V.S. Naipaul, Anwar Shaikh and Rafiq Zakaria
by V.P. Bhatia
The triumphal march of Savarkar's Hindutva as the sure antidote to poet Iqbal's Islamic anti-nationalism.
"DO INDIAN Muslims fit into the concept of Hindutva? According to its author V.D. Savarkar they don't because he considered them a separate nation much before Jinnah did," says the rather over-rated Islamic spin-doctor Rafiq Zakaria who is churning out article after article in a futile bid to remove the widespread impression that it is not a terrorist religion and that the post 9/11 campaign against it is all motivated. In particular, he seems heartened by collaborators like Khushwant Singh who is expert in Hindutva bashing, and would recommend any trash that is published to run down Hindutva. For, it is such people who have the free run of the now our totally discredited English daily press and have the licence to indulging in any sort of abusive propaganda even though it is no longer helping them to refurbish the ugly face of Indian or global Islam. Because the Indian people, especially the Hindus and Sikhs, have known for centuries what Islam really stands for-unprovoked sadistic invasions and mandatory massacres of Kafirs, mass conversions at point of sword and demolition of their most holy places to humiliate them deliberately as a godly mission.
No wonder, the Hindu psyche is deeply coloured by the Chengez-like Islamic atrocities and they still feel it in the bones. Islamic terror is not a recent but a centuries old phenomenon for them. It is indeed a miracle of miracles how the Hindu civilisation has survived from the never-ending chain of looting and burning since Mohd. bin Qasim and Mahmud Ghaznavi whose descendants are still as poor as ever despite their historic depredations.
Therefore, no amount of motivated whitewashing of the Islamic crimes and sanitising of its sins is going to make their victims believe the cock and bull Islamic-propaganda even though such revisionism has gone on since the Nehruvian era. For instance, would Khushwant Singh believe the stories about Guru Tegh Bahadur's martyrdom put in pre-Joshi NCERT books. No wonder, secularism has become a dirty word, and as a commentator in the Pioneer put it recently, Hindus even in secular Congress party are moving away from it "because of its pseudo-secular posturing and pandering to Muslim and Christian communalism," and that "what even Congress leaders say about minorities would put Mr Praveen Togadia to shame". In any case what they say about obnoxious Muslim behaviour in truncated India is "unprintable". And this runs deep down. Members of the CWC would, says the writer further, "do well to undertake an informed exercise to gauge the feelings of partymen at various levels on this sensitive issues before adopting resolutions that neither bring in votes nor strengthen the secular ideals. (Article by A. Surya Prakash-"Congress and the Hindu psyche", January 23, 2003) Zakaria would do well to ponder over this anti-Muslim epidemic.
Now coming to the canard that Savarkar was the original author of the two nation theory, spread mainly by crypto communalist Khushwant Singh and his ilk. One wonders why such mischievous hacks are afraid of naming Sir Syed Ahmed Khan who according to any number of standard historians was the original author of the theory and Savarkar started working on his thesis only after the horrendous Mopila atrocities of August 1921. To quote author Ram Gopal in his standard work Indian Muslims to put the record straight, Savarkar expounded his Hindutva theory emphatically as an anti-dote to Islamic barbarism. Thus at the Calcutta session of the Mahasabha in 1939, he said, "We Hindus, in spite of thousand and one differences within our fold, are bound by such religious, cultural historical, racial, linguistic and other affinities in common as to stand out as difinitely homogeneous people as soon as we are placed in contrast with any non-Hindu people-say the English or Japanese or even the Indian Muslims. That is the reason why today we, the Hindus from Kashmir to Madras and Sind to Assam will have to be a nation ourselves."
* * *
Further, "Savarkar's solution was not the division of the country into a Hindu India and a Muslim India, he would have a dominant position for the Hindus who constituted the majority, as every country has a basic core majority having major stake in its survival. Still, he proposed to secure the (minority) rights thus: When once Hindu Mahasabha accepts but maintains the principle of "one man and one vote" (political equality of all citizens) and the public services go by merit alone added to the fundamental rights and obligations to be shared by all citizens alike irrespective of any distinction of race or religion, any further mention of minority rights is on the principle not only unnecessary but self-contradictory. Because it again introduced a consciousness of majority and minority on communal basis." (Vide Ram Gopal in Indian Muslims, (Asia Publishing House, 1959)
Savarkar's was not a two-nation theory. He considered Hindus a nation and Muslims a community enjoying equal rights as citizens.Thus, according to Savarkar, while the Hindus were the Nation, the Muslims were a community. But all were citizens, enjoying equal citizenship rights. He was particularly against over representation for Muslims who were going on lengthening their charter of demands, ultimately demanding two votes for one man in the form of Parity with 70 per cent Hindus at the Centre even when their percentage was 24. Even in the Delhi proposals of 1927 or 14-points of Jinnah, they were demanding one-third representation at the Centre. This according to Savarkar was no democracy but minority blackmail for hegemony, with the intention of reviving the Muslim Raj over the whole of India. But he was strictly for equal treatment which was the most just solution of communal problem at the time.
However, the motivated Islamic-secular axis go on misrepresenting Hindutva, which according to Savarkar was a higher concept than Hinduism, defining the principles of Hindu nationalism as distinct from Hindu religious and social practices and beliefs to save India from the Gandhian abyss of abject surrender to aggressive Islam.
From that point of view, the present Indian constitution is discriminatory against Hindus as it gives more rights to minorities especially in the matter of having their exclusive religious institutions or madrassas. This is a thin end of the wedge which has introduced the same type of divisiveness in the Indian polity as the Minto-Morlay which ordained separate electorates.
Thus Article 30 is the most dangerous in this respect, as it opens the door to the Quranic madrasa education even at Government expense in the name of modernisation which can be used for brain-washing the Muslim children in Kafir-Momin concept and vitiate the very basis of the child education. In fact, modernisation goes Muslims the best of both the worlds. The West Bengal Government is spending Rs 115 crore per year on the madrassas. According to a Muslim commentator, every Muslim child is supposed to be well-versed in Quran by the age of seven and that is the root cause of communal mischief and even future catastrophe as it is by all accounts the most incendiary book in the world especially its 25 anti-Kafir ayats which even eminent Muslim leaders of some countries have wanted to be expunged from the Quran. It prepares every Muslim as an ever-ready soldier of Islam. That is why they send their children to modern schools late if at all, and thus lag behind and then blame their backwardness on the Hindus, while themselves following in education a sure blueprint for producing future Osama bin Ladens. If Rs 115 crore is spent on teaching the Quran in West Bengal then why not another Rs 115 on Vedic education? asks a writer in the Statesman. So, Kashmir-like situation is being readied all over India, thanks to the individious Article 30 which makes our Constitution blatantly communal. And yet shameless creatures like Rafiq Zakaria, A.A. Engineer wail endlessly against Hindutva and writers like V.S. Naipaul who have not mortgaged their wits to the motivated Islamic-secular axis which merrily tolerates the missionary forays of Jamaat Islami, Jamiat-ul-Ulema and Tablighi outfits to wipe out all traces of native Hindu culture from the Muslim converts and turn them into inveterate enemies of everything Hindu and even Indian and go about as rootless intruders in their own country.
One of this favourite trump cards of our secular Muslim writers from Rafiq Zakaria to Mushirul Hasan who lords over the Indian Express editorial page is to flaunt Sir Muhammad Iqbal's poems like The Nai Shivala and Saare Jahan Se Achha as irrefutable argument of his super-patriotism although even Mahatma Gandhi had said about Iqbal that he had "given up the path of nationalism". In the first natural gush of his undoubtedly great poetic genius, he had written melodious poems like Sare Jahan Se achcha, Himalaya, Hindustani Bachchon Ka Geet etc, but that was before 1905 when he went to Europe and came back almost totally transformed as an Islamic fundamentalist under the influence of British professors and Iranian poetry.
No wonder, the UK-based Pakistani genius Anwar Shaikh has analysed his total metamorphosis from patriotism to treachery in his recent Urdu book Fikr-e-Iqbal par, Ek Tanqidi Nazar (A critical view of Iqbal's thoughts) published in India by Nirali Dunya Publications 358-A, Bazar Delhi Gate, Daryaganj, New Delhi-110 002) in which he completely vindicates the views of Sir Vidia Naipaul that <span style='color:red'>Muslims converts have been compelled to disown their natural ancestry and blood relationship with India to become completely aliens in their own land and roundly blames the poet for leading the Indian Muslims astray by his prostituting his poetic talent to propound deceptive thoughts. Iqbal's influence was great but he misled the Indian Muslims into wrong direction by striking at the very root of Indian unity and Indian nationalism. He taught hatred of Hindus and of India after his first flush of spontaneous poetry so that whereas earlier he had said that every particle of his motherland was no less than a venerable deity for him, now he declared patriotism and nationalism to be the very anti-thesis, rather the coffin of Islam.</span> There can be no greater falsehood coined by any traitor than this, says Anwar Shaikh. This Iqbal did by projecting the fallacy of religion to be the basis of nationhood. So his earlier worshipful attitude for the country changed into a bid to split it into pieces.
Iqbal even undertook to Arabise Indian Islam to purify it of all ajmi (non-Arab) influences, through his poetry. To cap it all, his presidential address at the Allahabad session of the Muslim League was a recepi for disintegration of India which he sugar coated with his melodious poetry under the guise of Pan-Islamism "I am sure without Iqbal's poetic mesmerism and jugglery of words, the Muslim would never have launched a struggle for division of India," says Anwar Shaikh "He infused the Muslim mind with a type of madness with his magical poetry, leading them to their ruin", says Shaikh.
<span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>He diverted Muslim mind from love of India to love of all Muslim countries or toward Pan-Islamism. He asked them to forget the welfare and unity of the country of their birth and get immersed in the zest for Arabic Islam.</span> He wanted the Muslims to forget their local affiliations and get dyed in the Pan-Islamic pride. This had a regressive effect on the Indian Muslim mind. It made them more backward looking. They lost all sense of national pride.
Courtesy: Organiser, Cabbages & Kings, March 09, 2003
http://www.indiafirstfoundation.org/archiv...3/march0903.htm
by V.P. Bhatia
The triumphal march of Savarkar's Hindutva as the sure antidote to poet Iqbal's Islamic anti-nationalism.
"DO INDIAN Muslims fit into the concept of Hindutva? According to its author V.D. Savarkar they don't because he considered them a separate nation much before Jinnah did," says the rather over-rated Islamic spin-doctor Rafiq Zakaria who is churning out article after article in a futile bid to remove the widespread impression that it is not a terrorist religion and that the post 9/11 campaign against it is all motivated. In particular, he seems heartened by collaborators like Khushwant Singh who is expert in Hindutva bashing, and would recommend any trash that is published to run down Hindutva. For, it is such people who have the free run of the now our totally discredited English daily press and have the licence to indulging in any sort of abusive propaganda even though it is no longer helping them to refurbish the ugly face of Indian or global Islam. Because the Indian people, especially the Hindus and Sikhs, have known for centuries what Islam really stands for-unprovoked sadistic invasions and mandatory massacres of Kafirs, mass conversions at point of sword and demolition of their most holy places to humiliate them deliberately as a godly mission.
No wonder, the Hindu psyche is deeply coloured by the Chengez-like Islamic atrocities and they still feel it in the bones. Islamic terror is not a recent but a centuries old phenomenon for them. It is indeed a miracle of miracles how the Hindu civilisation has survived from the never-ending chain of looting and burning since Mohd. bin Qasim and Mahmud Ghaznavi whose descendants are still as poor as ever despite their historic depredations.
Therefore, no amount of motivated whitewashing of the Islamic crimes and sanitising of its sins is going to make their victims believe the cock and bull Islamic-propaganda even though such revisionism has gone on since the Nehruvian era. For instance, would Khushwant Singh believe the stories about Guru Tegh Bahadur's martyrdom put in pre-Joshi NCERT books. No wonder, secularism has become a dirty word, and as a commentator in the Pioneer put it recently, Hindus even in secular Congress party are moving away from it "because of its pseudo-secular posturing and pandering to Muslim and Christian communalism," and that "what even Congress leaders say about minorities would put Mr Praveen Togadia to shame". In any case what they say about obnoxious Muslim behaviour in truncated India is "unprintable". And this runs deep down. Members of the CWC would, says the writer further, "do well to undertake an informed exercise to gauge the feelings of partymen at various levels on this sensitive issues before adopting resolutions that neither bring in votes nor strengthen the secular ideals. (Article by A. Surya Prakash-"Congress and the Hindu psyche", January 23, 2003) Zakaria would do well to ponder over this anti-Muslim epidemic.
Now coming to the canard that Savarkar was the original author of the two nation theory, spread mainly by crypto communalist Khushwant Singh and his ilk. One wonders why such mischievous hacks are afraid of naming Sir Syed Ahmed Khan who according to any number of standard historians was the original author of the theory and Savarkar started working on his thesis only after the horrendous Mopila atrocities of August 1921. To quote author Ram Gopal in his standard work Indian Muslims to put the record straight, Savarkar expounded his Hindutva theory emphatically as an anti-dote to Islamic barbarism. Thus at the Calcutta session of the Mahasabha in 1939, he said, "We Hindus, in spite of thousand and one differences within our fold, are bound by such religious, cultural historical, racial, linguistic and other affinities in common as to stand out as difinitely homogeneous people as soon as we are placed in contrast with any non-Hindu people-say the English or Japanese or even the Indian Muslims. That is the reason why today we, the Hindus from Kashmir to Madras and Sind to Assam will have to be a nation ourselves."
* * *
Further, "Savarkar's solution was not the division of the country into a Hindu India and a Muslim India, he would have a dominant position for the Hindus who constituted the majority, as every country has a basic core majority having major stake in its survival. Still, he proposed to secure the (minority) rights thus: When once Hindu Mahasabha accepts but maintains the principle of "one man and one vote" (political equality of all citizens) and the public services go by merit alone added to the fundamental rights and obligations to be shared by all citizens alike irrespective of any distinction of race or religion, any further mention of minority rights is on the principle not only unnecessary but self-contradictory. Because it again introduced a consciousness of majority and minority on communal basis." (Vide Ram Gopal in Indian Muslims, (Asia Publishing House, 1959)
Savarkar's was not a two-nation theory. He considered Hindus a nation and Muslims a community enjoying equal rights as citizens.Thus, according to Savarkar, while the Hindus were the Nation, the Muslims were a community. But all were citizens, enjoying equal citizenship rights. He was particularly against over representation for Muslims who were going on lengthening their charter of demands, ultimately demanding two votes for one man in the form of Parity with 70 per cent Hindus at the Centre even when their percentage was 24. Even in the Delhi proposals of 1927 or 14-points of Jinnah, they were demanding one-third representation at the Centre. This according to Savarkar was no democracy but minority blackmail for hegemony, with the intention of reviving the Muslim Raj over the whole of India. But he was strictly for equal treatment which was the most just solution of communal problem at the time.
However, the motivated Islamic-secular axis go on misrepresenting Hindutva, which according to Savarkar was a higher concept than Hinduism, defining the principles of Hindu nationalism as distinct from Hindu religious and social practices and beliefs to save India from the Gandhian abyss of abject surrender to aggressive Islam.
From that point of view, the present Indian constitution is discriminatory against Hindus as it gives more rights to minorities especially in the matter of having their exclusive religious institutions or madrassas. This is a thin end of the wedge which has introduced the same type of divisiveness in the Indian polity as the Minto-Morlay which ordained separate electorates.
Thus Article 30 is the most dangerous in this respect, as it opens the door to the Quranic madrasa education even at Government expense in the name of modernisation which can be used for brain-washing the Muslim children in Kafir-Momin concept and vitiate the very basis of the child education. In fact, modernisation goes Muslims the best of both the worlds. The West Bengal Government is spending Rs 115 crore per year on the madrassas. According to a Muslim commentator, every Muslim child is supposed to be well-versed in Quran by the age of seven and that is the root cause of communal mischief and even future catastrophe as it is by all accounts the most incendiary book in the world especially its 25 anti-Kafir ayats which even eminent Muslim leaders of some countries have wanted to be expunged from the Quran. It prepares every Muslim as an ever-ready soldier of Islam. That is why they send their children to modern schools late if at all, and thus lag behind and then blame their backwardness on the Hindus, while themselves following in education a sure blueprint for producing future Osama bin Ladens. If Rs 115 crore is spent on teaching the Quran in West Bengal then why not another Rs 115 on Vedic education? asks a writer in the Statesman. So, Kashmir-like situation is being readied all over India, thanks to the individious Article 30 which makes our Constitution blatantly communal. And yet shameless creatures like Rafiq Zakaria, A.A. Engineer wail endlessly against Hindutva and writers like V.S. Naipaul who have not mortgaged their wits to the motivated Islamic-secular axis which merrily tolerates the missionary forays of Jamaat Islami, Jamiat-ul-Ulema and Tablighi outfits to wipe out all traces of native Hindu culture from the Muslim converts and turn them into inveterate enemies of everything Hindu and even Indian and go about as rootless intruders in their own country.
One of this favourite trump cards of our secular Muslim writers from Rafiq Zakaria to Mushirul Hasan who lords over the Indian Express editorial page is to flaunt Sir Muhammad Iqbal's poems like The Nai Shivala and Saare Jahan Se Achha as irrefutable argument of his super-patriotism although even Mahatma Gandhi had said about Iqbal that he had "given up the path of nationalism". In the first natural gush of his undoubtedly great poetic genius, he had written melodious poems like Sare Jahan Se achcha, Himalaya, Hindustani Bachchon Ka Geet etc, but that was before 1905 when he went to Europe and came back almost totally transformed as an Islamic fundamentalist under the influence of British professors and Iranian poetry.
No wonder, the UK-based Pakistani genius Anwar Shaikh has analysed his total metamorphosis from patriotism to treachery in his recent Urdu book Fikr-e-Iqbal par, Ek Tanqidi Nazar (A critical view of Iqbal's thoughts) published in India by Nirali Dunya Publications 358-A, Bazar Delhi Gate, Daryaganj, New Delhi-110 002) in which he completely vindicates the views of Sir Vidia Naipaul that <span style='color:red'>Muslims converts have been compelled to disown their natural ancestry and blood relationship with India to become completely aliens in their own land and roundly blames the poet for leading the Indian Muslims astray by his prostituting his poetic talent to propound deceptive thoughts. Iqbal's influence was great but he misled the Indian Muslims into wrong direction by striking at the very root of Indian unity and Indian nationalism. He taught hatred of Hindus and of India after his first flush of spontaneous poetry so that whereas earlier he had said that every particle of his motherland was no less than a venerable deity for him, now he declared patriotism and nationalism to be the very anti-thesis, rather the coffin of Islam.</span> There can be no greater falsehood coined by any traitor than this, says Anwar Shaikh. This Iqbal did by projecting the fallacy of religion to be the basis of nationhood. So his earlier worshipful attitude for the country changed into a bid to split it into pieces.
Iqbal even undertook to Arabise Indian Islam to purify it of all ajmi (non-Arab) influences, through his poetry. To cap it all, his presidential address at the Allahabad session of the Muslim League was a recepi for disintegration of India which he sugar coated with his melodious poetry under the guise of Pan-Islamism "I am sure without Iqbal's poetic mesmerism and jugglery of words, the Muslim would never have launched a struggle for division of India," says Anwar Shaikh "He infused the Muslim mind with a type of madness with his magical poetry, leading them to their ruin", says Shaikh.
<span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>He diverted Muslim mind from love of India to love of all Muslim countries or toward Pan-Islamism. He asked them to forget the welfare and unity of the country of their birth and get immersed in the zest for Arabic Islam.</span> He wanted the Muslims to forget their local affiliations and get dyed in the Pan-Islamic pride. This had a regressive effect on the Indian Muslim mind. It made them more backward looking. They lost all sense of national pride.
Courtesy: Organiser, Cabbages & Kings, March 09, 2003
http://www.indiafirstfoundation.org/archiv...3/march0903.htm