Forum Menu - Click/Swipe to open
 

Seervai on Partition of India

You have contributed 0.0% of this topic

Thread Tools
Appreciate
Topic Appreciation
To appreciate this topic, click 'Appreciate Topic' on the right.
Rank Image
Maripat's avatar
Online
Gham-o-Huzn
1,979
Brother
2,756
Maripat's avatar
#1 [Permalink] Posted on 9th June 2019 08:21
H.M. Seervai, Partition of India, Legend and Reality 2nd Edition. (New Delhi: Universal Law Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd., 1994)
report post quote code quick quote reply
+1 -0
back to top
Rank Image
Maripat's avatar
Online
Gham-o-Huzn
1,979
Brother
2,756
Maripat's avatar
#2 [Permalink] Posted on 9th June 2019 08:55
1947 : (August 15) India partitioned and Pakistan created in two pieces on either side of India

1948 : MK Gandhi murdered by Hindu Mahasabha operative Nathuram Godse

1948 : Muhammed Ali Jinnah died

1958 : Maulana Abul Kalam Azad writes (or dictates to Professor Humayoon Kabir) India Wins Freedom ( 30 pages of the book with held by him for publication after thirty years in 1988)

1962 : Leonard Mosley writes the Last Days of the British Raj by interviewing the actual British players in the process of partition

1967 : British Prime Minister, Harold Wilson, decides that Partition archives that were to be declassified in 1999 would be declassified

1970 : Publication of the British records starts under title Transfer of Power that would span over 12 volumes, edited by Nicholas Mansergh

1973 : Pendered Moon writes Viceroy's Journal based on Lord Wavell's experience as Viceroy of India from 1942-1946

1980 : Publication of 12 volumes of Transfer of Power completes

1985 Pakistani historian Ayesha Jalal publishes her revisionist book on Jinnah The Sole Spokessman, Jinnah, The Muslim League and the Demand for Pakistan

1986 : A 35 page supplement to his Constitution Law of India entitled Partition of India : Legend and Reality is expanded into 150 pages monograph by H.M. Seervai (Using material from later volumess of Transfer of Power)

1989 : First Edition of Seervai's book on Partition

1994 : Second Edition of the same book by Seervai





report post quote code quick quote reply
+2 -0Like x 1
back to top
Rank Image
Maripat's avatar
Online
Gham-o-Huzn
1,979
Brother
2,756
Maripat's avatar
#3 [Permalink] Posted on 10th June 2019 08:08
This is an astounding book.

Whatever we were told about the causes of partition of India have to be revised to such a great extent that one will end with a lot of mental homework to rework out the history leading to partition.
report post quote code quick quote reply
+1 -0
back to top
Rank Image
Maripat's avatar
Online
Gham-o-Huzn
1,979
Brother
2,756
Maripat's avatar
#4 [Permalink] Posted on 10th June 2019 08:24
This book completely revises the actual roles and characters of Muhammed Ali Jinnah, MK Gandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru, Maulana Azad, Sardar Patel and Lord Mountbatten. It also changes the profile of events leading to partition.
report post quote code quick quote reply
+1 -0
back to top
Rank Image
Maripat's avatar
Online
Gham-o-Huzn
1,979
Brother
2,756
Maripat's avatar
#5 [Permalink] Posted on 10th June 2019 08:27
The book also completely exposes Rajmohan Gandhi's new incarnation.
report post quote code quick quote reply
+1 -0
back to top
Rank Image
Unspecified
739
Brother
495
#6 [Permalink] Posted on 13th June 2019 10:39
So,what is your deduction from the book ? A little spoon feeding wouldn’t hurt:)

I hope you don’t expect us to be able to read the book or the 12 volumes of transfer of power,do you ?
report post quote code quick quote reply
+0 -0Agree x 1
back to top
Rank Image
Maripat's avatar
Online
Gham-o-Huzn
1,979
Brother
2,756
Maripat's avatar
#7 [Permalink] Posted on 14th June 2019 16:26
ALIF wrote:
View original post
Not a bad idea - to read 13 books! Just kidding.

The usual impression about the partition is that there was a villain called Muhammed Ali Jinnah who was bitten by the partition bug and wanted India divided along religious lines.

Then there were saints like Gandhi and Nehru.

And then there was this upright big boss called Mountbatten, the Viceroy.

And then there were some wise Muslim guys like Maulana Azad and others.

All these myths get busted in a series of publications spanning over a few decades.

The final block buster is Seervai's book.

How the outward image of the main players get revised by these boooks and particularly the last one is the subject matter of this thread.

I hope this give a brief summary.

For those who are interested in the history of partition the conclusions are really astounding.

Muslims have not taken the best advantage of the facts that have tunbled out of these books.

report post quote code quick quote reply
+3 -0Winner x 1
back to top
Rank Image
Unspecified
739
Brother
495
#8 [Permalink] Posted on 14th June 2019 18:06
Maripat wrote:
View original post

JazakAllah khairan sir,but still not sufficient. Looks like we will have to read seervai,s book on our own,provided we could get hold of it,in a small town in the extreme northwest of what was once Indian subcontinent:)
report post quote code quick quote reply
+1 -0
back to top
Rank Image
Maripat's avatar
Online
Gham-o-Huzn
1,979
Brother
2,756
Maripat's avatar
#9 [Permalink] Posted on 15th June 2019 13:30
ALIF wrote:
View original post
Or you could wait for my posts. But on the count I do not promise any time frame. Unfortunately I have taken too many things on my head and hence different things get attention at not so a regular pace and time.

I can not write in detail immediately because all the personalities mentioned above get revised so much that old images have to be discarded.

report post quote code quick quote reply
+1 -0
back to top
Rank Image
Unspecified
739
Brother
495
#10 [Permalink] Posted on 15th June 2019 16:36
I would wait...

جزاک اللہ احسن الجزاء
report post quote code quick quote reply
+1 -0Like x 1
back to top
Rank Image
Maripat's avatar
Online
Gham-o-Huzn
1,979
Brother
2,756
Maripat's avatar
#11 [Permalink] Posted on 11th October 2019 15:30
ALIF wrote:
View original post
Sorry brother I have taken too much on myself and hence it takes time to give attention to various threads that I have active. Today I intend to add a few bits to this one.

report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
Rank Image
Maripat's avatar
Online
Gham-o-Huzn
1,979
Brother
2,756
Maripat's avatar
#12 [Permalink] Posted on 11th October 2019 16:11
The Least Out Come Expected of This Thread


(1) There was Partition of India in 1947.

(2) There was circumstantial evidence of what might have happened behind the doors when Lord Mountbatten was talking to the Congress and the League.

(3) Then there is the actual dynamics that happened.

(4) This became available to the people slowly in the sequence of events that I have enumerated in the following post:
Maripat wrote:
View original post

Quote:
1947 : (August 15) India partitioned and Pakistan created in two pieces on either side of India

1948 : MK Gandhi murdered by Hindu Mahasabha operative Nathuram Godse

1948 : Muhammed Ali Jinnah died

1958 : Maulana Abul Kalam Azad writes (or dictates to Professor Humayoon Kabir) India Wins Freedom ( 30 pages of the book with held by him for publication after thirty years in 1988)

1962 : Leonard Mosley writes the Last Days of the British Raj by interviewing the actual British players in the process of partition

1967 : British Prime Minister, Harold Wilson, decides that Partition archives that were to be declassified in 1999 would be declassified

1970 : Publication of the British records starts under title Transfer of Power that would span over 12 volumes, edited by Nicholas Mansergh

1973 : Pendered Moon writes Viceroy's Journal based on Lord Wavell's experience as Viceroy of India from 1942-1946

1980 : Publication of 12 volumes of Transfer of Power completes

1985 : Pakistani historian Ayesha Jalal publishes her revisionist book on Jinnah The Sole Spokessman, Jinnah, The Muslim League and the Demand for Pakistan

1986 : A 35 page supplement to his Constitution Law of India entitled Partition of India : Legend and Reality is expanded into 150 pages monograph by H.M. Seervai (Using material from later volumess of Transfer of Power)

1989 : First Edition of Seervai's book on Partition

1994 : Second Edition of the same book by Seervai

(5) Q: What is the least outcome of this analysis? A: The actual answer will be known only after I finish the analysis but Muslims in general and Muhammed Ali Jinnah in particular does not come out as the villains.

(6) Professor Ayesh Jalal has been saying the same thing for years and decades by now but the word it still to be accepted and appreciated by the world. I saw in a video where she is speaking in the US and trying to communicate that all Jinnah wanted was a parity with the majority community but I got the vibes that she was not succeeding in her objective.

(7) Q: Why? A: I think this question can be answered squarely : Because the folklore of Muslims dividing India on the communal basis is too deeply ingrained in the minds of the people that it is difficult to communicate the actual reality of the event to the people. Partition was such a catastrophic event that any revisionist reconstruction invokes incredulity and cognitive dissociation.

(8) We have a tough task ahead - to communicate to the world that Partition was not what it has been made out to be.

(9) There are three words which look nearly synonymous and are relevant for partition and the real issue behind partition is hidden in these: Equality, Parity, Equity.

(10) Equality or at least the corresponding idea was employed at that time to ensure equal rights for Muslims in independent India.

(11) Parity is the word that Ayesha Jalal has been using instead of equality because so many people, who try to have an opinion on the issue, come up with queries like how could there be equality between 25 crore Hindus and 9 crore Muslims?

(12) Equity has been the word that Muslims of India have been using in Indian context for last few decades.

(13) Decisive answer to this point is available in the findings of the people mentioned above in this regard.

(14) If Hina Rabbani Khar knew and appreciated these points then her terminology, attitude and assertions would change. Though she is among those who already defend Pakistan valiantly when the need arises. But in some cases she does not assert herself as much she should, the reason being lack of appreciation of the import of the findings of Professor Ayesha Jalal and others - basically the real sequence of events and their causes before the Partition.

(15) Even Imran Khan attitude would change. At the moment I find him unnecessarily defensive where he could go full blast offensive.

(16) For example every Pakistani can say to the Saffron bigots in India : We separated our land from yours and what is your problem?

(17) As far as Indian Muslims today are concerned they always had the argument that they were not part of the movement for creation of Pakistan and hence can assert for their legitimate rights as equal opportunity citizen of India.

(18) Plus they could also claim that those who fought for and created Pakistan had given ample opportunity to the Congress for a united India.

(19) Only Professor Ariful Islam, who has retired from the Statistics Department of the Aligarh Muslim University, has used this 'new' information in his analysis. Late engineer Ahmed Saleem Pirzada ( with Professor Ali Amir of the Community Medicine Department of Aligarh Muslim University) launched a political party nearly twenty years ago for political empowerment of Muslims of India based on an ideology that takes advantage of these findings. Sadly they could not organize the Muslims behind them to take the idea to its logical conclusion. Mr Pirzada died a heart broken man couple of years back.

(20) In the meanwhile the Saffron did bring their juggernaut to an ugly climax involving lynching of Muslims and a two months lock down in Kashmir.

(21) Clearly Professor Ariful Islam and the two political stalwarts failed to make optimum use of the information I am talking about.

(22) One implication is that perhaps the academic clarification of the issues was not at par, lucid, clear and transparent.

(23) That is the slot that I am trying to fill in.
report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
Rank Image
Maripat's avatar
Online
Gham-o-Huzn
1,979
Brother
2,756
Maripat's avatar
#13 [Permalink] Posted on 11th October 2019 16:34
Reappraisal of Reputations


The Economist's review of Seervai's book noted that after this there should be a reapparisal of reputations.

Whose reputations?

(1) Lord Mountbatten

(2) MK Gandhi

(3) MA Jinnah

(4) JL Nehru

(5) Sardar Patel

(6) Maulana Abul Kalam Azad

(7) Lord Wavell

and a few more.

Q: Has this reappraisal taken place?
A: Up to a very limited extent only and that too has not resulted in any substantial events on the ground level.
report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
Rank Image
Maripat's avatar
Online
Gham-o-Huzn
1,979
Brother
2,756
Maripat's avatar
#14 [Permalink] Posted on 11th October 2019 16:43
Some New Reputation


I would like to add a few points of this reputation revision - I am fixing my views with the public news in this regard.

(1) Lord Mountbatten

He must share a huge blame for the calamity of partition massacre because he rushed up the process to unacceptable extent and committed several blunders.

(2) MK Gandhi

Though he got killed by the RSS for his secularism but his secularism happened to be skin deep only.

(3) MA Jinnah

He was much more of a statesman and not a demon at all.

(4) JL Nehru

His role was not very positive in thwarting the partition but that was already known. But he unfairly did Wavell in.

(5) Sardar Patel

As communal as ever.

(6) Maulana Abul Kalam Azad

Gentleman beyond the reputation he enjoyed already.

(7) Lord Wavell

Much more of an efficient administrator than Nehru made him out to be before the British Monarch.
report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
Rank Image
Unspecified
739
Brother
495
#15 [Permalink] Posted on 11th October 2019 20:13
Thank you very much sir !

It all leads me to one conclusion, that in all probability, keeping the ‘true’ mindset of Hindu majority in mind (which is very obvious today), the same thing would have happened in any case one day.The Muslims would have decided that living with Hindu is not an option any more, and that Muslims need a separate country of their own. That would have lead to the same kind of civil war and bloodshed that we saw during partition, in-fact with more bloodshed and more loss of human life, because then Hindus would have been in power instead of the British....

It could only have been delayed for sometime. The end result would be the same. Gandhi and Nehru were still decent human beings, the likes of Modi would have made sure that no muslim survives to see and enjoy a separate state. So irrespective of wether it was ‘intentional’ or ‘unintentional’, it was ‘good’...

And sir, i have all respect for the trouble you take to defend the Muslim cause, but i and many like me have reached a conclusion : “The world only understand the language of ‘power’, they only want to know ‘who can harm them’ and ‘who can benefit them’. Let us not deceive ourselves by trying to put some ‘sense’ into their minds. The world knows and understands ‘everything’, they can tell ‘wrong from right’, they can differentiate ‘truth from lies’, they can not miss who is ‘Zalim and who is Mazloom’....

That they turn a blind eye to Zulm is only because it suits them....



report post quote code quick quote reply
+2 -0Like x 2Agree x 1
back to top