Tuesday, January 08, 2013


यह क्या विडम्बना है
नारी के साथ होती है हिंसा
कानून उसे बलात्कार की संज्ञा देता है
और समाज इज्जत लुटने का सर्वनाम

फिर कतिपय बड़े नाम
बनाते हैं प्रश्न चिन्ह
राम राम,
क्यों लांघी लक्ष्मण रेखा
जब एक नहीं रावण छ: छ: थे
सीते तूने
क्यों नहीं कर दिया समर्पण
और एक  बहुत बड़े सन्त
एक हाथ की
ताली से करते हैं तेरा तर्पण

लेकिन तू तो भुमिजा नहीं
तू अग्निगर्भा थी
तू जानती थी कि
आज इस भारत या इन्डिया में
कृष्ण जिसको कभी तूने बांधी थी राखी
भूल कर वो कर्ज
विस्मृत कर अपना फर्ज
व्यस्त है
हफ्ता वसूलने में
इसीलिये किसी कृष्ण की अपेक्षा के बिना
तू स्वयं लड़ी दुशासन से
मानता हूं कि
तू नहीं हारी
जंग तो अब भी है  जारी ।

इस चीर हरण से
शरीर मेरा नग्न हुआ है
इज्जत मैने खोई है।
मैं कौन
और कौन मैं ही तो हूं तेरा अपराधी
मैं धृतराष्ट्र,
क्या आंखों के बिना
नहीं सुन सकता था मैं तेरा अन्तर्नाद

Thursday, January 03, 2013


The Two Nation Theory:
I recently remarked in my Facebook page that there was again a two nation divide in India between the “SECULARISTS” and “NATIONALISTS”. Both the sections are trying to deceive people. The game of Politics in India away from Statecraft has become a con game. It tries to CON people to vote for them. A new phrase that has been coined as “Careerist Politicians”. The word career broadly denotes or means a path seeking advancement and lucre. All Isms are only Facades. The electorate has the only option of choosing a lesser evil.
However digressing from my FaceBook entry, I want to reflect upon the concept of the so called the original “TWO Nation theory”. During freedom struggle a two nation theory was strongly advocated by Two Centre stage personalities, Jinnah and Iqbal. Muslim League made it, it’s core ideology under the tutelage of Jinnah.
My friends belonging to the secularist brigade would point out a speech of Veer Savarkar wherein he had also spoken about the “TWO Nation theory” in 1937. Savarkar being elected as Hindu Mahasabha President, they try to put this blame on RSS or in their pejorative sounding phrase the “Hindutva Brigade”.
There are two ways of looking at the issue.
1) The CHILDISH way: When two siblings or kids fight with each other, both claim that the other was the one who initiated the fight and he was merely using his “Right to Defend” rule. Between my two daughters, I faced this situation (about two decades back) on several occasions and I could never resolve the fight on this anvil.
2) Without trying to play the “who was the initiator” blame game, we try to find out who played the decisive role in india being partitioned on this TWO Nation theory.
Well let me try to take one point at a time.
1) The Childish way: Savarkar did say in one of his speeches in 1937 that India belongs to Hindus. He has defined his word “Hindus” as people living in the geographical region of India and being Nationalists and having loyalty towards India. His concept that Muslims believing in Muslim Ummah and Caliphate did not have a place in India. When Iqbal in Tarana Mili says that the NATION of Muslims living in India’s was Islam, their loyalty towards India became questionable.
But in this fight I am required to do a chronological deliberation of who initiated the fight.
Mohammed Iqbal said it in 1930 much before Savarkar.
I find that Sir Syed Ahmed Khan the founder of Aligarh Muslim University claiming even before Savarkar’s birth, that Hindus and Muslims were two “WARING NATIONS”. He specifically stated that as Hindus outnumbered Muslims in the ration of 4:1, once the British left India, the Hindus being much larger in Number would not accept Muslims as their leaders.Rather basing on their numeral supremacy they would dominate the Muslims. This had happened within 25 years of the installation of British Raj.
So it seems we can date it to around 1884 when this theory was minted by Sir Syed Ahmed Khan first.
2) Now looking at the issue from a more mature view, as to who was principally responsible for the ultimate implementation of this “TWO Nation theory” and causing a Vivisection/ Partition of India. Here we find principally Jinnah being responsible. Even in Pakistan Jinnah is credited with giving Muslims their homeland in this subcontinent, i.e.Pakistan. Muslim League was absolutely adamant on this Separate Homeland. He was the most vocal person and the protagonist of this Tragedy , It was admitted by Jinnah himself, soon after the partition and on his deathbed. Jinnah had exclaimed “Partition was the biggest mistake of my life”.
Some historians believe that had the question of Independence been postponed by a couple of years this tragedy could had been averted. Jinnah had little life ahead. Moreover ultimately it was the “Who Blinks First” game on. Nehru blinked before Jinnah. He could had easily continued the negotiations. Yes the brutalities of the “Direct Action Day” weighed heavily on the minds of Congress leaders. Yet there were ways to differ the day if Independence. And Muslim League with or without Jinnah was likely to BLINK.
Nehru blinked first and lost the game of Patience. Jinnah was playing a difficult person/negotiator. Maulana Abul Kalam Azad was able to insert a few crafty arguments, during discussion. Had Nehru not lost patience he could had steered a deferment.
My observation is, irrespective of who propounded the theory first, the Man who got it on the ground was none other than Jinnah. All other names are incidental.