Genesis of the Hindu-Muslim problem

Not very long ago, a young British scholar was in India on an incredible mission: “to study the Hindu-Muslim problem in India.” At an interactive session held at the Henry Martin Institute of Islamic Studies in Hyderabad, my first question was: “Is it not a tragic irony that a British researcher is now exploring a problem that was created under the British rule?” She dismissed the question with a disarming smile.

It is a historical fact that the first Indian War of Independence (1857) reflected excellent Hindu-Muslim relations. The cementing force, of course, was British imperialism, the common enemy of both communities. Even the Muslim “ulema” along with their organisations had joined the freedom struggle with great enthusiasm. In fact, Islamic scholars like Hasrat Mohani led the struggle from the front and Urdu poets composed patriotic songs to inspire freedom-fighters. (Our hearts are filled with the desire to die for the country, Let us see how much strength there is in the hand of the killer).

Jawaharlal Nehru, in his land-mark Centenary speech (1957), described how Hindus and Muslims had fought shoulder to shoulder against the British who had entered the country under the pretence of commerce but usurped the throne in Delhi. He also said that, unlike the British who exploited Indian resources and left, other foreign “invaders including Aryans, Arabs, Turks, Afghans and Mughals had settled down in India permanently and made it their homeland.”

Maulana Abul Kalam Azad’s emotional outburst was unprecedented: “A Muslim will abandon the cities in which he dwells, will move into the forest, will make friends with serpents and scorpions, but will not make peace with the British government.” Himself a strong supporter of Hindu-Muslim unity, he declared: “I will surrender the demand for swaraj but I will not give up unity for, if there is delay in gaining swaraj, the loss will be that of India only, but if our unity is destroyed then it will be a loss for the entire human race.”

It is a pity that Maulana Azad is today a forgotten hero. Historian Mushirul Hasan rightly feels that ignoring leaders of the calibre of Maulana Abul Kalam Azad is “part of a general ongoing trend to marginalise Muslim leaders’ contribution in the freedom struggle.” According to historical records, the “divide and rule” policy of the British was formulated by Lt. Gen. Coke and diligently pursued by successive Secretaries of State. When Lord Bruce was the Viceroy of India (1862-63), the British Secretary of State Mr. Wood wrote to him from London: “We have maintained our power in India by playing off one party against the other, and we must continue to do so. Do all you can, therefore, to prevent all having a common feeling.”

Following the events of 1875, Governor-General Lord Canning wrote to Vernon Smith, President of the Board of Control, on November 21, 1857: “As we must rule 150 million of people by a handful … of Englishmen, let us do it in a manner best calculated to leave them divided (as in religion and national feeling they already are) and to inspire them with the greatest possible awe of our power and with the least possible suspicion of our motives.” (The Muslims of India by P. Hardy, page 72).

Their military might was flaunted unabashedly in Jalianwala Bagh. Fortunately for India, the mind-set and outlook of a vast majority of Hindus are represented by Gandhiji and those who stand by him. This is illustrated by what actually happened in 1857. According to William Dalrymple, it was the upper-class Hindu sepoys who wanted a Muslim emperor (Bahadur Shah Zafar) to rule them again. He adds: “The contradiction between what happened in 1992, a Hindu rising against a Mughal symbol (the Babri Masjid) and what happened in 1857 when upper-class Hindus wanted to put a Mughal back on the throne is certainly worth exploring.”

Contrary to the general assumption that the British “gifted” to India a sound administrative system, the following remarks of Mr. B. Pollard, Superintendent, Leicestershire Constabulary (U.K.) at a National Seminar in the S.V.P. National Police Academy, Hyderabad, are illuminating:

“The problems of Indian Police have risen because the British introduced a police system in India which was quite opposite to their own system in the U.K. This was a deliberate change because in India the objective was to maintain the British Raj while in the U.K. they wanted a democratic police answerable to Law and Law alone. The British Police are accountable to criminal and civil courts and are not subject to any political control whatsoever.” (S.V.P.N.P.A. Magazine, April 1978). There can be no better example of hypocrisy and double-facedness than this.

No wonder, when Mr. Satyamurthy, then Mayor of Madras, was asked: “Do you know, Mr. Satyamurthy, that the sun never sets on the British Empire?” Satyamurthy retorted, “Because God cannot trust you in the dark.”

© Copyright 2000 - 2009 The Hindu