|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Hindu-Muslim
Divide: A Fresh Look
The book, that took more than two decades to be written, as claimed by the author, ponders over two issues—eradication of poverty from the country and how to overcome the state of contention between Hindus and Muslims. We, as a nation, have decided to be "secular" while our immediate neighbours, Pakistan and Bangladesh, are Islamic republics. But are we true to our word? Are rights written in the list of fundamental rights a guarantee to the minorities to develop their life to the full? The Muslims who opted to stay on in India after Partition feel that they have been betrayed by the administration. They have to bear the brunt of the "fanatical" Hindus. The latter quote examples of the Muslim rulers who subjugated the Hindus by pillage, plunder and political control. The Justice Sachar Committee only reaffirms the arguments of the Muslims. The committee has placed the Muslim community at the lowest rung of India’s educational, economic and social hierarchies. Why have the Muslims been left behind in the development process? Why has democracy placed them at such a disadvantage? What Amrik Singh has reconnoitered is that why Islam as a religion could not sweep over India and convert the Hindus. He asserts that India was so vast and diverse that Islam could not impose itself on the country. Moreover, "Hinduism was much too malleable to be classified as a religion its almost inalienable caste structure gave it extraordinary resilience and durability." The book becomes more interesting when the present state of affairs is examined. Irrespective of his party leanings of which we get no glimpse in the work, the veteran scholar places the Congress, the BJP and the various leaders in his line of fire. He praises them, at times, yet admonishes them. For example, he praises the Congress for maintaining the balance in favour of secularism vis-`E0-vis other parties, but criticises Jawaharlal Nehru on his failure "to evolve a coherent and concrete strategy" once the party was declining as a political force. Similarly, he feels that Indira Gandhi unleashed a wave of communalism to sustain herself in power. The BJP and the RSS draw no sympathy from the author, for he thinks that they pose a threat to the spirit of secularism. He gives an example. In Pakistan, the Shaheed Ganj Gurdwara in Lahore was claimed by both the Sikhs and the Muslims in the mid-1930s. The Privy Council delivered its judgment in favour of the former and the decision was enforced when the British were still around. Partition took place and we not only saw the movement of people across boundaries, but also witnessed one of the world’s worst massacres. But till today, the Shaheed Ganj Gurdwara continues to be a Sikh shrine, though Pakistan is a declared Islamic state. In a "secular India", the Babri Masjid is held as a ransom for the security of the Muslims in India. Is it fair? The author squarely blames the BJP for this issue. He discusses the mature leadership of Atal Bihari Vajpayee, which saved the BJP many times, and petty gains for which other leaders of the party compromised their principles. The work, written with a conscious effort, wants you to question yourself. It aims to become a starting point for further discussions. There is much to be done. There is a lot of assurance that needs to be ushered in between communities and there is a lot of ill will that needs to be wiped away. The author can come up with more thoughts, but he needs to elaborate on certain points. For example, he writes about people like Sheikh Ahmed Sirhandi in Emperor Jahangir’s court or Islam being driven out of Spain. After all, his readers from the younger generation can look up to him to quench their thirst for more knowledge and information.
|
.jpg)
There
