Partition of India took place in 1947. And not a year passes when a book or two are not published on the same subject. So far most of the books have been published by Muslim intellectuals, both Indian and Pakistani. The latest in the series is Being The Other: The Muslim in India by Saeed Naqvi, a well known journalist. Though much of the book is devoted to post-Independent India, his analysis of Partition is completely flawed and full of lies.
By all accounts, it is an established fact that it was Sir Syed Ahmad Khan who in his speeches delivered at Lucknow and Meerut during 1887-1888 propounded the Two-Nation Theory. The seeds of separate electorates for Muslims were also sown by Sir Syed. Taking his philosophy forward, intellectual elites from Aligarh Muslim University established the All India Muslim League at Dacca in 1906. It was Justice Ameer Ali who had persuaded Lord Morley to agree to the Muslim demand for separate electorates in the forthcoming Minto-Morley
Constitutional Reform 1909. In 1930, Allama Iqbal asked for a separate Muslim State in the North West of India.
In 1940, Quaid-e-Azam M.A.Jinnah declared that Muslims were not a minority (as asserted hitherto) but a nation judged by any international standards and demanded a separate homeland for the lndian ummah. As suggested by the White Hall in London, elections to the Provincial Assemblies and the Central Legislature were held in 1945-46. The Muslim League had one point agenda-creation of Pakistan. The staff and students of Aligarh Muslim University took an active role in canvassing the Muslim votes for Muslim League. According to Prof. M. Mujeeb, Vice Chancellor Jamia Millia, Delhi, an over/whelming majority of Muslims voted for Pakistan. Justice M.C. Chagla has written that but for the Muslims of U.P. there would have been no Pakistan. Sir Aga Khan in his Memoirs points out but that the independent and sovereign State of Pakistan was born in Muslim University Aligarh. AMU had worked as an arsenal for Muslim lndia according to M. A. Jinnah.
On the failure of Cabinet Mission Plan in early 1946, Jinnah launched Direct Action Plan. This resulted in the killings of thousands of Hindus in Calcutta in August 1946. It is therefore surprising that in the face of such overwhelming evidence, Mr. Naqvi blames Gandhi, Nehru and Patel for the vivisection of India. As a journalist he has no business to distort facts of history.
Dear Naqvi Saheb,
What has impressed me most about your latest book is your narration of how Awadh was the cradle of the Ganga- Jamuni tehzeeb and how the Shias provided the moving spirit behind the bonhomie. The following sentences have left an ongoing impact on me.
“The liberal Muslim, Persianized and broadminded and the majority of lndia Muslims, the newly converted ‘Jummans’, Arabized and focused on the mosque. A basic rule of thumb was: culture came from Persia, lslamism from Arabia.
Returning to Medina after his last Haj at Mecca in March 632, three months before his death in June that year, the Prophet halted at a place called Gadhir. He lifted Ali's hand and proclaimed: Munkunt 0 Maula, Haza Ali Maula, they who consider me their Maula or leader appointed by God, must also consider Ali their Maula. Shias regard the twenty-six years of Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman rule as ‘usurpation’. The elite Shias form nearly 20 per cent of the Muslim population in lndia.”
My first hand experience of the Shia-Sunni difference, that l remember, is when an lndo-Pak cricket match was on and a number of young people were watching it on the T.V. The Muslims who applauded when an Indian batsman hit a boundary appeared to be Shia. Those who clapped when a Pakistani batsman scored a four seemed to be Sunni. One of the young men explained this to me outside. Keep also in view that almost all those who are involved in the world war being fought by the Islamists are Sunnis and not Shias.
Hence my appeal to you and all Shias is henceforth to call yourselves Hazratis and not Muslims. And they should not hold a brief for Muslims generally. And before long the Shias would be perceived by Hindus as they do Parsees, Christians or Jews.