98% of Indians, once we come to know the truth we need to convey to every one, otherwise we will be culprit on the day of judgement... so let the truth explode....
I am an Indian not against to any religion..Don't reply before u read all the articles with given reference (ramayana, geeta, vedas etc.) SAVE MOTHERINDIA
My msg for all "UNITED WE STAND, DIVIDED WE FALL"
These are all because of Brahmins, They wrote scriptures and all Hindus are blindly believing those... Once they read & understand the all religious books they start to hate Hinduism(Brahmanism). Our leaders - lets only include the congress - have been power hungry eversince its inception. Nehru was a good freedom fighter but a rotton politician. He created several problems - partition, present J&K probs, our biased constitution, nasty political system, the list is endless...Any way the truth is something else, some people wanted to divide and rule the country in the name of religion from beginning (by the time British entered India) and still they r ruling in the same manner,Indian Muslims have suffered immensely due to the Congress manipulations.. read these books books and circulate among others as fast as u can -- http://www.skidmail.com/hindu/contents.htm#webmaster
http://asimiqbal2nd.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/o-you-hindu-awake.pdf
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Pantheon/4789/
There is so many movements have been failed in anti-Brahmanism read this -- http://www.ambedkar.org/gail/Dravidianmovement.h
tm
Hinduism is not religion read it -- http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/2-19-2004-50729.asp
Ask any question about Islam: http://www.islamicfinder.org/faq/list.php
Dear Muslim brothers, The 2% of people ruling 98% of Indians, once we come to know the truth we need to convey to every one, otherwise we will be culprit on the day of judgement... so let the truth explode....
I am an Indian not against to any religion..Don't reply before u read all the articles with given reference (ramayana, geeta, vedas etc.) SAVE MOTHERINDIA
Partition was best for India- Dirt shifted to AFPAK
Partition of India was the best thing that happened to India. Even with just 15% MUSLIMS, India is facing undue pressures for special treatment of the MUSLIMs and is even seeking developmental funds along religious lines. Had partition not happened, 50% of India population would have been Muslims- the combined MUSLIM population of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh is about 50Crore against 100 Crore people of all other religious groups- and India would have been entirely controlled by MUSLIMs as they would vote enbloc electing more MUSLIM MPs ensuring that a GOVT can NOT exist in India with out MUSLIM support.
However, it is quite unlikely that India would have remained a DEMOCRACY if what is happening in most ISLAMIC countries of the world like Saudi Arabia, other Gulf Countries,Pakistan, Bangladesh etc are any indication. India is a "secular democracy" only because of the Hindu Majority. The present plight of PAKISTAN and BANGLADESH are adequate indication of what would have happened to India had partition not occurred.
Yes partition was the best for India
You are right partition was the best for India otherwise Hindus had been continuing thier lives again as slaves,the lives they were continuing before the establishment of British Raj in India.
Muslims would definetly rule and Brahimans would be treated as slaves?
Who is to blame?
Dr Sahib! It is too simplistic to put blame on somebody else. British had been the occupation power since long and they had to go by their own designs. Despite whatever they planned and did, the first responsibility for division of India lies on none but Indians; the foremost on Hindu leaders for hailing from majority community. I think both Gandhi and Nehru had been responsible for this. If they had been a little more wise than communal and had paid any heed to what Jinnah or his followers were saying, the problem could have been resolved despite British plans, as you think. Nehru was trapped by the wife of Mountbatten. As a poet puts it, "Ba Khal-i-Hinduish bakhshad Samar Qand -o- Bukhara ra".
Anyhow, now Pakistan, Bangladesh and India are three separate realities. All must accept each other and must live in peace seeking prosperity in the comity of nations.
Good Luck!
Partition
sir,
Your article is absoutely right. briatin given freedom to all their colonial states from 1939 to 1950. They lost lot in 2nd world war.they given the administration rights to local parties. Jinna was leading a secular life since his child hood, he cannot be a fanatic . But what about other leadrs wh allways say ram ram....and concentrating in creating a self image . The partition was right . now we have three independand nations , we must respect each other . We are working in gulf together with pakistanis , bangalis and Indians, we stay together, eat together we dont haVE ANY probloms ,we srespect each other . Only politicians are creating probloms for their benifit . they need seperation , they need probloms to loot
Partition was the best thing that happened to India
Partition was the best thing that happened to India. Had India not been partitioned the combined MUSLIM population of un-divided India would have been about 50 Crore - Indian Muslims+ PAKIS + BANGLADESHIS. The population of all other religious groups together would have been just 100 Crore. INDIA WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN THE SECULAR DEMOCRACY THAT IT IS TODAY- example of most undemocratic ISLAMIC COUNTRIES including Saudi Arabia, gulf countries, Pakistan and even Bangladesh is before us.
Even if India had some form of "democracy", MUSLIMs would have effectively controlled India as they vote selectively for MUSLIMS only. All the MUSLIM majority areas have elected only MUSLIMS and Malapuram in the "most literate KERALA" is no exception. So partition was the best thing that happened to India after 1098AD, when Muhammad or Ghor captured parts of India.
Dr Sahib! It is too
Dr Sahib! It is too simplistic to put blame on somebody else. British had been the occupation power since long and they had to go by their own designs. Despite whatever they planned and did, the first responsibility for division of India lies on none but Indians; the foremost on Hindu leaders for hailing from majority community. I think both Gandhi and Nehru had been responsible for this. If they had been a little more wise than communal and had paid any heed to what Jinnah or his followers were saying, the problem could have been resolved despite British plans, as you think. Nehru was trapped by the wife of Mountbatten. As a poet puts it, "Ba Khal-i-Hinduish bakhshad Samar Qand -o- Bukhara ra".
Anyhow, now Pakistan, Bangladesh and India are three separate realities. All must accept each other and must live in peace seeking prosperity in the comity of nations.
Good Luck!
Have a different Views
The causes of partition of India is very complex to anlysis.There were many players who played crucial role in partition of India according to their interest.Among the players were the Hindu communlist,the Muslim communalist,the Imperialist,the Sikh communalist,the aristocratic class(include in this all the aristocratic secularist of Hindu,Muslim etc)and Beauracrcratic class.
About the role of the leaders it is very controversial to poit out finger on any body.Mr J.N.Nehru inspite of being not a religious person was heading a powerfull Indian class with sardar vallabh Patel.This powerfull class had vast interest in India.This class was in logger head with other emerging classes of India as well as trdaitional ruling class of India(see the percentage of employment of Indian muslims at the time of independence).Due to poltical compulsion in future India ,Nehru couldn’t ignore this fact.We have done little research about the role of Powerful indian beaurcratic class in partition.
After seeing the role of the Imperial power particulary Britian in world politics one can find that whenever it ruled,it created the problem of partition.See the Middle East.The question is why Britian played the role of politics of Partition in muslim majority areas of the world?
The role of two nation theory is to malign the Hindu and Muslim for partition.This is a trick to divert the attention from the real design and hands from the poltics of partition.Unfortunately the so called secularist historian with communlist also singing this ragas in different tune.Is not in present India the same characteristics of two nation theory found?But why not a demand of the separation of nation(i mean the religious based culture or a particular identity).This means that there was power that brought two-nation theory to justify the partition and divert the attention of historians from the truth.
The role of jinnah in partition and Nehru needs extensive research.No historian is in final position to say that why an ambassador of Hindu-Muslim unity (as Sarojini Naidu used to call Jinnah) turned into a sole leader of Partition?The persoanl rivalry could destablize the political formation of India but couldn’t divide the nation.If this was possible then it means that the last stage of the British rule under Lord Batten was complete in anarchy.Then the question is who put India on the path of anarchy to divide?
The use of threat of two-nation theory by Jinnah was political gimmick to pressurize the congress to get more consession to strengthen the position of Muslim League among Indian Muslims for example Jinnah demand to accept Muslim League as sole representative of Indian Muslims. The case of UP,Interim Government all these show Jinnah works.Even his declaration of demand of Pakistan was a bully to congress.Jinnah did not realize that what he is doing today will bring tragedy. In Later years he was unable to control the move for Pakistan that he started.If he withdrew he got political death and if go then will get partition.And he opted for later option. This is the situation like RSS and BJP present position of Political game of Hindutwa.Even Allama Iqbal who accepted by the communalist as main ideologue of two –nation did not wish partition of India but a confederation of NWP (North West Provinces) with more and more power to these provinces on the basis of devaluation of power.
In the end I would like to say that the time is to look ahead by forgetting the past pain for the bliss of future as suggested by Asghar Ali Sahib.But is it possible with the presence of the vast chain of Sisunekatan historical writing and product?
Independence day = 1 million died & 10 million house displaced
India's Independence Day is celebrated on August 15 to commemorate its independence from British rule and its birth as a sovereign nation on that day in 1947. The day is celebrated all over the country and by a growing diaspora around the world. Pakistan became independent on the previous day. What is sometimes forgotten is that the period signifies the single largest human migration of people in modern history. Till today, there is no institutional memory of Partition: the State has not seen fit to construct any memorials, to mark any particular places - as has been done, say, in the case of Holocaust memorials, or memorials for the Vietnam war.
Website: http://www.PunjabPartition.com
Dear Asghar sb., You are
Dear Asghar sb.,
You are correct in talking about the role of the british in India's partition into two religion based states. But my generation which is born post-partition and knows of this tragic event in the sense of history, fails to understand how stalwarts like Ganndhi, Nehru, Maulana Azad, Sardar Patel, Jinnah etc could let this tragedy happen. Were not british the very occupiers against whom the whole freedom struggle was meant to be? Didn't they have sense enough not to fall into the enemy's trap? After all which enemy even after deciding to withdraw from the occupied territories, would like to see its former colonies prosper and the partition ploy was a sure fire method to leave a festering sore on the psyche of the people in the indian subcontinent which continues bleeding to this day.
To me partition happened because of the monolithic egos of mainly two narcissistic personalities- Nehru and Jinnah, and the leaders of the time, went along willingly or unwillingly with their ego battles conveniently forgetting that the fate of millions of Hindus and Sikhs in the area to be made Pakistan and millions of muslims in then and today's Hindustan depended on them.
Ultimately, two 'secular' people are considered to be the foremost founding members of two nations-Pakistan, which doesn't go by the charade of secularism and is a theocratic state and India, which does in principle, through its constitution but rarely ever in action.
Whose loss is it?
My msg for all "UNITED WE STAND, DIVIDED WE FALL"
These are all because of Brahmins, They wrote scriptures and all Hindus are blindly believing those... Once they read & understand the all religious books they start to hate Hinduism(Brahmanism). Our leaders - lets only include the congress - have been power hungry eversince its inception. Nehru was a good freedom fighter but a rotton politician. He created several problems - partition, present J&K probs, our biased constitution, nasty political system, the list is endless...Any way the truth is something else, some people wanted to divide and rule the country in the name of religion from beginning (by the time British entered India) and still they r ruling in the same manner,Indian Muslims have suffered immensely due to the Congress manipulations.. read these books books and circulate among others as fast as u can -- http://www.skidmail.com/hindu/contents.htm#webmaster
http://asimiqbal2nd.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/o-you-hindu-awake.pdf
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Pantheon/4789/
There is so many movements have been failed in anti-Brahmanism read this -- http://www.ambedkar.org/gail/Dravidianmovement.h
tm
Hinduism is not religion read it -- http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/2-19-2004-50729.asp
Ask any question about Islam: http://www.islamicfinder.org/faq/list.php
Dear Muslim brothers, The 2% of people ruling 98% of Indians, once we come to know the truth we need to convey to every one, otherwise we will be culprit on the day of judgement... so let the truth explode....
I am an Indian not against to any religion..Don't reply before u read all the articles with given reference (ramayana, geeta, vedas etc.) SAVE MOTHERINDIA
united we stand
Zubair
Are you saying Indian system is bad and the systems of Muslim countries - PAkistan, Somalia, Suadn, Saudi Arabia, Ethiopia, Yemen, Egypt etc are better?
If Brahmins are so powerful and rich, how come their number of available seats- available to public merit- in educational isnstitutions get cut and cut every year?
I can tell you for sure that if you list the top 200 richest people in Kerala, there will not be a single Brahmin. It will be mostly Christians, followed by Muslims, followed by other Hindus,a nd not Brahmins. I can almost guarantee this!
It is high time Muslims stop complaining about all real and imaginary issues, and just get the butts off and get educated. And not madrasa education -- dont expect you can be a doctor or lawyer with MAdrasa education!
Thomas take care of your Church 'Madarsa'
What is this non sense comparison of richest Christian, Muslims and Hindus. Either there are rich, middle class or below poverty line from every section of society. Better to worry for have not's is you are really Christian like Muslim helps poor Muslims in Madarssa. Many Madarssa educated get much better jobs in India, in University view their knowledge of being bi-lingual in English and Arabic, in Embassies, in Middle East, in US, in Japan even in UN. Your must be happy that those Madarssa educated are not attempting more in Civil Services exams other wise people like u would have bee crying more.
Brahman in Kerala?. What is this? From where in South India Brahman exists. Your irk and bias shows that you are not 'THOMAS' yet 'Amar, Akbar & Anthony' using maximum benefits sacrificing you religious identity and spread hate against Muslims. FYI, enough Muslims are educated and plenty of them learning in IT/MBA/Medical/Engineering/Mass-Com and Humanities. Please don't behave like 'hate-acacemies' of Shishu Mandirs or Vidya Mandirs. The students from Madarasa are more human loving, law abiding and patriotic to your 'Missionary Schools'.
Ramadan Mubarak
Ramadan Mubarak to gopi thomas and Ak shingh and all the Islamphobic peoples and offcourse to all the Muslims of India and the world.
Dear Gopi.....Are u a indian?
Because I am worrying about India...but u r for other countries...It doesn't mean that they r wrong so we also!!! we should be a model for others, Again, I am not telling that the muslims r perfect, of course there r very few people who r following Islam properly & there r some countries which r following Islamic law & they r free from corruption and other wrong deeds...I am sorry if my previous comments hearts u people but please go through those links so u will come to know why I addressed Brahmins (not all of Brahmins). I am a friend of so many Hindus of all castes and I use to debate with them with very calm... Any how we Indians r brotherhoods lets think together for better future of India....Happy Ramzan ("The holy month").
ZUBAIR- aren't you happy that you are in INDIA and not AFPAK
ZUBAIR- why are muslims in India so unhappy while Muslims who went to Pakistan are getting butchered by USA?? Has India ever used planes to BOMB any Indian- Muslims of Kashmir, Maoist, Manipur or Nagaland?? Aren't you happy that you are in INDIA rather than in AFPAK??? So remain happy. Gujrath is an aberration and poor people are in every religious group. Khush raha karo. Agar India me jabardast Na-khush he toh AFPAK chalo. Magar KHUSH RAHA KARO.
I am Happy & proud to be an Indian Muslim
Did I speak about AFPAK or any other country?? & I never support AFPAK..I believe in Allah and always justify right deeds Anyhow if u r happy thats enough...but at least recognize the truth of Indian politicians, If u read this u will come to know whats happening India from dictates.....http://www.usislam.org/comparative/hinduawake.htm & http://asimiqbal2nd.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/o-you-hindu-awake.pdf
Zubair u may be happy but noyt proud
Zubair, you may be happy, but not a proud Indian Muslim. if you were proud, you will not be compalining ceaselessly; throwing shit against everybody except Muslims, finding fantom enemies like Brahmins (as I said I know the situatioin of Brahmains in south india -- they are equally as bad situatiuon as you always talk that Muslims are in).
You are not proud Zubair. That a gigantic country with zillions of languages and customs and religion has started from scratch and become a world power -- this sis omething you dop not like. You want to destroy it by forgoing meritocracy, providing proportional stake etc.. We are a democracy, people choose the govt. Do you want India to be like PAkistan, Saudi Arbia, Somalia, Egypt, CAhd, Sudan...a failed state? or do you want India to achieve a higher economic and social level in say next 5-10 years? We cannot eb a China because China's people are not free. If we were like China, may be it would have been easier.
U have to decide whether you live for religion or is religion for life. Until that internal conflict is settled, there wont be progress, and there will only eb compalints. And then one starts killing brothers (like happening in PaAkistan), or killinhg kafirs or ahmadiyyas or shites or whoever one comes across. IS this type of life worth living?
Let me offer an example for the umpteenth time. Learn from the practices of christians in Kerala. How did they accomplish major achievements in spite of being a minority? And they never had reservatiosn or special treatments? It is worth exploring and implementing selected things that worked for them. otherwise, after 100 years, your great garndchildren will still complain about the phantom Brahmins
You guys are always l;ways
My msg for all "UNITED WE STAND, DIVIDED WE FALL"
These are all because of Brahmins, They wrote scriptures and all Hindus are blindly believing those... Once they read & understand the all religious books they start to hate Hinduism(Brahmanism). Our leaders - lets only include the congress - have been power hungry eversince its inception. Nehru was a good freedom fighter but a rotton politician. He created several problems - partition, present J&K probs, our biased constitution, nasty political system, the list is endless...Any way the truth is something else, some people wanted to divide and rule the country in the name of religion from beginning (by the time British entered India) and still they r ruling in the same manner,Indian Muslims have suffered immensely due to the Congress manipulations.. read these books books and circulate among others as fast as u can -- http://www.skidmail.com/hindu/contents.htm#webmaster
http://asimiqbal2nd.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/o-you-hindu-awake.pdf
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Pantheon/4789/
There is so many movements have been failed in anti-Brahmanism read this -- http://www.ambedkar.org/gail/Dravidianmovement.h
tm
Hinduism is not religion read it -- http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/2-19-2004-50729.asp
Ask any question about Islam: http://www.islamicfinder.org/faq/list.php
Dear Muslim brothers, The 2% of people ruling 98% of Indians, once we come to know the truth we need to convey to every one, otherwise we will be culprit on the day of judgement... so let the truth explode....
I am an Indian not against to any religion..Don't reply before u read all the articles with given reference (ramayana, geeta, vedas etc.) SAVE MOTHERINDIA
Aftermath of the Partition
Good article.. But there is nothing to cherish about Indian democracy.. There are thousands of dalits, backward class people and muslims who are brutally discriminated under the veil of sham democracy since partition. The power has always remained with the upper class hindus while some muslims who were part of the establishment, were relegated to "yes men". Muslim leadership religuous or liberal have no recognition in India polity..
Post new comment