Was partition of India inevitable?

[Stephen Cohen]

Read my post above your's

While you were replying to me ; I was asking my question to you
Co incidence

 

[Levina]

While you were replying to me ; I was asking my question to you
Co incidence

You were quick to assume i would not read those articles. Lol
I had read 'em last nite.

 

[Stephen Cohen]

@levina

The crux of the matter is that Partition was NEITHER an accident
nor a bargaining counter

It was a clear aim ; an idea ; a desire

The most vociferous suporters were from UP and Bihar
BOTH Non Muslim Majority provinces

The question that " What will happen after the British left " had been troubling Muslims
RIGHT FROM 1857

The idea of Pakistan first took Birth in UP ; it was called United Provinces

 

[ashok mourya]

Jinnah was just a lawyer for the cause of the Muslim people, he won he did his job well that's it, there are others who laid the foundation of Pakistan such as chowdry Rehmat Ali.


Pakistanis don't share race, culture with Indians why would they have wanted to be part of United India?.

.

That 's why Muhajirs are stil Muhajirs in Pakistan not Pakistanis but Migrant Muslims from India .

 

[scorpionx]

Those 're good articles, both based on the book of Venkat Dhulipala. It reinforces my belief that pre-partition somebody had decided to sow the seed of hatred among hindus and muslims for their own selfish reasons

Dhulipala's book has rightfully been blamed for omitting out at least seven vital factors of the history of partition that should have been included in an academic work piece; aftermath of 1937 has been insufficiently described, the claim that Pakistan movement got enough Deobandi support also suffers from factual inaccuracies, Raja Mahmudabad's relation with Jinnah was ignored, Ambedkar plan, the coalition between left and ML, Congress and its alliance with radical fundamentalist groups like Khaksar and Majlis e ahrar whose anti-Shia and anti-Ahmadi incitement is quite well known have conveniently escaped Dhulipala's attention. So better, let us not hurry to come to any conclusion.

 

[Armstrong]

I will never understand threads like these; it happened nearly 70 years ago.....it was Our land...its was Our future....it was Our choice.....get over it !

The likeness of this debate is that of a group of people arguing about whether the divorce of two people should or shouldn't have happened when since then they've lived happily for many years, remarried and have started families of their own - Fascinating as it might be to endlessly over-analyze the thing...it brings nothing material to the discussion !

Ironically enough, in the same vein, no one bothers to ask whether British India should've been given Independence altogether or not ? Maybe judging by our abject social, economic and political conditions we were better off under the British; heck they gave up their prejudices a lot sooner than we did....in fact we still haven't in many ways !

Dhulipala's book has rightfully been blamed for omitting out at least seven vital factors of the history of partition that should have been included in an academic work piece; aftermath of 1937 has been insufficiently described, the claim that Pakistan movement got enough Deobandi support also suffers from factual inaccuracies, Raja Mahmudabad's relation with Jinnah was ignored, Ambedkar plan, the coalition between left and ML, Congress and its alliance with radical fundamentalist groups like Khaksar and Majlis e ahrar whose anti-Shia and anti-Ahmadi incitement is quite well known have conveniently escaped Dhulipala's attention. So better, let us not hurry to come to any conclusion.

For your fair and genuinely non biased take on History I'm thinking of making you an Honorary Pakistani but I dunno whether that'll work or not because a 'Bengali' is an 'East-Pakistani' anyhow !

 

[scorpionx]

For your fair and genuinely non biased take on History I'm thinking of making you an Honorary Pakistani but I dunno whether that'll work or not because a 'Bengali' is an 'East-Pakistani' anyhow !

Really!! As you also have dared not to watch a single episode of GoT, Me and @Nihonjin1051 have planned something for you, a trip to the wall and marriage to a white walker

 

[Armstrong]

Really!! As you also have dared not to watch a single episode of GoT, Me and @Nihonjin1051 have planned something for you, a trip to the wall and marriage to a white walker

I don't even know what the Game of Thrones is all about !

But in the meantime I was glued to Arrow, Gotham, some old British sitcoms like Yes Minister/ Yes Prime Minister and the Walking Dead !

 

[Levina]

Dhulipala's book has rightfully been blamed for omitting out at least seven vital factors of the history of partition that should have been included in an academic work piece; aftermath of 1937 has been insufficiently described, the claim that Pakistan movement got enough Deobandi support also suffers from factual inaccuracies, Raja Mahmudabad's relation with Jinnah was ignored, Ambedkar plan, the coalition between left and ML, Congress and its alliance with radical fundamentalist groups like Khaksar and Majlis e ahrar whose anti-Shia and anti-Ahmadi incitement is quite well known have conveniently escaped Dhulipala's attention. So better, let us not hurry to come to any conclusion.

Most probably you've not read my other posts on this thread. I was not pointing at who and what caused partition, au contarire I was debating that partition could've been avoided.

 

[scorpionx]

Most probably you've not read my other posts on this thread. I was not pointing at who and what caused partition, au contarire I was debating that partition could've been avoided.

Sorry, I did not go through your other posts, but I was just differing with the notions that some one just sowed the seed of communal hatred and partition happened, notions that were reinforced by Dhulipala's book which is a victim of convenient omissions.

I don't even know what the Game of Thrones is all about !

Its a fantasy genre based upon medieval northern European royal houses mainly. Its fantastic. I hope you will like it.

 

[Dash]

@levina is trying to avoid partition because she is mourning for the loss of the land of our forefathers.

Am I right or am I right??

 

[Levina]

Sorry, I did not go through your other posts, but I was just differing with the notions that some one just sowed the seed of communal hatred and partition happened, notions that were reinforced by Dhulipala's book which is a victim of convenient omissions.

Dont embarrass me with your sorry. I don't even have an iota of knowledge when compared to a stalwart like you. But I for one believe that partition could've been avoided, and its only a myth that partition was inevitable.
I realised that I feel nervous after typing that last sentence, because its you...YOU..I'm replying to. If am wrong then dont burst my bubble. Lol

 

[scorpionx]

Dont embarrass me with your sorry. I don't even have an iota of knowledge when compared to a stalwart like you. But I for one believe that partition could've been avoided, and its only a myth that partition was inevitable.
I realised that I feel nervous after typing that last sentence, because its you...YOU..I'm replying to. If am wrong then dont burst my bubble. Lol

Come on!! You are making me nervous now. There are plenty and plenty of authoritative articles available on internet. Just do not follow Indian authors only in this subject. We might not get the full picture of partition and the history of Independence, especially when you do not follow the Hindu Mahasabha faction within Congress during the 20's and the much omitted portion by most Indian historians about Congress and its alliance with fundamentalist Islamic organizations.

 

[Bang Galore]

Thats an assumption!
What if there was no muslim league or there was no 2 nation theory?
Remember it was it Iqbal who wrote the patriotic song "saare jahan se accha Hindoostan hamar" ?

You're talking of the present, while I was talking of the past. In the past there were no such issues in this region. So had there been no partition then ppl would 've carried on with their lives sans any communal violence.
And lets not pull a blanket statement on everyone in Pakistan or a muslim. Misinterpretation of religious scriptures is prevalent in every part of the world. And the reason why Islam sounds stricter than other religions is because its inception happened at a place which was known for barbarism.

Yes, I know about it too.
From Iqbal's case it is clearly evident that hatred towards hindus was not inherent in ppl of Pakistan unless somebody decided to take advantage of the hindu-muslim divide.


Thanks for the links!
Those 're good articles, both based on the book of Venkat Dhulipala. It reinforces my belief that pre-partition somebody had decided to sow the seed of hatred among hindus and muslims for their own selfish reasons.

This is not a creation of the 20th century, the differences between Muslims & Hindus existed throughout history and the idea of keeping Muslims away from Hindus was an idea that found widespread acceptance in the Ulema. Nowhere was this better explained than in the arguments developed by the top Sunni theologian Shah Waliullah who lived in the 18th century and is regarded by most Muslims of the sub continent as one of the top most Islamic scholar and whose teachings are widely followed.. He urged Muslims to separate themselves from Hindus even going on to urge them to live so far that they not even see the light of Hindu homes.

Muslim League demands were an outcome of such thought, not the reason for partition by itself.

 

[scorpionx]

This is not a creation of the 20th century, the differences between Muslims & Hindus existed throughout history and the idea of keeping Muslims away from Hindus was an idea that found widespread acceptance in the Ulema. Nowhere was this better explained than in the arguments developed by the top Sunni theologian Shah Waliullah who lived in the 18th century and is regarded by most Muslims of the sub continent as one of the top most Islamic scholar and whose teachings are widely followed.. He urged Muslims to separate themselves from Hindus seven going on to urge them to live so far that they not even see the light of Hindu homes.

Muslim League demands were an outcome of such though, not the reason by itself.

I often wondered was it not perennial to Indian societies? The 11th century Arabian accounts repeatedly tell how least receptive were Indians to any foreign ideas, theological and scientific beliefs, for whom there was just one land, one belief (belief that encompasses hundred sister philosophies) and one science those were of theirs. Those who adopted the foreign faith, did not immediately became an alien even if he was of this land by birth? The penetration of radical fundamentalism was a comparatively recent phenomenon compared to the much older repelling national prejudice, isn't?