Remembering H.M. Seervai (1906-1996)

Jinnah`s family life was quite screwed up. It is useless to paint it any other way. That would be a complete distortion of facts. His wife went into a depression and died in her twenties. He married a Parsi, when he was 40/42 and she was 18. And his father-in-law refused to talk to him.

However, when his daughter married one, he disowned her. He refused to even acknowledge her, as his daughter. Refered to her as Mrs. Wadia, from that point onwards. And gave her - his only living family member - a microscopic amount of inheritance. She, in return, never bothered to visit her own father`s grave for fifty-five years.......

I have looked long and hard to find anyone whose wife goes into a depression, and who disowns an only daughter - someone who has no other family member in the world, other than her own father. And whose daughter, then, does not visit her onw father`s grave for her whole life............Apparently, Jinnah was OK with Parsis as wives, but not as husbands or as son-in-laws.

This, to me, is the height of a dysfunctional family. Anyone who considers this to be normal is nuts............

It doesn`t make Jinnah any less of a person, as a leader. However, people need to get off their fictitious high-horse and stop trying to distort history. They need to stop misrepresenting Jinnah, and accept him for who he was............a person who was a human being, with all the shortcomings that human beings have..........

Neither Nehru`s nor Gandhi`s family was nearly as dysfunctional as Jinnahs. Though Jinnah had, by far, better ideas for South Asia than them, and was the much bigger visionary........Unfortunately, Nehru never let Jinnah`s ideas take root...........

Dost-mittar #61: I think it is hard to predict what the Germans would have done, in India, had the defeated the colonial power, itself, i.e. British. They could have changed everything, regardless of who was leading the axis powers, towards India.

I can`t see how an area the size of the Sub-Continent could stay, ``united.`` That is not its historical mean. Out of thousands of years, it has remained united for a few hundred, and that too when held together by invading powers.

In fact, I think within the coming generations it will break up in to a loose confederation of its historical units, again..........

The trivia about Shah Rukh Khan is interesting. I knew he was too good looking to not have some Pakistani-side blood in him. But here is one for you: Dilip Kumar could have become the Chief of Air Staff of the Pakistan Air Force. Can you guess how?

Re: # 67

Mantoji,

I agree wholeheartedly.

And I do not know. But if they both were unhappy for the reasons you state, I totally
disagree with their cause of resentment and it would be plain wrong on their part
to hold such grudges. Religion/caste are too silly a reasons for such resentments,
private or public politics notwithstanding.

Shishapa,

Refer to earlier posts. It was family politics mostly... and according to Hindvi public politics as well.

So tell us... why was Nehru hurt at his daughter`s marriage? Nehru wasn`t even a Muslim.
So tell us why was Gandhi hurt that his son became a Muslim? Had he become a Maleecha?

Such wonderful objectivity should be applied across the board.

(Enter the players)

Manto:
“Jinnah, O’ Jinnah – teraa jawaab nahin
Teri adaaon ka – bus koi hisaab nahin”

Jinnah (to Manto):
“Tu jahaan, jahaan chalega – mera sayaa, saath hogaa
Tu jahaan, jahaan chalega – mera sayaa, saath hogaa
Mera sayaa – mera sayaa!”

Manto (to Jinnah):
“Aa tu mujhe apne – aanchal mein chhupaa le
Gale se lagaa le
Ki aur meraaa… – koi nahin!”

Jinnah (to Manto):
“Khijaan ke phool pe aatee – kabhie bahar naheen
Tere naseeb mein ae dost – meraa pyaar nahin”

Manto (to world):
“Le-kur humm – diwana dil
Phirte hain – manjil, manjil…”

Manto (to Pakistani population):
“Gaa re mere sang, mere saajna…”

Pakistani population (to Manto):
“Na hum tumhe jaanein
Na tum hame jaano”

Mushy (to Pakistani population):
“Sau saal pahle
Mujhe tum-se pyar thaa
Aaj bhi hai
Aureee…
Kal bhee rahega”

Pakistani population (to khakis):
“Inhi logon ne
Inhi logon ne
Inhi logon ne le leena
Dupatta mora…”

(Exit the players)

``The Muslim general, Shah Nawaz Khan, was actually a pathan who chose to stay in India after the partition. You might know the name of his grandson, a guy named Shah Rukh Khan!``


Wow...this is one of the most interesting bits of news to have appeared on Chowk. Thanks, Dost-Mittar ji.

(Are you sure?)

Re: # 57

``he was deeply hurt ``

Deeply hurt? Why? Was Mr. Wadia a criminal or somebody?
Oh wait, he was not Muslim. Right!

Re: # 61

``You might know the name of his grandson, a guy named Shah Rukh Khan! ``

That is an amazing piece of information. I would have never guessed.
I am glad Shah Nawaz Khan decided to stay in India.
Had he gone to Pakistan, his grandson might have reached India, albeit in
a different way, via Kashmir.

Re#14

[I am afraid I find no intellectual value in discussing any issues with you.]

Thanks!

Urstruly:

You have made some misstatements in this post.

``Please keep in mind that until June 3, 1947, and that is just little over two months from the Independence, all Muslim league wanted was a constitutional parity of Muslims with Hindus.``

This happened earlier. The Congress leadership had agreed to a partition after Jinnah`s successful call for Direct Action of August 1946, and by June 1947, Radcliffe was already at work with his map and census data to draw the boundary lines in Panjab and Bengal.

``That was the purpose of Cabinet Mission too. But Congress would not relent an inch. Yes it is true that there was a Muslim representation in Congress but Congress`s claim that it was the ``only`` representative of all Indians inluding Muslims was a bit too much of a stretch.``

That might have been the Congress position during the 1930s but not during the 1940s. By this time, Jinnah had already established his credentials as a significant leader of Muslims, especially after the 1945 elections where ML won overwhelming majority of Muslim votes. Now, it was Jinnah who claimed that Congress did not represent any Muslims.

``And mother of all ironies is that after independence Congress did give Indian Muslims the constitutional parity that they have been demanding all along. But alas it was too late by then.``

There is no constitutional parity given to Muslims as a group; in theory Indian Parliament can have a zero Muslim member. The only special provision is that religious minorities can control their own religious and educational institutions. Muslims do have their separate personal law, but even there, the Directive Principles of the Indian Constitution say that the government would work towards the establishment of a common civil law. These were never contentious issues before independence. In fact, Jinnah probably would have favoured a common civil law for all Indians.

Romair#51:
``Suppose the Germans and Japanese had won WWII, quickly. What would have happened then?``

India would then have remained united, secular and socialist, though not democratic. It was Subhash Bose`s Azaad Hind Fauj which was spearheading Axis attack towards India and an INA contigent actually is supposed to have touched Burma-India border. Bose was a staunch socialist and secular. His Fauj was led by a Hindu, a Sikh and a Muslim general. The Muslim general, Shah Nawaz Khan, was actually a pathan who chose to stay in India after the partition. You might know the name of his grandson, a guy named Shah Rukh Khan!

Re: # 53

Urstruly...

It is ironic that after accepting that Khaksars were trying to kill Jinnah, you are trying to turn an assassination attempt into something else...

There were two attempts actually:

The events of the case are... and I have read the correspondence... that the Khaksar took out a knife and attacked Jinnah with it, who though feeble was able to hold on to the wrist...
It was serious enough for Jinnah to issue a statement through the Muslim League clarifying that the assailant was not a Hindu but a Muslim.

This is how the event is presented in most biographies of Mr Jinnah as well... including the one that everyone likes to quote.

Re: # 46

I think Hindvi is referring to Dina`s marriage. Yes that is one possibility certainly.

Re: # 50

Yes he was Parsi...

Re: # 47

Yes... you are right. He is said to have always referred to her as Mrs Wadia ... by all accounts he was deeply hurt and not being the type who would raise his voice, loose his temper or show negative emotions... he took it out like this.

But the affection that I talk is how frequently he would snap out a picture of his grand children... and how frequently at dinners he would recall anecdotes of ``Mrs Wadia`s children``.

I think when talk of Jinnah... we must make some adjustments don`t you think.

Re: # 55

``Much like he is turned into a villian, in India. ``

So Mr. Jinnah turned Hindus into villains to achieve his sinister goals yet he should
not be turned into villian in India? Tolerance ki bhi hudd hoti hai.

Urstruly #53: Interesting points, again...........

I think it is very necessary to study the history of Pakistan, objectively, and factually. Without and biases. And without turning people into heroes and villians. One can have one`s heroes and villians in history, but one should not distort historical facts, to fit them into one`s views on history.........

I think far too many individuals in Pakistan are unwilling to study Jinnah, as a human being. He is turned into a superhero. Much like he is turned into a villian, in India. Moreover he is used to establishe individuals` own views for present-day society, i.e. if I want Pakistan to be in such-and-such manner today, I selectively look at Jinnah`s life, and paint that to present-day society.

Similar things are done for other Indian (Muslim and Hindu) leaders..............

Your comments on khaksaars are interesting, and that aspect should be studied futhur. As are your comments on Jinnah believing in the status-quo. Though Jinnah, did prove his popularity, at the aam aadmi level, by the time Pakistan was formed..........He was, democractically, the most popular individual in Pakistan, the day he died...........

P.S. While it is true Pakistan would not have been formed, had Adam and Eve not been around. I think Nicholson`s and Edward`s etc. contributions would have to be considered quite a a bit more directly related, to its creation...........