Truly? Well, well. I find that I am a one-eyed man, being led by the blind.
A later visit showed that the communal element had organised.
And we were informed in solemnly intoned words about a contrasting visit; let us re-visit that as well.
I leave it to those blessed with better sight to decide who is one-eyed and who is blind in this matter. But we linger and tarry; it is still a long way to St. Dunstan's.
Sir,
The title of the book says it all. The author’s orientation is towards religion and fundamentalism etc leading to the present time. He for obvious reasons could not explain the Kashmiri movement in other details which are necessary in order to look at it objectively.
One cannot explain everything in detail but in the limited space that one can, let me highlight certain aspects. Sheikh Abdullah, since 1930 when he emerged on the political scene, swung like a pendulum between representing the oppressed Kashmiri Muslims, liberalistic thoughts and inclination towards Congress. Incidently, I hope you agree that the majority Kashmiri Muslims were terribly oppressed under the Maharaja rule, as so much has been written on this by independent observers that it is difficult to deny it. Sheikh Abdullah’s liberal views were needed for support of Hindu Pandits and Congress. But when he would cross certain lines, he would tend to lose his stature amongst his Muslim followers.
He also wanted to become famous. Gandhi was known as Mahatma, Ghaffar Khan was known as Sarhaddi Gandhi, Abdus Samad Achakzai was known as Gandhi of Balochistan and he wanted to become Kashmiri Gandhi. This would also tend to lose his Muslim support which was his base. So, for Muslim support he would make certain speeches and for the rest, he would make conciliatory statements to suit their needs.
In one such mode, in 1940 on Eide-e-Miladun Nabi, while addressing a Muslim gathering he identified Islam as the rising of sun and other religions as stars which would lose their spark as the sun would rise. This put him squarely against his liberal credentials and resulted in his falling apart with his Hindu Pandit friends. In a National Conference meeting when he was asked about his statement, he got angry and said he believed in what he said. Yet when he realized that this went against him in Congress he retracted. Later, when he felt that his Muslims supporters were getting annoyed he once again in a gathering said the same thing. This further alienated the Hindu and Congress allies.
Pandit Premnath Bazaz was Sheikh Abdullah’s friend and had served 3 year’s jail sentence with him. But on his statement about Islam being a sun, he and others went against him. Bazaz, also wrote a book titled Inside Kashmir in which he crtisized National Conference. Sheikh who also befriended the Prime Minister of Kashmir, Iyenger, a fundamentalist leaning Hindu helped to ban the book in Kashmir. But Bazaz went on speaking against Sheikh and made damaging revelations against him, which alienated His Muslim supporters.
By the time Nehru visited Kashmir, Sheikh Abdullah’s Muslim Conference was broken in to National Conference and its liberal constitution was re-written. This had further alienated Muslims and it were mostly Hindu traders, Pandits and limited Muslims remained to welcome him in Srinagar.
Sir to know who is blind and who is blessed with 20/20, please read Blind Men of Hindoostan by General Sunderjee – not for this topic indeed.
Indeed it is long way to St Dunstan’s and offcourse Hanuz Dilli Door Ast
Please tell me when I start irritating you.
