"Jinnah Jaswant Bhai Bhai"
Submitted by admin on 19 August 2009 - 7:16pm
By Shafee Ahmed Ko
“Jinnah-Jaswant, Bhai Bhai” seems to be the new slogan since Jaswant Singh sings a new song on Mohamed Ali Jinnah, Father of Pakistan eulogizing him in new political biography, 'Jinnah: India-Partition, Independence’.
Jaswant Singh, who has served seven terms in Parliament and held charge of six ministries in BJP-led governments, including finance, external affairs and defence; a senior leader of BJP and from the royal family of Rajasthan,. His son Manvendra Singh was a candidate in the Lok Sabha elections in Rajasthan and Jaswant won the battle by getting elected from Darjeeling. Jaswant Singh is in arrows of rough shod from different angles especially from his party key group of cadres especially Hindus such RSS, Bajrang Dal and Shiv Sena.
On Tuesday 18, the Shiv Sena supremo, in his party organ “Samna” has come down heavily as “I fail to understand why BJP leaders, who claim to be patriots and pro-Hindutva, slip on the issue of Jinnah. There appears to be a rush among BJP leaders to offer flowers to and praise Barrister Mohammed Ali Jinnah. Some years ago, BJP leader L K Advani had offered flowers on Jinnah mausoleum and had lauded the founder of Pakistan as a historic icon. Advani had praised Jinnah who caused the murders of millions of innocent people in undivided India. How can such a person become an icon of Indian history? And now a veteran leader of BJP Jaswant Singh is holding Pandit Nehru instead of Jinnah responsible for the partition of India.”
Rajnath Singh, the party leader retorted “division of India which led to a lot of dislocation and destabilisation of millions of people".
"It is too well known we cannot wish away this painful part of our history," he said.
He also took objection to ridiculing of Sardar Vallabhai Patel by Jaswant Singh, saying the first Home Minister played a historic role in unification and consolidation of India amidst serious threats to its unity and integrity.
"The entire country remains indebted and proud of all the profound vision, courage and leadership of Patel,"
Advani, senior leader of BJP earned similar political and public ire when he praised Jinnah as a great secular nationalist. Jaswant Singh’s postulation are very clear to state that on “Nehru as one of the principal architects of India’s partition” To fan the fuel of Hindu enthusiasts, Jaswant further writes “that Jinnah did not win Pakistan, rather Nehru and Patel conceded Pakistan to Jinnah with help of the British”
Why after 62 years of partition, Jaswant Singh has seen a new dawn with an ideology deliberately writing book on Muhammad Ali Jinnah, when the party has met a debacle in the last parliamentary election and the BJP is scanning for all sorts of virus scrutinizing state wise what exactly went wrong. In such process Rajasthan BJP leader in an interview to Pakistan’s renowned freelance journalist, Anjum Niyaz amusingly answers as follows:
So why the urgency to write yet one more book on Jinnah, that too 60 years after he founded Pakistan?
“I was unable to convince myself that Mohammad Ali Jinnah was a demon (as some Indians believe). I was also unable to convince myself of the ideography of Jinnah as some in Pakistan believe. He was neither. He was a man of flesh and blood,” says Jaswant Singh who is determined to demolish the “great many myths surrounding partition in both India and Pakistan.” Having recently toured Sindh and Balochistan, Jaswant Singh is still at a great loss (as he was at the time of partition) to understand the reason for separation when he finds “such unity socially and culturally” between the two countries even today.
Another reason for his lonely quest to demystify Jinnah in his forthcoming book “tentatively” entitled Mohammad Ali Jinnah, Ambassador of Hindu-Muslim Unity to the Quaid-i-Azam of Pakistan – The Journey is his personal friendship with the Quaid’s daughter Dina Wadia and her only son Nusli. “I was struck by the fact that both mother and son continue to stay in India.”
He “hates to admit it,” but until now, no man or woman, in both India and Pakistan, who has been in public life, has taken on the task of dissecting the reasons for partition. It’s sadder still that no Indian has ever “devoted himself to the study or writing of a political biography of Jinnah.” Jaswant Singh does not claim to be an “academic.” He has no formal education as he left school at 15 to enter the army as a cadet where he was commissioned at age 19. “I am no professor either and feel a bit of a fraud being called a Harvard Fellow.” Being aware of his many “limitations” he says that as an author it’s with “great trepidation that I have entered this territory.”
The time alone will answer what the “game that politicians play”
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.
Gopi what is your view on you God Jaswant Singh and Sardar Patel
Gopi, you would love this. Before Jaswant Singh book, actually Maulana Azad had hinted indirectly in his famous book "India Wins Freedom", that Patel did not fit the ideals of Congress (secular liberal democracy).
While not referring to him as a Hindu communalist, that is what was meant.
After came Jaswant admitting Patel's role. Now, there has been a book by an RSS leader slamming Patel. This came in net : 'Book by RSS leader slamming Sardar Patel in line of fire'
Ahmedabad,August 28 (ANI):Gujarat chief minister Narendra Modi promptly banned Jaswant Singh's book on Jinnah,less than a week after its release,but a book by a radical Hindu leader slamming former political leader Sardar Patel for precipitating the Partition has been selling off the shelves in the state for the past 27 years.' So now that it is accepted that the Hindus wanted partition, what is their anger with Muslims about ? Hindutva Hindus like Gopi say the Hindus who partitioned India were visionaries.
Contrast how the BJP and Congress reacted to Jaswant's book.
In India, we were brought up to say that partition was solely caused by Jinnah. Jaswant has correctly said that India was partitioned due to Nehru and Patel.
Pandit Nehru, despite his greatness, sabotaged the Cabinet Mission Plan, after the League and Congress agreed to it; this plan would have avoided partition.
Sardar Patel was a traditional anti-Muslim Hindu communalist. He said if the limbs are diseased, amputate them.
The BJP is unable to take Jaswant's expsoure of the facts; they reacted in a very unbecoming manner. They hate Nehru, but Patel being a Hindu communalist, is their icon.
On the other hand, Pranab Mukerjee pointed out Nehru's lasting contribution. Nehru set up a fine constitution, separated the armed forces, created an independent election commission and judiciary. Nehru had redeeming features and Congress can say it. Patel left nothing apart from Hindu communalism for the BJP to pronounce.
Gopi, I am delighted to hear from you on TCN.
I shall be getting Jaswant's book.
Have you read Maulana Azad's 'India Wins Freedom' ? That is a classic.
Azad who admired Jawaharlal (as he calls him), nevertheless says he made a blunder over the Cabinet Mission plan.
Azad also makes clear that Patel did not fit with the ideals of Congress (he is referring to his communal outlook).
And of course he condemns Jinnah's haughty intransigence, and notes that once he made the switch, Jinnah found himself surrounded by feudal types he did not feel comfortable with.
Jaswant's book is needed because in the HIndu mind, there is the belief that Muslims alone caused partition - because that is their nature. It is better that the Hindu contribution to partition is declared directly from someone from the Hindu right, instead of by Azad.
Also, you have to remember the sort of Hindus who created the conditions for partiton are still around and they are creating divisions as before.
Gopi, the RSS is the eminence grise of Indian politics. Normally, they control the strings as Brahmins are wont to do.
Now the BJP-RSS linkage is being discussed. This was long overdue.
After partition, these thugs were exposed and Nehru banned them. Slowly they crept out and poisoned the polity. Now, nobody will ban them, but it is clear they cannot dictate terms to others. The theought they could rule by putting the BJP as their front man.
Gopi, I was first called Pandit by a gentleman called sohan in a net discussion, due to my deep understanding of Hinduism and Hindus. sohan was also from America, but he was a liberal type, unlike you. Then others started referring to me as Pandit.
It is like Gandhi called Jinnah the Qaid, then others started calling him Qaid-e-Azam. So you see, there are many who hate me, but the knowledgable amongst the Hindus respect me.
Has anyone called you other than Hindutva donkeys ? Look at what you write.
You are seeking diversion after diversion because you do not want to face the reality that your Hindu communalism is an obstacle for India.
Gopi, Sudarshan is right only partially. That Jinnah was a Congress nationalist and secular in the 1920s is correct. However, Sudarshan equates Jinnah with Tilak ! This is RSS duplicity. He is trying to make Tilak respectable !
Gandhi supported the khilafat movement because he wanted to show concern for Muslims, to draw them into the freedom movement - that is fine.
That Jinnah took that the stand that the Turkish khilafat was of no concern to him is also fine.
Sudarshan however twists things and makes out the reason Jinnah left Congress was because of Gandhi and Khilafat. Jinnah left Congress because of communal Hindus like Tilak, Rai and Patel. Sudarshan also knows this, but he wants to cover up and blame Gandhi.
I am not quoting Sudarshan because I think RSS is a credible organisation; rather to tell you that even the right wing HIndus of the RSS feel compelled to admit Jinnah was secular and not anti-Hindu.
Know the history before posting such articles ..
Jinnah left the congress because of leaders like Tilak .. ! what a joke .. Tilak died in 1920 .. and for you kind information Jinnah was himself a follower of Tilak .. It was Jinnah who represented Tilak in Sedition case filed against Tilak by British. After death of Tilak it was Jinnah who protested the decision of congress to honour a British Officer who had insulted Tilak ..
Gopi your God Jaswant expelled from BJP
Some Muslims asked for a separate country, some did not. You ask them why they demanded a separate country. The Muslims say because of anti-Muslim Hindus like Patel, Tilak... Gandhi and Nehru are not held as communal Hindus .
Since some of the Muslims asked for partition, you have accept the reason they cite. To you, your Hindu communalism is patriotism. The Patels and Tilaks also thought the same way. That is why the country was split - because Hindus like you equate being Hindu with India. Jaswant has brought out the role of Hindu communalism, perhaps not explicitly.
Hindus need to understand what caused partition, so that they don't make the same mistakes again. As long as we have communal Hindus, we shall have carnages like Gujarat and Ayodhya.
The Hindus need to reasess Patel. There is no doubt that communal Hindus like Patel, Lala Lajpat Rai and Tilak helped drive Muslims into the League. Muslims do not blame Gandhi and Nehru, they hold Patel responsible.
Since they asked for partition and if they say it was because Patel was a communal Hindu who was against them, then that has to be the correct cause. These people should not have been allowed inside the Congress. They fitted the Hindu Mahasabha.
Some Hindus say Patel was the Iron Man who integrated India. He integrated what was left of India after creating the conditions to partition it !
Jaswant's book is thus timely. There are other scholarly works that say the same.
It is like all the BJP Hindus - don't want to read Jaswant's book, but brand him as an anti-national. Gopi, you are a typical communal Hindu thug.
Jaswant garbage
Jaswant has not got his facts right. It was Patel who held back privy to Jinnah, if he were to agree to partition. But Gandhi went onto fast to let Jinnah have his way.
The following clearly claifies Patel's stand for one INDIA. Only traitors are out to destroy the fabric of mother INDIA.
'I Must Speak the Truth’
Many people misunderstood Patel. There was false propaganda that he did not like Muslims. On the 6th of January 1948, speaking in Lucknow, he said, "There is a cry that I am against Muslims. But I am their true friend. I cannot beat about the bush. I cannot dissemble. Let no one try to have his two feet in two different boats. Let every one choose one boat. Let us all, who belong to India, swim or sink together."
The Sardar's plain words made some people angry. They complained to Gandhiji. What Sardar Patel said at that time shows the superbself-confidence of this mighty man:
"I cannot speak anything but the truth. I cannot turn back on my duty, just to please some one."
Jinnah was secular Patel was communal Hindu Gujju Bhai
Kiran, it is good that even BJP Hindus acknowledge Jinnah was secular.
Gandhi, Saroijni Naidu, Vijaylakshmi Pandit, Nehru, Jaswant and even Advani have attested to this. Jinnah created Pakistan because the communal Hindus drove him into it.
Your visionaries are the communal Hindus like Patel, Tilak and Rai. Then, why does the BJP fret about Muslims and Pakistan when you claim proudly that Hindus created partition because they were visionaries ?
You have more visionaries in the BJP like Modi, Advani and Varun. They are planning another partition for the remaining Muslims. Satisfied ?
You think once the Muslims are out, you can return to enjoy pure swarna rule ?
The Hindus need to reasess Patel. There is no doubt that communal Hindus like Patel, Lala Lajpat Rai and Tilak helped drive Muslims into the League.
Muslims do not blame Gandhi and Nehru, they hold Patel responsible. Since they asked for partition and if they say it was because Patel was a communal Hindu who was against them, then that has to be the correct cause. These people should not have been allowed inside the Congress. They fitted the Hindu Mahasabha.
Some Hindus say Patel was the Iron Man who integrated India. He integrated what was left of India after creating the conditions to partition it ! Jaswant's book is thus timely. There are other scholarly works that say the same.
In this country, it is common amongst Hindus to think that solely the Muslims led by Jinnah partitoned the country simply because they were intolerant. Due to this simplification, there is much hatred directed not only against Pakistan but against Indian Muslims.
The Muslims were only seeking political safeguards in the first instance. The right wing Hindus in Congress like Patel however wanted to project a Hindu nation. The fact is that Hindu communalism and the British also had major roles in the partition. There is no doubt that Patel wanted partition.
Jaswant Singh's book is thus welcome, especially as it has come from a person with integrity who has been associated with the Hindu right.
You would love to have freedom of speech for Jaswant and myself taken away on grounds that we are abusing it. But you would like to have freedom to spout your Hindu communalism.
Yes, you need to tell me where Hindu communalists like you will go now that your BJP's shelter is crumbling. I may be able to help you through conversion.
The general feeling amongst Muslims (those who supported and those who opposed partition) is that Nehru was secular and modern, but Patel (along with Tilak and Rai) were communal Hindus harbouring revanchist sentiments.
Thus, Muslims generally respect/admire Gandhi and Nehru, but they unanimously blame Patel.
Would you agree that Nehru was modern and secular, but Patel was communal and against Muslims ?
You are right about the holy cow of Gujarat ! Patel was inducted into Congress by Gandhi.
Maulana Azad wrote that Gandhi made a mistake because towards the end as Patel turned against Gandhi and accused him of tarnishing the name of Hindus.
Azad also notes that Patel did not abide by the Congress ethos (he was referring to his communal outlook).
Patel was blamed for Gandhi's death because of his links with the RSS. He had to ban RSS only under duress of Nehru.
Facing the blame for Gandhi's murder, Patel had a heart attack that ended him.
The British, Muslims and Hindus together were responsible for partition. The last chance was the Cabinet Mission plan. The British made a proposal that would have given Muslims political safeguards. The League accepted and the Congress also; but Nehru reneged on this soon after.
Then the British came up with plan 2, partition. Nehru was not communal, but he wanted a centralised state as Jaswant Singh says, whereas the Cabinet Mission plan had a federal model.
Patel was of course a plain Hindu communalist, and people like him forced Muslims into the League - including someone of the calibre of Jinnah.
It is good that this book has been written by a senior leader who has been associated with a right wing Hindu party, and it has received such publicity. It can have the effect of making Indians assess matters objectively, and not on the basis of prejudices and communal hatreds.
I recommend open minded readers to also read Maulana Azad's 'India wins Freedom', which recounts the partition period.
Hindu maga sabhai
Jinah was an honest person and he always tok care of people to whom he represented.
He was neither Pro nor against the creation of pakistan. His only concern was the welfare of Indian Muslim.
And when Nehru & Gandhi refused to give what he was asking for Indian Muslims, he went with the option of Pakistan.
Not only Nehru & Patel supported the idea, but also most of the Rss & facist & sangparivar ideaoligst also were afraid that muslims must be divided orelse they will become superior power in India, India will again become a Muslim state, where Hindu Maga Sabhai's Agenda Divided & rule Agenda must not been failed.
But due to Partition lakhs Lakhs of Muslims were killed they were innocent where they event don't now why they are been killed.
Even though currently 20crore muslims live in India where they are still treated as lower caste people.
Insha Allah that day is not too far Muslims rulling India-where Peace with equal
rights-justice-security.
Jinnah was Honest
Jinah was an honest person and he always tok care of people to whom he represented.
He was neither Pro nor against the creation of pakistan. His only concern was the welfare of Indian Muslim.
And when Nehru & Gandhi refused to give what he was asking for Indian Muslims, he went with the option of Pakistan.
Nehru & Patel supported the idea, bcz they were afraid that if muslims will leave in India, India will again become a Muslim state.
Md. Kashif Yunus
Patna
Jaswant Singh no Saviour of Muslims
Its really sad to see most people from the community are so easily supporting Jaswant Singh, without even reading the book or caring to read the reviews or excerpts of the passages.
Its a very well thought of attempt to malign (or bring about the true image) of Jinnah as a secularist, who was more concerned about his own survival and saw the creation of Pakistan as the only means of keeping his authority. Actually, as Jaswant Singh said in his interview, this instead of creating a storm in Pakistan (on the true reality of Jinnah) this has ruffled more feathers in BJP. So lets take this whole episode with a pinch of salt. He was expelled not due to to Jinnah, but due to his comments of linking Sardar Vallabh Patel as one of the architects of Partition. Of course the RSS cannot let this come out to the front, as Patel was the pride of Hindutva and Gujjus.
Jinnah was honest
Jinah was an honest person and he always tok care of people to whom he represented.
He was neither Pro nor against the creation of pakistan. His only concern was the welfare of Indian Muslim.
And when Nehru & Gandhi refused to give what he was asking for Indian Muslims, he went with the option of Pakistan.
Nehru & Patel supported the idea, bcz they were afraid that if muslims will leave in India, India will again become a Muslim state.
Md. Kashif Yunus
Patna
Pay price if you speak truth
Its very simple that in a so called democratic country like India if you speak truth you have to pay the heavy price?
actual face of democratic India
banishment of jaswant Singh had exposed the actual face of democratic India in the world adding democracy in India was more bitter than dictator ship.
civil society in Pakistan and India was surprised over this decision of BJP as party could not tolerate the truth about the Quaid-e-Azam after 62 years as they torched the books and expelled him from the party .
India claimed to be democratic country in the world but democracy was nowhere seen therein. There was no difference between democracy and dictatorship in India. This decision has exposed the democratic face of so called democratic India .
Mr. Shafee Ahmed Ko has
Mr. Shafee Ahmed Ko has touched many points. Congratulations to him. I would like to add the following:
Mr. Jaswant Singh's expulsion from the BJP for writing a book on Jinnah is surprising all secular and democratic people. One can appreciate or criticise his remarks based on facts. It is well known that Jinnah was once called as the ambassador of Hindu-Muslim unity. He was also a staunch Congress leader. Situations changed him and made him an All India Muslim League Chief.
It is very unfortunate that Mr. Jaswant's 30 years of dedicated service as a leader has no value for the BJP leaders who passed a resolution to expel him. One can understand where the party stands and how its leaders analyse issues!
The fact is that the strong leaders who wanted to grab power were not willing to co-operate with Mr. Jinnah and his party and pushed him to a corner to demand Pakistan. No doubt he fought for Pakistan and got it with the consent of all leaders.The loss in every respect was immeasurable. It was his great blunder. No Indian will ever pardon him for this and more so Indian Muslims whose dedicated freedom fighters including ulema had to undergo great hardships during the freedom struggle. Many of them were even hanged to death by the Britishers.
One feels that Mr. Jaswant should have criticised him more for this tragedy. Even today we are suffering because of the division of the country. We would have been stronger if the country had remained one India. The only leader who was opposed to the division of the country till the end even when all agreed to it was Maulana Abul Kalam Azad. Even after partition he maintained his stand as the opponent of the partition.
V.M. Khaleelur Rahman, Chennai
It is true that jinnah was a
It is true that jinnah was a secular person. One just need to hear what he had said on the pakistan's foundation day. He said" pakistan belongs to hindus n pakistan belongs to muslims, in pakistan there will be temples and there will be mosques". In both these places hindus and temples find mention ahead of muslims and mosques. Also one needs to look at the history very closely. In 1937, first elections were held in india, in which cong won majority of states. Jinnah wanted a unity govt of cong-muslim league. But cong refused. It was at this point that jinnah seriously started thinkin of a separate muslim country. He held the view that when muslims are not gettin their rights when india is still in british hand and we are fightin for its freedom then what will get once we get independence. Even the resolution for pakistan was passed in 1940 at lahore, where minar-e-pakistan is situated. It is clear from dese events that it was the stubborn nature of jawaharlal nehru and other cong leaders, which forced jinnah to demand a separate country. Had they formed a unity govt with muslim leage, may be india would not have been divided. One also must keep in mind that it was the great scholar allama iqbal, who first coined the word "pakistan". What compelled such a nationalist leader who wrote"saare jahan se accha hindustan hamara", to take such an step. May be the situation at that time was different from what we are made to believe today. In the end ,atleast the burden of partition should be shared by all those who did matter at that time, and the whole blame should not be put on mr jinnah.
Thank ALLAH- India has been partitioned
Thank God that india has been divided. Managing just 15 Crore Muslims with their BURQUA, SHARIA, special minority fund allotment, appeasement for vote etc is difficult in the present day India. Dread to think what would have happened if all 50 Crore of un-divided Indian Muslims had to be managed. All the problems in AFPAK would have been India's problem now.
Who care about individual responsible for partition but it is the best thing that happened to India in the last 800 years.
This is why Nehru & Patel wanted India to be divied
This is why Nehru & Patel wanted India to be divied.
HERE IS THE TRUTH OF INDIAN PARTITION.
Islam on violence and terrorism
Islam on violence and terrorism
What does Islam say about violence and terrorism?
Terrorism is defined by God (Allah) as the verbal or physical use of violence – whether by a state or individual – against a person or people (civilians or combatants), in the absence of a divine permit.
Any form of terrorism, as defined above, is completely forbidden and condemned in Islam.
Are the majority of terrorists Muslims?
The vast majority of terrorists in the world today are not Muslims – they are fundamentalist Christians and Jews.
At present, we are witnessing international terrorism carried out and encouraged by non-Muslims on a mass scale against thousands of innocent Muslim men, women and children in Iraq, Afghanistan and Palestine.
Even in the UK, Muslims are being targeted and terrorised by draconian laws, police brutality and indiscriminate raids and arrests.
Does the Qur’aan (Koran) teach violence?
Violence can be pro-life or against life. In some circumstances, the use of violence (as punishment) may be necessary to safeguard the life, sanctity and morality of others.
Examples of legitimate forms of violence are capital punishments, self-defence, and so forth.
Therefore, there are two types of violence in Islam: one that is legislated and one that is forbidden. Violence (or terrorism) against innocent people is prohibited, whereas violence against aggressors can be justified.
Medieval and modern Indian History are full of untruth
Medieval and modern Indian History are full of untruth and it is deliberately done to malign and marginalize muslim community in India.By projecting Mr. Jinna as the main conspirator of Partition the communal forces of Majority community tells muslims that they have no place in India as the Pakistan created by their own leader. I salute Jaswant Singh for his courage.He has been expelled from B.J.P. and his association with B.J.P. can be termed as " A right person in wrong place"
Its time to accept the truth
Its time to accept the truth ! Many peoples before did all the hell against Islam and Muslims. Some peoples from the non Muslims communities earn a living writting all the hell against Islam and falsely fabricated news against Muslims and Islam. One such example is Glen Jenvey. Alhamdulillah ( Thanks To Allah ) he have reverted to Islam. To know futher about him please read this http://www.google.com/profiles/omarhamzajenvey and http://ummah.com/forum/showthread.php?t=225429
Post new comment