well i am sure i will not be using SORRY Word for the article on kashmir… here we are talking about partition not about GUJRAT MASSACRE … HOW ARE SURE THAT ONLY MUSLIMS LOST THEIR LIVES IN THE PARTITION ?
Millions left for their promised new homeland with smiles on their faces as trains left both India and Pakistan.
And what was the nature of pre-partition camaraderie in villages and towns? It is suggested that if one were to look at the overall organisation of pre-partition societies, there was cohesion generated by ‘tribe’ or biradari, rural commonalities, linkages and economic interests. The anthropological paradigm of ‘ethnic bonding’ between some Punjabi castes like the Jats on both sides of the border and the common ‘Punjabi ethos’ show a complete neutralisation of the Muslim-Hindu divide during partition, with faith and nationalistic fervour taking precedence. In the pre-partition milieu, religious identity in rural settings was overshadowed by bonding between similar tribe or caste or occupation or geography.
Another perspective highlighted is the notion of honour (izzat), which was of paramount importance for individuals of all participating communities. Many individuals saved people from other communities as a manifestation of honour, whether while doing their duty or in a personal capacity notwithstanding religion, caste and creed. The concept of ‘watan’ or paidaish or place of birth proved to be equally important for analysing the quandary of the generation surviving the trauma of partition. The positive, it is suggested, continues to reflect when establishments acknowledge the significance of watan or paidaish place when it comes to politicians. It has been aptly said: “Every bird loves to fly back to its nest and so do we, human beings. We are passionately attached to our roots, the pull of these roots beckons us to our ancestors”