My Memories of M A Jinnah

E-mail Print
R C Mody

R C Mody is a postgraduate in Economics and a Certificated Associate of the Indian Institute of Bankers. He studied at Raj Rishi College (Alwar), Agra College (Agra), and Forman Christian College (Lahore). For over 35 years, he worked for the Reserve Bank of India, where he headed several all-India departments, and was also Principal of the Staff College. Now (in 2010) 84 years old, he is busy in social work, reading, writing, and travelling. He lives in New Delhi with his wife. His email address is This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it .

During pre-independence days, there was a craze among youngsters to boast about how many leaders of the independence movement they had seen. Everyone wanted to excel the other in this regard. Not only the number but also the stature of the leader mattered. I had little to report. I had grown up and spent my early boyhood in Alwar, a Princely state. Leaders of national stature rarely visited Alwar, as the freedom movement was confined largely to British India. I had not seen practically any well-known leader in person till I was in my mid-teens.

When I went to college in Agra in July 1942, I hoped to meet national leaders because Agra was a leading city of British India. Alas! The Quit India movement commenced within a month. And the British government responded by locking up all the prominent leaders whom I looked forward to see. For months, we were not even aware where they were confined.

One morning in April 1943, the newspapers reported that Mohammed Ali Jinnah was on a visit to Agra that day. Normally, I would not have been excited. I had read about Jinnah having been called an "Ambassador of Hindu-Muslim Unity". But, that was much earlier, and appeared unbelievable in the face of what he had since become. Since 1937 (when I started reading newspapers), I had read only his fire-spitting statements, preaching hatred, and bitterly attacking the leaders whom I revered. In late 1939, he had asked Muslims to celebrate the resignations of Congress Ministries which held office in 8 (out of 11) provinces as a "Day of Deliverance and Thanksgiving". A few months later, in March 1940, he demanded the partition of India and the creation of a separate country for Muslims.

Regardless, however, of his views and pronouncements, I was still interested in seeing a national figure in person. I asked my friends in the hostel in which I lived, but no one appeared interested. I would have to go by myself.

After making enquiries, I found out that Jinnah had come to Agra as a lawyer to plead a case in the court of a local Magistrate. Jinnah's client was an Army contractor (incidentally a Hindu) who was accused of trying to bribe a British Colonel in the Indian Army. The court was in the Cantonment, a few miles away. I skipped my classes, and went on my bicycle, all the way.

There were no restrictions on entry into the court - security checks were unknown then. The courtroom was not crowded, and I found myself face to face with the man whom I had seen only in pictures till then. He was dressed immaculately, in a western style silk suit, sporting a monocle. I recognized the Magistrate too. I had seen him resisting (not unkindly) a demonstration of which I was a part eight months ago, in August 1942, to protest against the arrest of our leaders. He and the accused (on bail) were also very well dressed, and the three of them made the otherwise drab courtroom look bright. In the courtroom, there was gossip in hushed voices that the accused had engaged Jinnah, an expensive lawyer from far away Bombay (now Mumbai), because the Magistrate was a Muslim.

I watched Jinnah till lunch time, arguing his client's case meticulously. He spoke in a low voice to the Magistrate seated at an elevated level across the usual wooden barricade of a courtroom. There was no oratorical flow in Jinnah's speech, nor any display of the rhetoric for which he was famous.

Jinnah in sherwani and Jinnah cap

But it was a different Jinnah in the evening, when he came to address a public meeting in Baker Park (now Subhas Park) arranged by the local Muslim League. I came to this meeting with a number of fellow hostellers. This time Jinnah wore a sherwani and a fur cap. There was a fairly large crowd, mostly Muslims, carrying banners welcoming Jinnah. He started his speech in Urdu but switched quickly to English, seeking forgiveness for his ‘bad Urdu', saying that he unfortunately had not acquired sufficient proficiency in the language that was likely to be the lingua franca of their dream country, Pakistan.

I found his speech in English impressive in content, pronunciation and delivery. In his Urdu speech, I remember, Jinnah had referred to Jawaharlal Nehru, as a "Mashhoor (well known) Hindu leader". During question time after his speech, when some one asked Jinnah why he called Nehru a ‘Hindu' leader even though he was modern and irreligious, Jinnah quipped, "An arch Brahmin, with a veneer of Westernism". The meeting ended amidst tumultuous shouts of "Pakistan Zindabad". I remember wondering how the Muslims of Agra would benefit from the creation of Pakistan, which would be several hundred miles away from Agra. (Many years after the creation of Pakistan, it was realised that it was more the outcome of deliberations in drawing rooms of UP and Bombay than of any agitations on the streets of Karachi or Peshawar, which became part of Pakistan, while UP and Bombay did not become part of Pakistan.)

Thus ended my two encounters on a single day with a leader of national stature. I recall writing an elaborate report on them in a letter to my father, from whom I had heard a lot about Jinnah.

One and a half year later, by September 1944, when I had moved from Agra to Lahore for my studies, Jinnah and his demand for Pakistan had started attracting national attention more than ever before. It started particularly with the Gandhi-Jinnah talks at Bombay towards the end of this month. For a week or more, the country was engrossed totally in the newspaper reports on these talks. The extent to which it had impacted Indians then can be judged from the following episode, which I still remember 67 years later.

In Lahore, I was staying with some relatives. Early one morning, when I was sleeping still on the sprawling lawn of my host's home, I was woken up by the shouts in English of the westernised daughter-in law of the house, rushing with a newspaper in hand, "Papa, Gandhi-Jinnah talks have failed." The family was stunned and spent the entire morning discussing the news. (The justification for the apprehensions that gripped the family that morning, I understood, when in less than 3 years, Lahore became part of Pakistan and they had to leave the beautiful home in which they hosted me.)

While going through the letters exchanged between the two leaders, released after the failure of the talks, I read that Gandhi had addressed Jinnah as Quaid-e-Azam (great leader). I do not recollect any one using this appellation for Jinnah earlier. Perhaps it became more common after the creation of Pakistan.

Jinnah and Gandhi, Bombay 1944

A few months later in June 1945, when we dispersed for the summer vacation, I was in Shimla where the first Shimla conference was convened that month by the Viceroy, Lord Wavell. The principal participants were the Indian National Congress, led by Maulana Azad, and the Muslim League, led by Jinnah. I ultimately the got long awaited opportunity to see in person Gandhi as also some of our other top national leaders, who had been released from prison a few days earlier, and had come to Shimla for the conference, filling up the void ( indicated at the commencement of this narrative) which I was carrying for many years.

This time, Jinnah was not on my mind. But, on the opening day of the conference when I was standing in front of the Cecil Hotel watching leaders coming out of the Viceregal Lodge during the lunch hour (Now, I wonder why the Viceroy could not have served them lunch. Was it Imperial arrogance?), a hand driven rickshaw stopped just in front of me, and Jinnah alighted from it. I could not help watching him from as close quarters as I did in the courtroom in Agra.

M. A. Jinnah with Lord Wavell

He was attired dandyishly, wearing a butler (double toned) pair of shoes and a sola (sun) hat. With a wry smile, he agreed to pose for a photograph to a youngster holding a camera. But when another boy extended his autograph book towards him, Jinnah declined disdainfully and walked into the hotel.

Click here to see Lord Wavell welcomes Indian Political Leaders in Simla (1945)

This was the last time I saw Jinnah in person. I learnt from newspapers the next day that during the opening session of the Conference in the Viceregal Lodge, Jinnah declined to shake hands of Congress President Maulana Azad, a Muslim, when they came face to face.

I never saw Jinnah in person again after that day in June 1945. But, I kept following his activities and statements closely through newspaper reports till 7th August 1947 (date confirmed by my 1947 diary), when he, as Governor General (designate) of Pakistan, boarded an aircraft at the Delhi airport for Karachi. As he was leaving, I remember him tersely wishing India "Good luck".

There is unfortunately no reason to believe that he really meant India "Good luck". During the few months intervening between the acceptance of his demand for Pakistan and his departure for Karachi, I do not remember a single occasion when he said any thing that smacked of a feeling of ‘forgive and forget'. On the other hand, his speeches continued to be, as before, bitter, taunting and rhetorical.

Once, on 13th June 1947, Nehru and he came face to face at a meeting, chaired by Lord Mountbatten, on the future of Princely states. Nehru accused the outgoing British officers of trying to ‘Balkanise' India by encouraging the Princes to declare themselves independent. This was an issue on which the interests of India and Pakistan were identical. However, far from supporting Nehru, Jinnah stood up indignantly, pushed back his chair and expressed his desire to quit the meeting rather than listen to ‘bombastic' speeches making unjustified accusations against British officers. He made it clear that he stood by right of the Princes to remain independent.

In my opinion, such a stand was motivated not by his belief in the right of Princes to be independent, but by a desire to further divide India by inciting Princes in general, and the Nizam of Hyderabad and the Nawab of Bhopal in particular, against acceding to India. Later, after Pakistan came into being, Jinnah not only merged Princely states (Kalat almost by force) into Pakistan territory but his troops invaded neighbouring Kashmir, in October 1947 when its ruler was still considering the future of his state.

Whenever Jinnah said that there was nothing common between Hindus and Muslims, I used to remember the way in which we used to jointly celebrate Krishna Janmashtami and Prophet Mohammed's birthday in school. But all these ended, even before the Partition, as the Muslim youth started falling prey to his propaganda.

Another aspect of his personality, which we observed till the end, was his arrogance towards not only his political opponents but also his own followers. Once he was asked, while still in India, as to who besides him had contributed to the attainment of his goal of Pakistan. He replied, "My type-writer or may be my stenographer."

In retrospect, I feel that Jinnah could have used the period between the announcement of the Partition Plan (June 3, 1947) and his departure from India (August 7, 1947) to mend fences with Indian leaders and create goodwill. Perhaps this could have laid the foundation of friendship between the two emerging nations. But alas, that was not to be.

Hope was once again revived when we read about his often-quoted speech (see excerpts here) to the Pakistan Constituent Assembly on 11th August 1947. He talked of no discrimination on the basis of religion in Pakistan. Some thought that the ‘Ambassador of Hindu-Muslim unity' in him had re-emerged after 30 years.

I kept waiting to see what Jinnah would do to implement this promise. But I heard only of millions of non-Muslims being butchered and fleeing their homes and hearths in Pakistan, after he delivered this speech. He did nothing to stop them from leaving. He never came anywhere near addressing the large kafilas (convoys) marching towards India, and ask the marchers not to go, assuring them safety and security. He did virtually nothing to implement his tall promise.

On the evening of 30th January 1948, I had rushed to Birla House in New Delhi, on hearing of Gandhiji's assassination there. I could not go beyond the gate on which Nehru was standing. After listening to his tearful address, in which he announced the plan for the funeral next day, during the long tonga drive to my residence, many memories and ideas passed through my young mind. One of them was the idea that some good might come out of the great tragedy that India had suffered. Gandhiji had sacrificed his life for protecting the Muslim minority in post-partition India. He had also insisted on India paying Rs 55 crore due to Pakistan, which India had withheld as Pakistan was waging war against it in Kashmir. I thought that Gandhiji's passing away in these circumstances may bring a change of heart in Jinnah, and he may land up in Delhi the next day to mourn him - which could have ended the prevailing bitterness between the two new nations. But, it turned out to be only an empty dream of an immature mind. Jinnah was made of sterner stuff. All he did was to send a tersely worded condolence message, calling Gandhi "a great Hindu leader".

When we got the news of Jinnah's death in September 1948, some of us were sorry. The lingering hope that he might still re-appear one day in his earlier avtar as an Ambassador of Hindu-Muslim Unity or of Indo-Pak amity (in the new reality) got finally extinguished. Years later, there were rumours that during his last days, which he spent in Ziarat, (Baluchistan) he told one of his physicians how much he missed his days in Bombay, and that when he returned to Karachi, he was going to call "Jawaharlal" and tell him "Let us start all of it afresh". The rumours have never been confirmed. In any case, Jinnah returned to Karachi only a few hours before his death, probably in a semi-conscious state.

Any narration of memories of Jinnah in India would not be complete without referring to the two houses he left behind, one in Bombay and another in Delhi. Both homes are epitomes of his luxurious life style. I learnt from newspapers soon after he left India that he had sold his Delhi home to a controversial Indian industrialist. Later, the Government of India acquired this house under the Evacuee Properties Act. I did not care to know what happened to it after that until a few years ago when a magazine published pictures of one of the most elegant houses in New Delhi's Lutyen's Bungalow Zone, currently the home of the Ambassador of an EEC country. Since then, whenever I pass by it, I try to catch a glimpse of it.

The flagship was the Jinnah House in Malabar Hills in Bombay. Like Anand Bhawan in Allahabad (residence of the Nehru family), Jinnah House of Bombay was one of the places where history was made. I had often seen it in pictures and films. Gandhiji had gone there to meet Jinnah in September 1944 for the Gandhi-Jinnah talks discussed above (see here). Once Nehru was seen ascending its steps in 1946 when he went there to meet Jinnah and invite the Muslim League to join him in forming the Interim Indian Government. Nehru was received only by Jinnah's secretary; Jinnah himself came out after some time to turn down Nehru's request, though the League did join the Interim Government later, as a hostile force to make it unworkable. Years later, Sri Prakasa, India's first envoy to Pakistan, wrote in his reminiscences that Jinnah, now Governor General of Pakistan, once turned sentimental about this house. He told Sri Prakasa, "It is my heart, please, ask Jawaharlal, to keep it properly and not break my heart."

Jinnah was dead by the time I first went to live in Bombay and could manage to have a look at this house. It was a magnificent edifice. Today, its ownership is controversial, and it is decaying fast. How I wish that this house, which in any case is a part of our history, is preserved for posterity, the way we have preserved monuments left behind by the British.

Epilogue

What is Jinnah's legacy? This remains a controversial issue, part of an ongoing debate.

I think that from 1937 onwards his overarching objective was to "save" undivided India's 9 crore Muslims from "Hindu Raj" and allow them to lead a life of dignity, in event of the British leaving India. To achieve this, he propounded the two-nation theory, and demanded a Muslim Pakistan to be carved out of India. He got it. But, did he succeed in achieving his overarching objective?

The 9 crore Muslims of 1947 have by now increased in number to just over 48 crore. Ironically, over 16 crore of them, over 33 %, continue to live in India under what Jinnah called "Hindu Raj", from which he wanted them to be emancipated, making India still the home of the second largest number of Muslims in the world, after Indonesia. This, more than anything else, demonstrates the fallacy of Jinnah's view that Muslims needed a separate country to escape Hindu persecution.

A little less than 16 crore Muslims live in Bangladesh. Their fathers and grandfathers were swayed by the two-nation theory and they helped Jinnah to create Pakistan. But, they were soon disillusioned and fought a bloody war to get out of it, and that too with India's help.

About 16 crores Muslims live in what is Pakistan today. Many of them are descendants of those who migrated from India in the hope of a better life. But they are still treated as outsiders: they are called Muhajirs (Urdu-speaking immigrants from India) and often discriminated against. I have seen their kith and kin in India, seeking visitors' visas, in order to pay them a visit, being harassed and humiliated at the Pakistan High Commission in Delhi. Ironically, the High Commission treated me with due courtesy when I went there to apply for my visa to visit Pakistan in the 1990s.)

Jinnah had visualized Pakistan as a modern, forward-looking democratic state. Today, it looks a far cry from the Pakistan Jinnah had dreamt of. Some young Pakistani writers go so far as to say that the country is still in search of an identity.

Finally, India and Pakistan have still not been able to find a way to live peacefully with each other. No doubt, Jinnah cannot be held responsible for what happened after his death. But, I feel that the divisiveness that Jinnah preached still continues to divide India and Pakistan.

In this sense, Jinnah continues to live even to day, over 63 years after his death, through the spirit of divisiveness that he has left behind.

_______________________________________

© R C Mody 2011

Videos and photos of M A Jinnah from the Internet

Gandhi and Jinnah 1944

Quaid-e-Azam's speech to Pakistan's Constituent Assembly August 11, 1947

Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah August 15, 1947

Quaid-e-Azam's address at a Mammoth Public Meeting in Lahore October 1947

Videos and photos of Shimla conference

Lord Wavell welcomes Indian Political Leaders in Simla (1945)

Various Indian leaders

News report on Shimla conference

Another news report

Another news report

Comments
Add New Search
malati shah   |2011-04-19
Almost feel I was there...wish I had been...those heady days...!
A good book
to read, "Looking through Glass" by Mukul Keshavan...fictionalised with
all the historical facts.
G V Krishnan   |2011-03-13
A fascinating read. I don't suppose you can find in history books details such
as: 1) Jinnah took questions from audience after a public speech at Agra in
early 40s. I wish today's leaders do this.
2) The appellation 'Quaid-e-Azam' in
reference to Jinna was first used by none other than Gandhiji.
3) Mr Mody's
reference to that touch of 'imperial arrogance', at Shimla Conference (1945).
They met at the Viceregal Lodge, but the Congress leaders - Gandhi, Azad - and
jinnah took a rickshaw to Cecil Hotel for lunch break. Lord Wavell could have,
couldn't he, had them over for lunch at the Viceregal Lodge.
4) Aug.7, 1947 :
Jinnah, Governor-general (designate) of Pakistan, wished India "Good luck',
tersely, before he boarded his aircraft at Delhi for Karachi.
5) Asked who else
did his think contributed to realisation of Pakistan Jinnah said,"my
typewriter or maybe my steno".
sareer Khan   |2011-07-22
The writer expressed that those who went across the border, are now called
Muhajir and they are discriminated.I don't know the date he wrote this artical
but I feel I should clear the point.
In the mid 80s,the military regime of Ziaul
Haq, being a muhajir himself,formed Muhajir Quami Movement (MQM)to counteract
the biggest party lead by Zulfiqar Ali bhutto,the PPP.MQM as the name shows is a
group which has been engaged in ethnicity,discrimination with other people from
Punjab,sindh,balochistan and specially NWFP(NOW Khyber Pukhtunkhwa)and blood
shed.They are not discriminated but they themselve discriminate.They are not
called Muhajir but they themselves called themselves as Muhajir.The writer is
requested to complete his research and then re-write the article. Thank you.
R C Mody   |2011-08-05
Dear Sareek Khan Sahib,
I was immensely gratified to find that you could spare
time to go through my "Memories" of Quade-Azam Jinnah and also to point
out some of its shortcomings which it undoubtedly it may be having in plenty.It
is well nigh impossible for any one dealing with a multi-faceted personality
that Jinnah Sahib was, based entirely on six decades old memory , not to
commit mistakes. And for that reason, comments like your have to be treated with
respect.
The point that you have raised, however, is apparently due to some
misunderstanding. It is certainly not true that General Zia had anything to do
with Muhajir Quami Movement (MQM) In fact he was not a Muhajir either. He was a
Punjabi belonging to Jullundar ; the migrants from East Punjab to West Punjab
(Nawaz Sharif is also in this category) were anything but Mujahirs. The term
applies only to Urdu speaking migrants, from UP and from other parts of India
(excluding E Punjab). And the founder of MQM is Altaf Hussain whose grandfather
was Grand Mufti of Agra and father Station Master of the Agra Fort Rly Station
(which overlooks the historic Moghul citadel).
The name of the party has since
been changed to Mutihaddi Quami Movement (MQM still) It may be, as you say,that
the name Mujahir was self conferred. But it is a fact that the base of the
movement was that the Urdu speaking migrants were not fully accepted in
Pakistan ,although they had played a much greater role in its creation than
those who hailed from the regions which constitute Pakistan today. The fact
that MQM is the third largest party in Pakitsan today would obvously testify
that its stand was not without basis. The following is an extract from the
internet:
MQM, is the 3rd largest political party[4] and the first largest
militant[5] political party of Pakistan.[6] It is generally known as a party
...
R C Mody   |2011-08-05
continued from above ....

The term applies only to Urdu speaking migrants,
from UP and from other parts of India (excluding E Punjab). And the founder of
MQM is Altaf Hussain whose grandfather was Grand Mufti of Agra and father
Station Master of the Agra Fort Rly Station (which overlooks the historic
Moghul citadel).
The name of the party has since been changed to Mutihaddi Quami
Movement (MQM still) It may be, as you say,that the name Mujahir was self
conferred. But it is a fact that the base of the movement was that the Urdu
speaking migrants were not fully accepted in Pakistan ,although they had played
a much greater role in its creation than those who hailed from the regions
which constitute Pakistan today. The fact that MQM is the third largest party in
Pakitsan today would obvously testify that its stand was not without basis. The
following is an extract from the internet:
MQM, is the 3rd largest political
party[4] and the first largest militant[5] political party of Pakistan.[6] It is
generally known as a party which holds immense mobilizing potential in province
of Sindh.[7] The student organization, All Pakistan Muhajir Student Organization
(APMSO), was founded in 1978 by Altaf Hussain which subsequently gave birth to
the Muhajir Quami Movement in 1984.[8] The organization maintains liberal,
progressive and secular stances on many political and social issues.[9]

Some of
the facts stated above led me to make observations to which you refer. If
there is some other angle locally , I would heed to it with due reverence.

With
warm regards,

R C Mody
R C Mody   |2011-08-05
continued from above ...

The following is an extract from the internet:
MQM,
is the 3rd largest political party[4] and the first largest militant[5]
political party of Pakistan.[6] It is generally known as a party which holds
immense mobilizing potential in province of Sindh.[7] The student organization,
All Pakistan Muhajir Student Organization (APMSO), was founded in 1978 by Altaf
Hussain which subsequently gave birth to the Muhajir Quami Movement in 1984.[8]
The organization maintains liberal, progressive and secular stances on many
political and social issues.[9]

Some of the facts stated above led me to make
observations to which you refer. If there is some other angle locally , I would
heed to it with due reverence.

With warm regards,

R C Mody
Sareer Khan   |2011-08-05
Thank you sir. I hope you would keep on your good job.Really fantastic.
best
regards
Sareer Khan
Khyber Pukhtunkhwa (NWFP)
Pakistan
R C Mody   |2011-08-05
Dear Sareer Sahib,
Thanks for your liberal response which indicates both your
good heartedness as well as broad mindedness.If you feel like, pl click Altaf
Hussain in my last E Mail. It will open up the web on him and give more
information about MQM., for whatever it is, either way.
Regards,

R C Mody
Muhammad Hassan   |2013-05-04
Hello Sir R. C. Moody. I am from Pakistan, I enjoyed your article and all the
information and pictures included in it. Do you think that Pakistan and India
can become good friends in future? And do you think that Pakistan, India and
Bangladesh have a common destiny?

Regards.
Hassan Mirza   |2013-05-19
For majority of the 800 years rule of the Muslim Dynasties in India, Muslims
were the dominant force (ofcourse according to today's standards rule of a
minority over a majority is not justifiable, but at that time that was the rule,
if you have power then you can rule over people even if you are a minority),
Sikh and Marhate Kingdoms later were mostly antagonistic towards Muslim rulers.
So my point is that all of this history of competition, rivlary, sense among
Hindus that Muslims have ruled them with force, this thinking aming Muslims that
'we have ruled them for 1000 years' and the cast system in Hindus all played
important role in creating schism among both communities.

You might think that
why I havea added cast system in this list, whenever my grand parent (who
migrated from Amritsar) talked about Hindus they always used to tell me about
this untouchability issue that many Hindus considered them untouchables.

(see
this brilliant documentary about partition of India, see how a Hindu gentleman
tells how Hindus treated Muslims in general


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jGiTaQ60Je0
)
Hassan Mirza   |2013-05-19
About your friends who studied with you in Lahore, I think that if you feel
angry towards them then kindly forgive them, this was not right to say that
Indian connection from Pakistan, this is not possible, We are people of the same
region, Muslims of India and Pakistan have a common culture, Urdu is our lingua
franca, Hindus of India and Pakistanis also have many things in common like
Hindi/Urdu language, many of our customs and traditions. So Pak-India connection
can never be broken, it will be a vert unnatural thing to do, we have roots in
India, we were a part of India, we have a common history, we were Indians,
Jinnah was an Indian, Muhammad Iqbal was an Indian, Maulana Muhammad Ali, Sir
Syed was an Indian, all of our heros were Indians. So your friends were not
right in saying this, but like I said that hatred between Hindus and Muslims was
at its peak at that time, maybe it was hatred which caused your friends to say
this, things are different now I guess. I hope they are.

I currently study in
Germany, whenever I see a north Indian (South Indians are like Siri Lankans for
me, they are good people but they are just very different) I feel like they are
my long lost countrymen, I feel like they could have been my childhood friends,
I don't feel that they are from a different country. But then I never approach
them or befriend them because of my hesitation, I just remain quite and don't
talk to them much. I read in Dawn newspaper and article that whenever a
Pakistani sees and Indian, the first reaction that ne develops is of love,
warmth and affection, but then after some time old wounds or old grievances and
some kind of fear and enimity come back in a Pakistanis heart, my condition is
almost the same. But I think we will become friends again, and will become more
than friends, maybe like brothers who seperated from who each other due to
d...
Hassan Mirza   |2013-05-19
But I think we will become friends again, and will become more than friends,
maybe like brothers who seperated from who each other due to differences a long
time ago.

Maybe you already have read this book, name is 'Understanding the
Muslim Mind' by Rajmohan Gandhi, I have not read it but read some reviews, I
think that this book explains properly what was in the minds of the Muslim
leadership in India.

Salam.
Hassan Mirza   |2013-05-19
Oh, By the way I am from Lahore and have lived most of my life near FC college
(your university), my school was located very near to the place (called fawara
chowk in the area of Shadman) where Bhagat Singh was killed by the British, I
never knew this untill recently. Do you miss the city of Lahore, I wish you
could come to Lahore,I certainly would have hosted you in my home.
Hassan Mirza   |2013-05-19
I have made many mistakes in written Englsih in my comments, but I had to type a
lot so that is why i made msitakes.

You have written in your article that
Jinnah said "My type-writer or may be my stenographer." According to Dr.
Mubarik Ali (A famous historian in Pakistan nad he is a very neutral and
unbiased historian) Jinnah never said this. Many things associated with Jinnah
are just a part of myth surrouding his personality.
Ramesh Mody   |2013-06-04
Mr. Mirza wrote:

“I think that Gandhi, Nehru and Patel should be given some
blame as well. All the Muslim and Hindu leaders of India were great men who
tried to serve their communities in their ways and according to their
understanding of the situation at that time”

I agree with most of what you
say in your long and valuable comments on my observations. There is not some but
plenty of blame that has to be shared by every leader. Gandhi had himself
given a powerful and an ornamental title, “Himalayan Blunders” to the
mistakes he committed.

But when you say that all leaders “tried to serve
their communities in their ways,” let me say in summary that it would not
apply to two of the three persons mentioned by you: they are Gandhi and Nehru,
both for different reasons. I say “in summary” because the editor of this
website has indicated that this website is for memories, and not for analysis
and commentary, and that he does not wish to encourage further, long analytical
postings here. I have sent my complete document to you by email.
Bishan Sahai   |2018-02-04
Muslims hooting for Jinnah is visiting their children today. Poitically
incorrect but nevessary to remember that it was the Muslims in those provinces
which were not to be part of Pakistan who were the greatest chsmpions of
Pakistan.And Jinnah abandoned them.
abdullah syed   |2018-05-30
To some extent your article is biased and far from the reality..you mentioned
that muslim in pakistan killed hindus'residing in pakistan, ruthlessly.you did
not mention what hindus and sikhs did to the innocent muhajirs,seeking refuge in
pakistan. I dont say that hindu nd other minorities were safe, during partition
,but atleast they were in much better condition as compared to moslims ,coming
from india. I think you will sincerely rectify your article
abdullah syed   |2018-05-30
What were the principles for the different states to be merged in india or
pakistan..your commentary on kashmir ,dear sir,is not justifiable.you ve
mentioned kalat but did not refer to hyderabad mysor jonagarh and other such
princely states..being a student of history one's analysis must be impartial and
accurate .
Write comment
UBBCode:
[b] [i] [u] [url] [quote] [code] [img]  
Name:
Email:
Please input the anti-spam code that you can read in the image.

3.26 Copyright (C) 2008 Compojoom.com / Copyright (C) 2007 Alain Georgette / Copyright (C) 2006 Frantisek Hliva. All rights reserved."