Lately, I have seen many posts by different guppies at WA forum discussing Muslim genocide, Hindu- Muslim riots, Gujarat riots, East-Pakistan killings, minority killings, racial segregation in subcontinent etc. In my opinion, most of these problems are result of manipulation of religion by religious authorities. In other words, most of the problems we are facing today in subcontinent’s politics as well as in our social culture are result of introduction of “Religion” into politics by religious pundits. I thought it would be interesting to understand the root causes of this serious problem by presenting some historical perspective.
Indo-Pakistan history is one of my favorite subjects. In my opinion, Mr. Gandhi is the first prominent politician in subcontinent’s political history that introduced religion into politics. With an exception of Aurangzaib Alamgir, most of the Muslim emperors were extremely secular. Even congress was pretty secular until the emergence of Gandhi jee. He introduced Hindu idiom and hard-core Hinduism to politics of Congress. He “Hinduised” Congress politics, which frightened Muslims away from it, as is manifested from Congress’s rule in Provinces during 1937 to 1939. He himself has written in ‘Young India’ on 12 May 1912 that in order to wrestle with the snake of politics. “I have been experimenting with myself and my friends in politics by introducing religion into politics.”
Renowned scholar Dr. Eqbal Ahmad says that Gandhi was an anti-imperial opportunist. He used Hindu expression because Hinduism was religion of majority. He wanted to mobilize masses against British rule. If Muslims had been in majority, he would have used Islamic Expression in politics. Do you guys agree with Eqbal Ahmed? Was Gandhi a rabid communalist or a mere “ anti-imperial opportunist”?
With the help of hindsight we see that Gandhiji’s tactics of spiritualizing Indian politics caused more harm than any benefit for India. If there had been no Gandhi, or else, Gandhiji had not played upon religious sentiments of the masses, India would still have become free, as after the Second World War Great Britain had lost all power to cling on to its imperial possessions. In fact, it was obvious at the end of First World War that Great Britain is losing the control over sub continent. But Gandhiji’s tactics did help create fissure between Hindus and Muslims, which culminated in the partition of India. It created so much hatred among these large communities, that we are still facing the trouble to overcome it. In addition, we had to witness as its essential corollary the mayhem and carnage of millions in the wake of independence of India and Pakistan!!!
Having said that, I would also like to clarify that I am not trying to blame Gandhi for every thing. I am a big fan of him and admire some of his political skills. However, given the political stature of Gandhi, all of his policy actions would always be scrutinized as closely/carefully as possible. After all, he effected not only his generation but also many generations to follow.
I understand that this forum may not be the best place for this particular thread but to me, this post is simply a continuation to many other relevant discussions that we are having in some other threads on this forum. After few days, I plan to move it to some other forum. Thanks a lot.