Home Journal List Al-Hikmat: A Journal of Philosophy Volume 31 Article Details

RESOLUTION OF 1940 IN THE BRITISH PUNJAB

AN ANALYTICAL DISCOURSE (Part I)

Abstract

Romila Thapar writes, “Hindu and Muslim communalists had their organizational bases in the 1920s such as the Muslim League and the Hindu Mahasabha. Despite it being in essence anti-nationalist, the twonation theory is now effectively not questioned. If anything it is once again being endorsed by some political parties.”1 It is a stark reality that emergence of a movement has some philosophical background with a variety of demands. The best solution to this problem is to redress the grievances of the aggrieved faction along with a countering philosophy. In British India, the philosophy of nationalism and democracy paved the way for majority rule which intoxicated the Hindus who sidelined the Indian minorities particularly the Muslims and the same is being repeated in present India while dealing with the minorities. The current wave of the ‘Hindu nationalism’ in India with full force roots in the pre-partition political set-up about the Muslim League had been crying for decades and its voice was deemed as conspiracy. Philosophy, ostensibly religious in nature worked as a pushing force behind the political alignment in British India. Western philosophy of territorial and religious nationalism is repeatedly overlooked by many scholars, who take all the political parties except India’s Indian National Congress as ‘communal,’ fundamentalist, and perhaps ‘undemocratic’ too. Congress posed to pursue the western philosophy of secularism; Muslims and Sikhs followed the religious cult of nationalism. A contest between the religious communities appeared on the concessions and opportunities propounded by the Raj, which transmuted nationalism to communalism. Consequently, political leadership worked, in fact, mainly for their respective communities. Hindus for Hindustan, Muslims for Pakistan and Sikhs aspired for Sikhistan. Abuse of nationalism or communalism is best dealt with if change comes and makes its place in the equation without brutality and violence. Nonviolent movements represent intellectual contest, rather than physical fight.The Muslims felt jubilation on the passage of the Lahore Resolution2 on the 23rd March 1940, which demanded Muslim homeland. The All-India Muslim League set a clear direction of its struggle but it caused anxiety for the Sikh political 22 Akhtar Sandhu leadership mainly dominated by the Shiromani Akali Dal. The Hindu press and leaders individually and massively cried against the League’s partitioning scheme, while the major Hindu political forum, the Indian National Congress, could not chalk-out an abrupt reaction as a formal strategy. Mental agony overwhelmed the Sikhs on the idea of Pakistan and they relentlessly protested against it. Many tried to prove that the Lahore Resolution reflected a vague plan and Muslim masses did not back the partition scheme, nevertheless the factual position is that the League was very clear about its demand and enjoyed the majority’s voice on its back. This article looks into the responses by the political stakeholders in the British Punjab to the Lahore Resolution. (This article consists of two parts. The second part will appear in next issue of Al-Hikamt)

Download