Hindus suffer in secular India: Prafull Goradia
Prafull Goradia
Partition was supposed to settle the two-nation issue raised by Jinnah. But it hasn’t done so. With the Constitution loaded in favour of minority communities, and politicians vying for the minority vote, the majority feels distressed
Mr Varun Gandhi’s speeches in Pilibhit constituency and the endorsement of his candidature by the BJP are nothing but symbols of Hindus feeling they are under siege. Uncannily, the severity of the siege was not widely realised until the 26/11 Mumbai terror attack. The Union Government has also admitted the siege by disallowing the second edition of Indian Premier League matches in India. It is a national confession that the Government is terrified of terrorist attacks. In this context, Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi has said that this decision of the Government indicates that in future all its actions will be determined by terrorists.
India has a dark terrorism background where not only Jammu & Kashmir continues to bleed but also the expulsion of Pandits from the Valley has become a sore point with Hindus in other parts of the country. The fact that the Government has chosen to turn a blind eye to this unfinished agenda of partition does not reduce the tragedy of Hindus becoming refugees in their own homeland. Does Prime Minister Manmohan Singh realise what a deep wound he inflicted on the Hindu psyche by declaring that minorities deserve the first right to the nation’s resources?
The Sachar Committee, its recommendations and the preferential allocation of funds to Muslims is unforgivable. Especially when the action is coming from someone who was 15-year-old when his family was driven out from Gah village in Pakistan.
Haj subsidy has for years rankled in the Hindu heart as a subtle but vexatious form of jiziya, the favourite tax of Muslim rulers, including Aurangzeb. Prof Sri Ram Sharma has written that the jiziya was the most eloquent distinction between momin and kafir Having detested for decades Mohammed Ali Jinnah for precipitating India’s partition, Hindus have recently begun to realise that the Quaid-e-Azam was in fact a visionary. In his Pakistan Resolution of March 1940 the essential message was that Hindus and Muslims could not co-exist.. He said: “Islam and Hinduism are not religions in the strict sense of the word, but are in fact different and distinct social orders, and it is only a dream that Hindus and Muslims can ever evolve a common nationality.”
Jinnah had followed up on what Syed Ahmad Khan had envisioned 52 years ago. In the course of a public speech, he declared that Hindus and Muslims were two separate nations although living in the same country. He was appalled at even the remote possibility of the British withdrawing from India. How could Muslims and Hindus sit together on the same throne? Most certainly not. It was necessary for one of them to conquer the other. He went on to say that if Muslims were outnumbered, their Pathan brothers would come out from mountain valleys.
Today, a glaring issue is that of reservation. Every attempt is being made by the Congress to introduce education and job quotas for Muslims. This is particularly resented in the background of partition when 30 per cent of India’s territory was given away to set up a homeland for Muslims. Jinnah and the Muslim League had demanded an exchange of populations. Secular India insisted that Muslims must stay back whereas Pakistan kept its word and sent most Hindus packing from its western wing. The process in the eastern wing was slower: While there were 30 per cent Hindus in East Pakistan, only eight per cent remain in Bangladesh. Moreover, infiltration from across the eastern border is continuous and affects States as far away as Gujarat and Maharashtra.
The Constitution is partial to the minority communities, especially Articles 25 to 30. Articles 29 and 30 empower the Muslim community to set up any number of educational institutions, the expenses for which are borne by the Government — whether State or Centre. A substantial portion of this is paid for by Hindus but Muslims enjoy a privilege which is denied to Hindus. Incidentally, the Christians manage their own funds for the schools, colleges and hospitals they run.
Not only that, more urban property in India is owned by waqf boards than by any private party. These are lands which were confiscated by Muslim invaders and were handed over to their supporters. Zamindari was long ago abolished and the princely states were amalgamated into the Indian Union, but not the waqfs, which, in the opinion of Prof AAA Fyzee, are redundant and economically counter-productive. Many a Muslim country has nationalised these boards, but they flourish in India.
Partition was supposed to settle the two-nation issue raised by Jinnah. But it hasn’t done so. With the Constitution loaded in favour of minority communities, and politicians vying for the minority vote, the majority feels distressed
Mr Varun Gandhi’s speeches in Pilibhit constituency and the endorsement of his candidature by the BJP are nothing but symbols of Hindus feeling they are under siege. Uncannily, the severity of the siege was not widely realised until the 26/11 Mumbai terror attack. The Union Government has also admitted the siege by disallowing the second edition of Indian Premier League matches in India. It is a national confession that the Government is terrified of terrorist attacks. In this context, Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi has said that this decision of the Government indicates that in future all its actions will be determined by terrorists.
India has a dark terrorism background where not only Jammu & Kashmir continues to bleed but also the expulsion of Pandits from the Valley has become a sore point with Hindus in other parts of the country. The fact that the Government has chosen to turn a blind eye to this unfinished agenda of partition does not reduce the tragedy of Hindus becoming refugees in their own homeland. Does Prime Minister Manmohan Singh realise what a deep wound he inflicted on the Hindu psyche by declaring that minorities deserve the first right to the nation’s resources?
The Sachar Committee, its recommendations and the preferential allocation of funds to Muslims is unforgivable. Especially when the action is coming from someone who was 15-year-old when his family was driven out from Gah village in Pakistan.
Haj subsidy has for years rankled in the Hindu heart as a subtle but vexatious form of jiziya, the favourite tax of Muslim rulers, including Aurangzeb. Prof Sri Ram Sharma has written that the jiziya was the most eloquent distinction between momin and kafir Having detested for decades Mohammed Ali Jinnah for precipitating India’s partition, Hindus have recently begun to realise that the Quaid-e-Azam was in fact a visionary. In his Pakistan Resolution of March 1940 the essential message was that Hindus and Muslims could not co-exist.. He said: “Islam and Hinduism are not religions in the strict sense of the word, but are in fact different and distinct social orders, and it is only a dream that Hindus and Muslims can ever evolve a common nationality.”
Jinnah had followed up on what Syed Ahmad Khan had envisioned 52 years ago. In the course of a public speech, he declared that Hindus and Muslims were two separate nations although living in the same country. He was appalled at even the remote possibility of the British withdrawing from India. How could Muslims and Hindus sit together on the same throne? Most certainly not. It was necessary for one of them to conquer the other. He went on to say that if Muslims were outnumbered, their Pathan brothers would come out from mountain valleys.
Today, a glaring issue is that of reservation. Every attempt is being made by the Congress to introduce education and job quotas for Muslims. This is particularly resented in the background of partition when 30 per cent of India’s territory was given away to set up a homeland for Muslims. Jinnah and the Muslim League had demanded an exchange of populations. Secular India insisted that Muslims must stay back whereas Pakistan kept its word and sent most Hindus packing from its western wing. The process in the eastern wing was slower: While there were 30 per cent Hindus in East Pakistan, only eight per cent remain in Bangladesh. Moreover, infiltration from across the eastern border is continuous and affects States as far away as Gujarat and Maharashtra.
The Constitution is partial to the minority communities, especially Articles 25 to 30. Articles 29 and 30 empower the Muslim community to set up any number of educational institutions, the expenses for which are borne by the Government — whether State or Centre. A substantial portion of this is paid for by Hindus but Muslims enjoy a privilege which is denied to Hindus. Incidentally, the Christians manage their own funds for the schools, colleges and hospitals they run.
Not only that, more urban property in India is owned by waqf boards than by any private party. These are lands which were confiscated by Muslim invaders and were handed over to their supporters. Zamindari was long ago abolished and the princely states were amalgamated into the Indian Union, but not the waqfs, which, in the opinion of Prof AAA Fyzee, are redundant and economically counter-productive. Many a Muslim country has nationalised these boards, but they flourish in India.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home