A bit of Hyderabadi history

Razzakar (Volunteer; Marathi, 2015)
Director: Raj Durge

This part of Indian history is unfamiliar to most, especially those outside India. India had between 550 and 700 princely states, each under its monarchs, chieftains, or feudal lords. At the time of India's independence, at least two states wanted to stand alone and not join India or Pakistan. There was Kashmir, which had a Hindu Maharajah Hari Singh ruling over a Muslim majority. The other was Hyderabad, ruled by a Muslim Nizam over a predominantly Hindu population.

Kashmir, as we know, went into chaos when Pakistani soldiers disguised as tribesmen created mayhem. Hari Singh went into exile, and the State eventually broke up. Its problems persist to date.

Down in Hyderabad, the wealthy Nizam was not ready to part from his wealth and power. It was believed that his subjects mostly wanted to be with India. During Indian independence, the Nizam had to quell a Marxist people's rebellion. The Nizam's army, aided by Qasim Rizvi, the leader of a firebrand Islamic political party, went on a killing spree. They killed many feudal lords and even peasants who were Hindus. The vigilante group that claims to be championing the Nizam's cause and the path of Islam, as they eventually aim to join Pakistan, called themselves 'Razakkar' (the Volunteers).

Hyderabad was in a disadvantaged position. They were a landlocked state, and the fact that the Hindus were tortured gave India a legitimate reason for India to station its soldiers at its borders. The duel stood a standstill as the peasant fought back tooth and nail against the Razakkars. Indians moved in through 'police actions'. Hyderabad was annexed to India.

This 2015 Marathi film showcases an account of what some Hindu peasants in the State's periphery would have experienced under the tyranny of the Razakars. I am waiting for another version of the Razakkar's tale in the 2024 version.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

The state of a state

Kohrra (Fog, Punjabi-Hindi; 2023
Miniseries S1E1-6.

Shrouded in fog, that is how it is. It used to be the food basket of India and the provider of the country's most significant tax returns from its businesses and income earners. Punjab used to be prosperous. People of the diaspora have been instantly recognised worldwide for their resilience, entrepreneurial skills, confidence and ability to adapt and integrate. 

Sadly, the situation in their home state now is a far cry from what it used to be in its pre-independence days. The downward spiral started when a large chunk of the State was sliced away amid bloody butchering to satisfy specific political ambitions. Just as they recoiled back to health with the erection of a dam and the introduction of Green Revolution initiatives, they were the envy of many, including their poor Eastern cousins, Haryana. 

Religiosio-linguistic politics dictated that Hindi-speaking Hindu Himachal Pradesh and Haryana be cut off from the predominantly Sikh Punjabi province in a way that contributed to the tumultuous, violent sectarian politics of Akali Dal, Bindrawale and Operation Blue Star. After that, it was downhill all the way. The Punjabis missed the bus that brought various revolutions: IT, automobile manufacturing, biotechnology and retail. Haryana went places.

20th century Punjab sees an average Punjabi dying to get out of Punjab to get a green card in Canada. Hardy, hardworking Sadarjis are replaced by drug-peddling, gun-wielding gangsters who glorify female objection in their music videos. Then there is a constant external pressure to demand an independent country of Khalistan where Gurmukhi is the script, and Sikh is the national religion, which will be in harmony with their neighbour, Pakistan, so they believe. 

Interestingly, Chandigarh is the common
capital of Punjab and Haryana.

This miniseries, a compelling six-episode first season, brings the audience to the daily dealings of two small-town police officers. It paints an unsettling township where the police have too much power and too much on their plate. Police brutality is the norm, and it seems justified in wanting to mete justice to the grieving family. Opulence is the game the wealthy display to claim their societal role. Family pride takes precedence over everything else. 

Life is cheap, and people can be knocked off for a song. Truth somehow gets buried somewhere in the chaos of things, much like how the splendour of the Saraswati river and its civilisation disappeared into annal of times. 

At least, this is what I, as a non-resident of Punjab, take home after watching this miniseries. It starts with the death of a soon-to-be-married NRI groom found dead in the field with his pants down. The investigating police officer teases out in piecemeal all the undercurrents behind the death. The officer himself has a complicated back story. Losing his wife to depression, he cannot see eye to eye with his adult daughter. His daughter, married with a young child, hates her husband and has an affair. 

Meanwhile, the bride to the deceased groom has a morbidly clingy musician boyfriend who tries everything to regain his beau. But the boyfriend also has a side chick. The dead groom's boyfriend, who came from the UK, is also missing. Now, where is he?

With everyone breathing down his neck, the grieving groom's family, the anxious UK mother, and the aggressive groom's father handling his family issues and pressure from his superiors, sub-inspector Balbir Singh has to tie all the loose knots and close the case. Forgot to mention that Balbir Singh also fancies the widow of a former informant whom he killed!

With such a bizarre storyline, there is no guessing what will happen next. It all makes sense in the end, like most things in life. Nothing is really so straightforward. Nothing is black or white.

P/S. It would appear on the surface that emigration improves one's standard of living to emulate the citizens of their host, to grow and be part of the nation. Wrong! It is true what the migrants want is a peaceful existence, the ability to prove one's purpose of existence, to impart wisdom to the next generation and a final seamless transition to the Otherside with the least morbidity. The host country believes it can assist with resources; in return, the arrivals should blend into the system. Integration, the newcomers will not do for they are convinced their hosts are inferior for the arrivals brought in with them the real civilisation, which is superior and time tested. This is evident in this miniseries. Despite being an NRI, whom one would perceive to have progressive thoughts in sync with the Western world, here the father is showing none of those. Even though he left his home country because it was not good enough to nurture his family, he still brings his old ancient belief systems. 

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

No one gives a damn really!

Meghe Dhaka Tara (The Cloud-Clapped Star, Bengali, 1960)
Screenplay & Direction: Ritwik Ghatak

I saw him brought in earlier in handcuffs and was attended to by my seniors. I noticed that everyone was looking at him with judgemental looks. So as not to embarrass him further, I just immersed myself in work. Still, from the corners of my eye, I did notice that he looked too intelligent to be wearing prison attire and be shoved around like a common criminal.

He must have seen me clerking the patients all through the afternoon, and there I was, still attending to patients at 10pm, as the first frontliner and the most junior of the staff. I must have looked gullible enough for him to quietly signal me to come beside him as I passed him by.

.

So, when he called me, I was curious. He complained he had chest pains that could be a heart attack and needed a certification letter that he had a massive myocardial infarction. I was scratching my head. At most, he could be having some musculoskeletal discomfort. His symptoms and ECG suggested that the possibility of a full-blown cardiac event was remote. I told him, "I will see what I can do", and never went in his direction again.

I later found out he was a senior lawyer charged with a criminal breach of trust suit and was scheduled to appear in courts the following day, hence the delay tactic. And, I was the sucker to be used for his personal intent.

For a long time, I was annoyed by the event. There I was, squeezing my brains trying to sort out the best treatment for the ill patients, and someone out there was one-minded to get me into trouble and sweet talk me for his nefarious intentions. 

As the years went on, I soon realised that nobody actually gives anyone a damn. At the end of the day, it is all about self-sustenance and personal gratification. If I were working through lunch that day because I thought the patients needed more urgent attention than my suppressible hunger, it is no fault of the patients. It was mine for not prioritising and lack of foresightedness. As if these things are predictable? I chose my line of duty. I thought it was my calling, so stop whining. I am just a mere spoke in the wheel of human civilisation. And the direction of the human march is forward, and I am the lubrication to ensure smooth motion. Nobody is worried that the lubricant dries up or gets denatured. It is what it is.

This 1960 Bengali movie reminded me of that event that happened 33 years ago. The film was made by a legendary filmmaker, Ritwik Ghatak, who is often to referred to as the second most influential director to another great Bengali moviemaker, Satyajit Ray. Ghatak's compositions combine neo-realism with a bit of over-dramatisation to portray the society we live in. Many of his films show female empowerment, societal divisions and the effect of the 1947 Partition on the Bengal region.

Khuki's family is a refugee family affected by the Partition. The family is probably from the Bhadralok class of society who benefitted from the British Rule acquiring Western education and 'cultured' behaviour. All that came to nought overnight as they were deprived of homes and possessions after the bloody feud for statehood. So this middle-upper echelon of East Bengal spilt over westwardly for survival.

Khuki's father is an old school teacher who could recite Keats and Shakespeare at the drop of a hat, becomes debilitated after a fall. The responsibility of caring for the family falls on Khuki. She has ambitions of higher education and marriage to the love of her life, Sanat.

Khuki's mother is forever complaining of increasing expenses for the household. The eldest son of the family, Shankar, is only interested in being a world-class singer. Till then, he was not planning to do any other work. A younger brother, Mantu, is a keen sportsman. The youngest, Gita, is a dreamy young girl interested in staying pretty and not in her studies.

Khuki sacrifices all desires for the well being of the family. She surrenders her salary, gives up her comfort and even gives up her man to be married off to her sister. What she gets in return is just more demands and contempt. All the stresses did not augur well for Khuki.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Go with the flow?

Subarnarekha (Bengali, 1965)
Story and Direction: Ritwik Ghatak

The world, they say, constantly evolves. Every civilisation has its norms and social mores that it holds close to its heart for its society to follow. Depending on how strongly one community sticks to its belief, sometimes death may seem the most appropriate punishment meted to shirkers. 

The older generation thought they had seen it all. They know who is good and what brings destruction in the end. The young ones from all ages inherently have that rebel streak in them. They refuse to see eye-to-eye with their elders, no matter how well the latter proved themselves to be. This must be Nature's natural way to help the human race explore all avenues and choose the best way to propel forward.

It is no easy task to hang on to old traditions and values when the world is evolving, and it appears to be left behind. Even though we can see that their ways are decadent but why is everyone following them? Are we missing something?

This must be how the elders of Bharat must have felt when the East Indian Company was making inroads into India. With all the rich traditions and knowledge readily in their motherland, they cannot understand why the younger ones were fascinated with the self-defeating culture of the West.

'Subarnarekha' constitutes Ritwik Ghatak's third offering of the trilogy involving refugees during the Partition of Bengal in 1947. Ishvar Chakraborty leaves East Bengal with his sister Sita. Ishvar hangs around the refugee camp with nothing much to do. He takes in a young refugee boy, Abhiram, whose mother is taken away by zamindars. 

A chance meeting with an old friend brought him a job elsewhere. Despite being labelled as a deserter, he jumps up on the opportunity for seeking greener pasture and leaving the rest. Ishvar's boss is a traditionalist, believing in caste and creed.

Years go on. Abhiram is sent to a boarding school, graduates and become a casual writer. Sita grows up pretty, is musically inclined and falls for Abhiram. Ishvar, by now, is a general manager and is earmarked to be a partner in the foundry he is working. When Sita and Abhiram bring up the idea of marrying, the boss brings up the question of Abhiram's caste. The young ones elope, starting from scratch and scraping the barrel. Ishvar turns out broken and spirals down the ladder of decadence. The end is devastating as both Abhiram and Sita die, and their son goes under the care of his uncle, Ishvar, to stay in his abode by the banks of River Subarnarekha.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Religion a political tool!

Jinnah (1998)
Screenplay, direction: Jamil Dehlavi

This must be Pakistan's reply to Richard Attenborough's narration of the Father of India, Mahatma Gandhi. It was made, not by a Pakistani, but by a London-based British of Pakistani-French descent. The controversial Jamil Dehlavi, whose 1980 film 'The Blood of Hussain' earned the ire of the Pakistani government. As the name suggests, the storyline paralleled the events surrounding the historic Battle of Karbala, which is vital in the Shia tradition, not to the predominantly Sunni Pakistanis.

Even though this film fetes the founder, the Quaid-i-Azam, the great leader of Pakistan, it was never screened in Pakistan. Most depictions of Jinnah elsewhere are often of one who is cunning, conniving, humourless, and challenging to deal with. To be fair, this film tries as much as possible to paint a picture of a well-meaning, conscientious Jinnah. It, however, glaringly gives a blank about a few particular things about his background that questions his portrayal as a soldier of Islam in his quest to establish a brand new fully Islamic country to safeguard the welfare of Muslims in the subcontinent. Jinnah and his Muslim League Party feared that an independent India would mean injustice from the British Raj would be transferred to another heathen ruler, the Hindu Raj.

In a flashback sequence, the story is told in a flip-flop manner, as Jinnah is at the fabled heaven's gate and being interviewed by St Peter. St Peter's archival system faces a glitch; hence, Jinnah has to narrate in person his life events. St Peter walks through his life, literally, as Jinnah is asked whether he regrets all the things he did in his lifetime and whether he would do it all again with the wisdom of hindsight. With a few regrets to his family life and the people who perished during Partition, Jinnah's answer is yes.

Nowhere in the film was it hinted about Jinnah's origin. The fact that he was a Gujerati, not from Punjab, where central Pakistan was carved out. It also omitted that he was of Shia denomination. I suppose where he came and at that time, it did not matter. He also did not speak Urdu, the spoken language of the majority of Muslims in India.

Jinnah's grandparents were Gujarati Hindus who were converted by a Sufi. Jinnah himself was not a traditionalist. After getting married as his mother's pre-requisite before leaving to study in England, he was initially meant to study medicine. He turned mid-way to read law and turned out quite a force to be reckoned in the courts. In 1929, he was said to have successfully defended Sardar Patel in a funds misappropriation case. He stood in Bhagat Singh's and Bal Tilak's legal team in the right to speech trial. In his famous speech, he asked the court, "You want to prosecute them or persecute them?"

Jinnah with his sister and confidante Fatima

At one time in the movie, Jinnah is seen as a maverick Anglophile lawyer arguing in the British courts. A plea by a friend, poet-philosopher-politician Muhammad Iqbal, turned his attention to the Muslim plight in India. And he plunged head-on into his Two Nation strategy. What they conveniently omit is that Jinnah was not particularly religious. He lived the life of a wealthy English gentleman, openly ate pork, consumed whiskey, wore expensive European clothing items, and married a non-Muslim, a Farsi as his second wife. He was neither a great admirer of Muslim principles nor a frequenter of mosques.

Islam was a political tool to claim a new nation using victimhood of persecution by radical Hindu elements in India. Paradoxically, this same element assassinated Gandhi, a Hindu leader. The premise of this new country, Pakistan, was to offer its citizens equal rights, privileges, and obligations, irrespective of colour, caste, creed, or community. It promised citizens that religion had nothing to do with the state's business but merely a matter of personal faith. Obviously, this piped dream came crashing down only a year after the birth of this nation.

Richard Lintern as young Jinnah

When Jinnah succumbed to the illness (TB, disease of consumption as it was called then; it consumes your body), which was a tightly-guarded secret between Jinnah and his physician of the Zoroastrian faith, Dr Jal Patel, he left behind a trail of dictators who had set aside democracy principles and let religious zealots dictate how a country should be run. Jinnah led as a Governor-General, and his word was law. Liaqat Ali, who became his successor, decided to accept Islam as the official religion. This caused a frenzy. Many, including its law minister, Jogendra Nath Mandal, a Dalit Hindu, who was impressed with Jinnah's vision, fled for their lives, taking refuge in India. Pakistan went on to become an Islamic Republic in 1956 after a military coup.

Jinnah's second marriage to Rattanbhai (Ruttie) Petit needs mention. Jinnah was Ruttie's father's guest in his mansion for two years when he asked a 16-year-old Ruttie hand in marriage. The 24 years of age difference and the differing religion were hurdles, but it happened two years later when Ruttie was a major. Probably because of the age difference and the different priorities in life, she had clinical depression. It is said that she later succumbed to morphine overdose. Ironically, Jinnah's only daughter, Dina, married an Indian-born Farsi, against Jinnah's approval and was disowned by him.

A nation's fate is decided under a tree.

Even though this movie is supposed to give a human touch to the founder of a country often portrayed negatively, and as a villain, it never got approval for screening in cinemas. The detractors complain that it is wrong to cast an actor who is synonymous with playing horror and vampire films to represent an esteemed leader of a nation. It is not that he is of European descent. Christopher Lee, who assumed the role, actually did a fantastic portrayal of Jinnah and was the spitting image of Jinnah himself, as we see in pictures. Lee also regards his performance here as the best in his career.

A stellar performance by the cast but history, as they say, is muti-dimensional. The viewers have to accept the storytelling maturely. The almost unrecognisable and puffed-up Shashi Kapoor appears as the St Peter character.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Memories are made of these?

Sardar ka Grandson (Hindi, Sardar's Grandson; 2021)
Netflix

Somebody was comparing two pieces of land that were carved out of a more significant portion of land, circa 1947-48. See how the parent state reacts to the other. What a contrast!  In 1947, the Muslim state of Pakistan (1,030,000 km²) was carved out of a large piece of land that was essentially Buddhist/Hindu for thousands of years. Despite all the bloodshed and emotional trauma that accompanied this creation, India, by and significant accepted the turn of historical events and carried on with life, trying to improve itself.

In contrast, the tiny Jewish State of Israel  (22,000 km²) was reborn in 1948 after 2000 years in a place where their forefathers, thousands of years previously before, were exiled. Yet, their neighbours and their yeomen are hellbent on the state's annihilation. The problem is where to mark the beginning of history and selective bias of record to determine who was there first. 

Since its inception, Israel has been defending itself from hostile neighbours. It had turned a deaf ear to curses from many of their proxies. Collectively, the enemies of Israel have made it a crusade to fight the land held sacred by other believers as well, Christians and Baha'is included. Still, there can be no place for intellectual discourse. Instead of living in harmony with its neighbours as the great scriptures advocate and improving their living standards, they chose anarchy. There has been no peace for the past 70 years.

When someone loses a place that they call home, what do they actually lose? Is it the physical space occupied by the person, or is it the memories associated with the place? Can the experiences and feelings be quantifiable? Is it justified to live brooding over lost land, living in melancholy reminiscing on how things were? Or should we accept it as the ever-changing tide of history and move on? Cambodia was once a race of master builders. Greece was where people of Europe started thinking beyond their primal, animalistic needs. But look at them now. Wind of change does not escape anyone.

Maybe it is trans-generational trauma of sorts, or perhaps it will be forgotten as the older generation, which was there in flesh and blood during the 1947 Partition. The event has affected the Punjabi community tremendously. 

This 2021 light comedy tells the tale of a Punjabi American immigrant (Amreek) who has to return urgently to Amritsar to visit his 90-year-old ailing grandmother, Sardar Kaur. In the USA, he runs a moving business with his fiancée, Radha. Due to his lackadaisical attitude and bumbling demeanour, they part ways.

Back in India, his grandmother's dying wish is to visit her former home in Lahore. Before the Partition, she and her husband had built a home. She had to leave it in desperation when Pakistanis moved in and killed her husband. So get a visa and go, right? The problem is that the grandmother is denied entry to Pakistan. On record, she has assaulted a Pakistani official many years before, as a spectator, before during a friendly cricket match. 

By then, Radha has moved on to other things. Amreek once witnesses her advertisement of her translocating a whole tree. Amreek decides to do the same for Sardar's house. As fate would have it, the official whom Sardar had assaulted is now Lahore's mayor, and he is not going to give the permit for translocation so easily. As expected, Amreek is successful, he and Radha are united, Sardar is happy, and the film managed to portray an image of buffoonery on the people of Pakistan and their officials. Perhaps that is the reason why the film fared so poorly on IMDB and Rotten Apples' scales.  The leftist media have to stand in support of their brethren. An enemy of my enemy is my friend.

The movie is average, but there are a lot of loopholes in the storyline. Imagine navigating a double-storey townhouse through the narrow and diabolical streets of Lahore on a trailer. If the viewers were to look beyond all these faux pas, they might enjoy this romcom.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Knives, daggers, and bullets cannot destroy religion.

Manto (2018)
Netflix

We always try to portray the world as a place of hope, of joy, dream, and the sky is the limit of our achievements. This is just hogwash. In the real world, Mother Nature is particularly hostile towards its creations. And we, the products, are no different towards each other. We sugarcoat the world around in perfect harmony with apple trees, honey bees and snow white turtle doves. In reality, it is ruled by bigots and kleptocrats who use their Machiavellian techniques to hoodwink everyone to fill up the world with their preset agendas. They paint an image of heaven on Earth, but deep in their pockets, they have conceived a plan of chaos and entropy. But still, these flag-waving jingoistic cabals have only one thing on their agenda - control and the power that comes with it. 

As if to entice its followers, they create an imaginary enemy and a promise of an unproven paradise. Consequently, the conforming automatons think with their brain; not with their heart, losing the only thing that keeps humanity alive. Compassion. 

History tells the story of the victors. Theirs would be the account as depicted by the powers that be. Writers, especially great ones, tell a different view of history. They say what is going at the ground level and is more indicative of that is true to life. Look at the mainstream media. See how 'truth' is hijacked to suit the narrative of the day and the viewpoint of their paymasters. Nobody likes bad news. They feel motivated when things are going on well as planned. They label writers as nihilistic and pessimistic as they tend to highlight only the things that are rather unseen, unheard, suppressed and marginalised. The raw reality of life is viewed as obscenity.

Hassan Sadaat Manto was a successful short story writer, novelist and screenwriter who lived in British India around the time of Indian Independence and Partition. Having a successful career in pre-Independent India in Bombay and Delhi, he was forced to leave for Pakistan after increasing aversion against Muslims in Bombay. He was deeply affected by the Partition by the things that he saw. Describing in detail, with no holds barred, the accounts of atrocities of Sikhs and Muslims against each other, he got into trouble to the Pakistani newly drafted obscenity law. He became progressive depressive, hit the bottle, jobless and succumbed to cirrhosis of the liver.

From the movie, I discovered two heart-wrenching short stories - Thandha Gosht (Cold Meat) and Toba Tek Singh (his last composition in 1955). Thandha Gosht tells the story of a Sikh man who meets his fiery and suspicious mistress after going missing for a couple of days. The mistress, suspecting that her lover had been disloyal to her, especially when he failed to rise to the occasion, slits his throat. The man confesses that he had gone off to kill Muslims. This was at the time of Partition. He joined the band of men at revenge rape of Muslim women. He emotionally tells how he attempted to rape a lady only to discover that she had already died. She was just like cold meat.

Manto with his wife Safia and sister-in-law Zakia
Manto Family Archive

Toba Tek Singh is a sad tale of an elderly Sikh man who is institutionalised in the Pakistani mental asylum. He longs to reunite with his family whom he left in the town of Toba Tek Singh. The old chap is unsure whether the city is in India or Pakistan after the Partition. Every one whom he asks gives a different account the town is situated. Then comes the day when Pakistan and India exchanges prisoners and mental patients. This old man is at the no man's land between two countries when he is released to India. Confused whether the town is actually situated, in India or Pakistan, he just drops dead in the agony of frustration.

Read an account of this remarkable storyteller here.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Still relevant today

Pakistan or Partition of India (1940, Revised 1945)
B.R. Ambedkar

Dr Ambedkar is often voted as the single most important icon of India, surpassing Gandhi and the members of the Nehru clan. He has been described as one of the most erudite people from the subcontinent. He is credited with the drafting of the Indian Constitution. One of his many books that seem to be ahead of its times and is especially relevant in these trying times of identity politics is this one. 

It was written at the tumultuous times when India was fighting a war for the British while at the same time, in the local front struggling for self-rule. Like two siblings fighting for the coveted candy from their parents, it was a time when Muslims were fighting for a separate nation. The Hindus wanted to keep it that way as it had been since time immemorial.

As early as 630AD, through the writings of the travelling Buddhist monk, Hsuan Tang (Xuanzang), the Indian subcontinent had been described to spread from Afghanistan. The 8th-century Indian philosopher, via his travels to the four corners of the country, had demarcated the extent of India. So, to carve out part of the country, for sentimental reasons, is considered sacrilege. 

Char Dham (4 Abodes) - Holy pilgrim sites

as described by Adi Shankaracharya from

Kerala who united the nation of India through

his travels and philosophical debates to all

four corners of the country.

From the 8th century onwards, waves upon waves of Muslim invaders infiltrated from the North changing the landscape of the country altogether. It is said the destruction of various gems of knowledge were burnt to the ground. Temples were desecrated and looted. Then on it was a series of the path of destruction with kingdoms rising and falling, each new warrior claiming to protect their way of life. Finally, the British East India Company put the final death knell to the once glorious land.

By the time the British were ruling India, the dichotomy between the Hindus and Muslims were quite pronounced. The wealthy Muslims who prospered when the Mogul Emperor was ruling had all lost their influence. At about that time, the Ottoman Empire, the sick man of  Europe, was no worthy representative of the past glory of the religion. There was a dire need amongst the elite group to reignite this. 

The last time, the Hindus and Muslims join forces to combat a common enemy was during the Sepoy Mutiny in 1857. The Colonial Master must have noticed this and using their time-tested 'divide-and-rule' tactic, they managed to create distrust between the two sides. So, when Independence was fought for, the Muslims were fervent on distrusting the Hindus. They claimed that they would get fair treatment in a country dominated by a Hindu majority. Hence, the call for a Muslim nation called Pakistan began as early as the 1930s. The calls for Islamic union started with Khalifat movement in 1919. They were sympathisers of the Ottoman Empire but were disappointed when Turkey became a republic instead of re-establishing an Islamic Empire.

Babasaheb Ambedkar was in a unique position to be the best person to critically evaluate all the merits and demerits of creating a Muslimraj nation. He, having the brunt of the discriminations hurled upon for being a Dalit and a Hindu, knows too well about the downside of the ugly treatment of the backward castes in a Hindu community. Being one who delved in different religions (before his mass conversion later), he is also well versed in the Islamic scriptures. Armed with this knowledge, he went on to discuss whether Partition should happen and what are the dangers should Pakistan were not created, from a Hindu and Muslim perspective.


Ambedkar had a lot of criticisms about Gandhi's way of going about getting Swaraj from the British. His cooperation with the Khalifat Movement and his back-bending means of appeasing to their whims and fancies were frowned upon. His inactions after the Mopla Rebellion in Kerala and the use of his secret weapon, fasting, for political gain and Indian unity were admonished. 

The Hindus, at least the ones in the upper crust (caste) of the society were mostly against Partition. Many wanted to maintain the status quo by clinging on to the civil service. Creation of a new nation would mean loss of their status. They were happy with Muslims living in India within pockets of Muslim majorities. They felt they would be fair.

The French-speaking and the English-speaking Canadian can live together. So can the English and the Boers in South Africa. And Switzerland has a harmonious mix of French, Italians and Germans in their populace. During the writing of the book, Czechoslovakia was living proof that two ethnicities, Czechs and Slovaks can come together as a country.

But, at the same time, in the case of Czechoslovakia, trouble can start from within. Like the Sudeten German who engaged Hitler to march into their country.

Ambedkar accused the Muslim of unable to show nationalism or nationalistic spirit. For them, there is the only allegiance to religion. The religious tie of Islam is the strongest in humanity. There was no assurance that Pakistan would be fair to their non-Muslim minorities and vice versa.

The author was also worried that what was left of India could even disintegrate. Unlike proposed Pakistan with a universal language of Urdu (and religion), India was a potpourri of cultures and languages. 

On top of all of the above, India had to deal with the bad foreign press. He quoted a 1927 novel 'Mother India' which was written by a Miss Mayo who was quick to paint a horrible picture of traditional Hindu way of life - child brides, widowhood etc. It created great dissatisfaction in India. The story was rewritten later and made into a blockbuster movie in 1957 to instil nationalism.

To conclude, in the epilogue, the author took the stand that it was inevitable that Partition should happen. Even though India had survived a cultural basket for generations, the creation of two nations was not pre-destined but a deliberate attempt to emphasise the difference when it was more beneficial to find commonalities. 

Communal antagonism is present everywhere. We should learn to embrace each other's differences.

https://etouch-jayanthinathan.blogspot.com/2017/05/pakistan-or-partition-of-india-by-dr-br.html

https://medium.com/@PranavSJ/book-review-pakistan-or-the-partition-of-india-by-dr-babasaheb-ambedkar-80f75dc5d368

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.