Two nation theory- a historic myth
Introduction
The concept of two nation theory is the very basis of partition of India and establishment of Pakistan. This theory exaggerates religious differences and ignores geographical, cultural and linguistic conditions. The different religious communities though living in same area are considered as separate nations. Before we further discuss this theory, it is necessary to define Nation. According to Webster New Dictionary, nation is defined as "community of people composed of one or more nationalities with its own territory and government". According to Oxford Dictionary, Nation is "a large body of people united by common descent, history or culture inhabiting a particular country" Thus both definitions stress on distinct territory or geographical area. According to Webster's dictionary, even different nationalities living in a particular region would be one nation only.
The origin of two nation theory
Mohd. Iqbal
The seeds of two nation theory were sown as early as beginning of eleventh century when the scholar Al Barauni highlighted the differences between Hindus and Muslims. Some hold that Sir Syed Ahmad Khan supported the two nation theory. But this is not agreed by many. Mohammad Iqbal known as Poet of the East provided philosophical base for the theory and partition of India. Iqbal considered that there was more sympathy between two Muslims living in different countries than a Muslim and a Non Muslim living in same country. Iqbal was for Pan Islamic nationhood that went beyond territory. He believed in Ummah (Muslim broterhood) and considered territory based nation unislamic. Jinnah translated iqbal's philosophy to reality by successfully founding Muslim homeland viz. Pakistan by dividing India.
The Hindu view
Hindu Mahasabha was a prominent Hindu organization. Hindu Mahasabha also believed that Hindus and Muslims were different nations. But unlike Muslim League, they did not believe in transfer of population or division of the country. Vir Savarkar of Hindu Mahasabha, according to Dr. Amedkar believed that the two nations namely Hindu and Muslims could exist in same territory. The Muslims would be given freedom of worship and way of life but not any privilege just because they were minority. They could be given no reservation of seats in parliament. One vote for each citizen would be the norm.
Rashtriya swayam Sewak Sangh presented another view. According to them, India is Hindu Nation (Hindu Rashtra). even the Muslims are Hindu according to R.S.S. The term 'Hindu' is derived from 'Sindhu; of Indus valley and has nothing to do with religion or form of worship. India has a tradition of various forms of worship and philosophies ranging from idol worship to atheism. All are Hindus whatever be religion or faith or form of worship. Logically, this is not wrong. India has been known as Hindustan for thosuands of years. 'Hindustan' means 'Land of Hindus'. Many in Arab world refer to Indian Muslims as 'Hindu Muslim'. Rashtriya Swayam Sewak Sangh obviously never believed in two nation theory and considers every India as 'Hindu'. However it needs be reiterated that in the present context, 'Hindu' means religion and not nation. So, it is better to use the word "Indian' or 'Bhartiya' for all citizens and 'Hindu' only for those belonging to 'Hindu community/ religion'. Even though RSS considers India as one nation and Muslims as part of the 'Hindu Nation', quite often the Muslims are accused of being 'foreign element'. Once Jana Sangh (dissolved by merger in Janata Party) political front of RSS talked of indianization of Muslims implying that they were not fully Indians and needed to transform to true Indian. This is another way of saying that they are not fully compatible with the Indian nation and hence are a different nation. RSS has contempt for Muslims and Christians both as being alien elements. These outsiders must adjust themselves to Indian culture and traditions, implying Hindu Rashtra and Hindu traditions.
However, it will not be out of place to state that India has been invaded many times and various races entered. Most of the races like Hoons and Shakyas mixed up and mingled so much with India that they lost their identity. India is said to be a melting pot that unifies all elements. The Muslims and Christians being the last entrants could not be fully absorrbed in Indian nation or rather Hindu Rashtra in terms of RSS vocabulary.
Congress View
Indian National Congress is major political party that fought for independence. Congreess was against two nation theory. But the Muslim League was successful in the provinces of Punjab and Bengal. Ultimately, unprecented bloodshed and circumstances forced Congress to accept partition of India. Most Muslims did not leave India. India follows the policy of secularism. The acceptance of partition was only a tactical compulsion for which Jinnah was primarily responsible. India is officially a secular state. All political parties accept the principle of secularism even if only formally because of constitutional provision.
Two nation theory proves irrational
Over emphasizing religious beliefs gave rise to the two nation theory. Nowhere in the world this has been accepted. In India, Sikh, Buddhists, Jains also consider them different religions though Hindu Law applies to all these. We can well imagine what would happen if all these were considered as different nations and asked for separate homeland. In fact, Khalistan movement is still alive and operating from U.S.A. and elsewhere. Khalistan led movement under Bhindrawale killed many innocent and ended with blue star operation only. There have been separatist tendencies also in South. Dravida Kashagam founder Perriyar also wanted separate Dravadistan.
There are no doubt vast disparities in language, culture, dress. But these do not affect overall unity. There is unity in diversity.
The two nation theory has failed in Pakistan as well. The Pakistan nation also could not remain intact. If Islam could be basis of nation, there is no reason why Bangladesh (East Pakistan) should have separated. There are reginal and linguistic differences in Pakistan. The people in Sindh, Baluchistan and Pakhtoonistan crave for their separate entity and existence.
Pan Islamic theory was the basis of two nation theory. Iqbal hated the regional basis of nationhood. But now there are no supporters of Pan Islamic movement. Pan Islamic doctrine will enable the strong Muslim forces to interfere with the weaker ones. Probably, the doctrine of Pan Islam and nationhood based on religion gives the various terorist groups to seek shelter and base in Pakistan. If Islam and not territory is basis of nation, there is no way the Arab and other non Pakistani fundamentals should not establish their camps in Pakistan.
Language and not religion is significant
There is some sort of linguistic and cultural identity between India, Pakistan and Bangladesh. There are Punjabi and Urdu writers in both India and Pakistan. The Indian films are widely liked in Pakistan. There is linguistic and cultural identity between India and Bangledesh as well. It can be said without any fear of contradiction that a Pakistani Muslim would be more at home with an Indian Non Muslim rather than an Arab Muslim. The reality is just oposite of what the founders of Two nation theory beleved. Language is the most significant common factor between any twio indiviuals. That is why the Indian states are formed on linguistic basis. In fact, even the provinces in Pakistan are organized on linguisitc basis.
India is one nation based on Ganga Yamuna composite culture
It is the same rivers and land that have given shelter to all living in India. Despite different religions, there is common spirity of unity and oneness. We have tradition of Hindu saints and Muslim sufi saints. Both are equally respected. India is a nation based on common heritage that is also known as Ganga Yamuna culture.
Like it on Facebook, Tweet it or share this article on other bookmarking websites.