Tilak and Gokhale

YLH:

You wrote this a while ago, and its already published. Congratulations! Its great!

Later,

Aisha F Sarwari.

TO Rsaxena, Jay and their spoons.

``Gandhi had not only brought his ancient Hindu Philosophy saying `I am a Hindu first and hence a true Indian` (Secular and Nationalist Jinnah by Ajeet Javed Singh Page 187)...``

Spit in your hands then drown in it! All that attempt to have Gandhi sit on the padestal of white pure light goes off in a puff of grey smoke. Objectivity bhi kuch cheez hey!

___________________________________

YLH:

Before this I had no idea about these two men`s great role. Thanks for introducing the area for me.

Aisha

Yasser:

Thanks for en-lighten-ing the reader about ``Tilak and Gokhale`` - a good history lesson.

``However, utterly disappointed, he was finally converted to the cause of Progressive Muslim Nationalism in 1937 by the great poet Philosopher
Muhammad Iqbal. That was the beginning of Jinnah`s journey on the road to Pakistan.``

I had previously referred you as, ``Jinnah Obsessed.`` After writing that, I was reminded of my obsession that lasted for a very long time. I was also very passionate about ``someone`` till I was in school. I still am. But the intensity stabilized after I finished school. I guess probably because I started focusing on coming out of the books and being in the real world[intentionally]. It ain`t that easy! Books are great teachers and weave a beautiful world for the reader. It`s on the reader how he/she is able to see the world and relate to the teachings of those books than just living in those books. Real world is pretty damn demanding :)My obsession was/is with the verses and the message behind them. Reading your intro to T&G, I had to bring up this point as you`ve mentioned ``Iqbal`` at the end. How could I let it go!

On another note, I am trying to learn about a certain practice. Why would people go back to history every now and then and talk about the by-gone days and leaders.

Kyoun?

What`s your take on that?

a) Is it to cover up for the current void we have?

Or

b) To console ourselves that we had great men in our history and just sleep on that thought.

Or

c) To remember those leaders for the strategies they practised during their tenure.

Or

What?

Please enlighten.

Thanks.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

``...by the great poet Philosopher Muhammad Iqbal. ``

...like philosopher, like disciple- and like the present state of their vision:-

http://www.jang.com.pk/thenews/jun2001-weekly/nos-10-06-2001/lit.htm#2

The Award Complex

Kazy Javed

Iqbal and Tagore were the most eminent South Asian poets of the first half of the last century. Iqbal belonged to the Punjab and composed poetry in Urdu and Persian languages. Tagore was a Bengali and wrote in his native language. Iqbal`s fame mostly remained confined to north India. Tagore, however, had become an international celebrity in his lifetime. In 1913, at the age of 52, he was awarded Nobel Prize for Literature. Older than Iqbal by sixteen years, he outlived him for three years and died in 1941.

How did the two poets look at each other? What was their opinion of each other? Many critics have raised this question but failed to answer it without parti pris.

Now one of our notable research scholars M Ikram Chughtai, Director of the Urdu Science Board, has come up with a clear answer based on some new research. The current issue of the Lahore-based monthly Al-Ma`arif carries his revealing article on Iqbal and Tagore.

Chughtai has presented some interesting details. He tells us that despite being contemporaries and compatriots, the two poets never met each other. They did not even exchange letters. No written proof of a contact between them is traceable. However, it is said that once Tagore, while in Lahore, tried to meet Iqbal. He paid a visit to his Mayo Road residence but Iqbal was absent, gone to Bhopal for his medical treatment. Once back in Lahore, Iqbal perhaps could have written to Tagore and express his regrets. He did not. And there was a reason; Iqbal resented Tagore receiving the Nobel Prize. Chughtai says ``Tagore`s award had been hovering on Iqbal`s mind throughout his life and he, directly or indirectly, could not free himself from this `award complex`.

Chughtai has also made a detailed mention of the abortive efforts made by Iqbal and his well-wishers to get a Nobel for him. Soon another development was to take place which was to further sadden the Iqbal: King Raza Shah Pahlavi of Iran extended an invitation to Tagore to visit his country. He went there in 1932. As a royal guest, he was given tremendous welcome in many cities of Iran. While in Tehran, he received a similar invitation from the King of Iraq. In Baghdad, Tagore was received by King Faisal himself.

Chughtai assures us that Iqbal was greatly `shocked` by these invitations and warm welcomes extended to a poet who he considered to be his rival. In one of his recently discovered letters, he wrote to Ghulam Abbas Akram, the then foreign minister of Iran, that Tagore was a non-Muslim and that ``Tagore did an injustice to the Indian Muslims. He told the Muslims of Mesopotamia to persuade the Indian Muslims to cooperate with the Hindus for the freedom of India.``

Tagore`s attitude towards Iqbal was different. It can be felt in his two messages, one sent to Inter-collegiate Muslim Brotherhood of Lahore which celebrated Iqbal Day in January 1937 and the other of condolence on Iqbal`s demise in 1938. In these messages the Bengali Nobel Laureate acknowledged Allama`s greatness as a poet and universal value of his poetry.

Against this background, it is not surprising that the compilers and editors of the speeches and statements of Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah have expurgated the Quaid`s statement issued on Tagore`s death. The Quaid had paid rich tributes to the Bengali writer, saying ``I am certainly grieved to hear the sad news of the death of one of the greatest of India`s poets, philosophers and social workers. I had the privilege of knowing him from my younger days and the last time I had the honour of meeting him was in London in 1929. His very frank and illuminating discussions were a great source of encouragement. Above all, he was a true patriot and was always ready to understand and appreciate the opposite point of view. In his convocation address to the Gurmukhi University he made very weighty and frank observations about the slogan `India is one and indivisible` which should be studied by every Indian. ``It is an irreparable loss to India. Poet Tagore will live through his works with us``.

ylh,

Tilak and Gokhale were good leaders but they were far away from the masses. They did not have the charisma or the grassroots support to convert the Congress into a mass movement. Basically, the Congress was a glorified debating society at that point. If it were not for Gandhi, this would have continued forever and we might have all remained british subjects.

It is true that Gandhi injected religion into politics. However, it was not intended as a sectrian ploy to attack muslims. Rather it was to tap into the deep reservoir of spiritual strength of both hindus and muslims. As a conquered people, both hindus and muslims had lost the stomach to fight for their independence. They would have continued to lick the british boots and survive on scraps. After all they had remained under imperial muslim rule for 800 years without much protest. Gandhi was able to awaken the common man in both communities by appealing to their conscience via religion.

Where Gandhi was a complete failure, was in his inability to formulate a reasonable power sharing arrangement between hindus and muslims. He underestimated the need for this by thinking that his charisma was enough to bridge the gap between the two communities. In my opinion, he was so engrossed in the struggle against the british, he did not pay enough attention to this issue.

Where Jinnah failed was in clearly defining the right solution for muslims. His concept of Pakistan remained vague till the last days and it did not cover the needs for all muslims in India. He did not realize the demonic forces that would be unleashed during partition and he certainly did not anticipate a permanent hostility between India and Pakistan. While he reluctantly accepted the Cabinet Mission plan, he never proposed any serious solutions for power sharing at the center. In fact, he got so engrossed in the romantic notions of carving out a separate nation, that he did not pay attention to what was really in the best interest of muslims - an equitable constitutionally guaranteed system of power sharing at the center.

Zahra #3: Obsession in the early stages of life is usually in isolation. Later on, it changes into a lower level of obsession through comparison, a one on one type-Jinnah Gandhi or Iqbal-Tagore. Further down the road, it is further weakened due to one against many comparison (not limited to sub-continent but includes any one from anywhere). Singers provide the best example. In the begining, it is one particlar singer or group, changed to a comparison with some one else in the same land or language and then you realize the stupidity of obsession through comparison because of different variables involved.

A stage comes, when you abruptly realize the futility of never ending obsession through comparisons after comparisons. This is what happened to our great Sufi poet Shah Hussain. One day, he realized the uselessness of detailed comparisons. He got up, took his religious books, and threw all of them in a well and ran shouting ``it is all nonsense``. From then on, he took it easy and created one of the best poetry in Punjab.

Any discussion about independence movement in the early part of this century, excluding Ghadar movement, is more like discussing internal squabbling of like-minded group of PML, Mutt ke chamchey. The politicians in sub-continent were Angrez ke chamchey as Amit has rightly alluded to and Majrooh Sultanpuri wrote poems about it.

Good stuff . . . thanks/veeresh

This may be of relevance here. When I went to Golden Temple, Amritsar, a few years ago, I found while researching something else that after the Jallianwala Bagh massacre, Rabindranath Tagore from faraway Bengal gave up his Knighthood and wrote an op-ed which was published only by ``The Statesman``. I then asked for and received copies of all the other newspapers of those days. Very interesting reading on what our media then, as well as our illustrious freedom fighters ESPECIALLY the Congress types, had to say.

Yasser, when I go back next time to Amritsar, I`m going to photocopy some stuff and send it to you. Some of it will warm the cockles of your/y hearts and some of it will want to make you/me hide our faces or drown in a teaspoon of salt water.

Incidentally, when the Queen of England visited India and then Amritsar a few days ago, the British Press changed the Jallianwala Bagh visit reportage from ``commiserate`` to ``commemorate``.

But good work. I hope others at chowk can now understand one of the essences of being at an old time chowk: I can be a hard-core devout Hindu / Muslim / Sikh / non-believer but I can also at the same time be very tolerant of another person`s faith.

Aberrations like hard core fundamentalists come and go . . . has history shown you one example of a hard-core faith which wants to exclude others lasting more than a few generations, at best?

Good work YLH, and please keep writing. What are you going to do after your graduation?

sarwari #2.

that was just another persons opinion about gandhi, not much different from the views of Mr. thennali raman. As a young person, enamoured by credentials and publications, you might attach credibility to published works and positions. Further down the line when you have a few books by Mcgrawhill, a couple of dozen papers in refereed journals, gone past the citation index, you will realise who Mr. Thennali raman is. At least I can assure you he is as knowledgeable as any of the harward professors , living or dead.

At last learn to think for yourself, a person who acts on his beliefs and faces its consequences, or the one who wants his confortable life style not to be disturbed as the prime motive, who is greater.

Take facts from history, not the opinions of the historians. What is attained as a free loader always ends as trash. One has to pay a price to get anything valuble, anything to be treasured.

regards and best wishes to see light, what ever be the source.

Jay.

YLH,

Jinnah should be assessed by extent to which his vision has turned to reality. Other than his quotes from one speach, the man is unheard of in pak media and politics. If he were alive, he would have been a follower of Atlaf Hussain, would have joined Mujib, but not the Mukti Bahini: would have been a jihadist from the lounge room, an advisor to musharaff with a TNT on shia-sunni affairs. Every one has a role in history, even the ones with divisive theories like TNT similar to the one with a funni mush from germany.

Multiple sighs, e.g., the below.

-Arun Gupta

``Despite attempts on Mr Gandhi`s part to portray Gokhale as his political Guru (ref `Gokahle my Political Guru`) Gandhian methods and ways were a flight from the moderation and progressive nationalism espoused by Gokhale and his disciple Mohammed Ali Jinnah. Gandhi despite frantic attempts was unable to gain membership in Gokhale`s `Servants of India` for atleast two years. His drives for recruitment for the British Army, and his calls for cooperation and opposition against the movements for self rule and Dominion Status did not make a darling of the leaders of the Indian Nationalist Movements.``

Nice to see you not spewing venom...but then YLH why is it that the elite in pakistan treat their fellow momeen worse then their pets....read

http://www.naradonline.com/displaynews.php3?id=30176

``A number of cases of doctors prescribing veterinary medicines to treat humans have been detected by Health department officials in Pak`s Punjab province.

The unethical practice is continuing unchecked with the connivance of the health department field staff despite repeated instructions by the provincial government to stop using veterinary drugs to treat human beings, Pakistani daily `The News` quoted sources as saying. ``

This is the modern day problem of pakistan. the state of pakistan exists and will be there for the future, unless these modern day problems are solved all the fine theses on Jinnah and others will come to nought....

YLH:

Young Master,

Flex your muscles spread your wings

You`re the bird that soars and sings

Never heed the vultures` calls

Let them post their downfalls.

Congratulations on your graduation with accolades & honours.

May Allah bless you and Sarwari.You are certainly a role model for a lot of Pakistanis & muslims.

Parvaaz hai dono kee issi eik jehan mein

Shaheen kaa jehan aur hai,kurgus ka jehan aur``

__________________A L L A M A IQBAL.

tr:Both circle this same very sky

The vulture,the eagle--- worlds apart.



wassalaam