Hindustan Times
The same people? Surely not
Few things annoy me as much as the claim often advanced by well-meaning but woolly- headed (and usually Punjabi) liberals to the effect that when it comes to India and Pakistan, “We’re all the same people, yaar.”
This may have been true once upon a time. Before 1947, Pakistan was part of undivided India and you could claim that Punjabis from West Punjab (what is now Pakistan) were as Indian as, say, Tamils from Madras.
But time has a way of moving on. And while the gap between our Punjabis (from east Punjab which is now the only Punjab left in India) and our Tamils may actually have narrowed, thanks to improved communications, shared popular culture and greater physical mobility, the gap between Indians and Pakistanis has now widened to the extent that we are no longer the same people in any significant sense.
This was brought home to me most clearly by two major events over the last few weeks.
The first of these was the attack on the Sri Lankan cricket team on the streets of Lahore. In their defence, Pakistanis said that they were powerless to act against the terrorists because religious fanaticism was growing. Each day more misguided youngsters joined jihadi outfits and the law and order situation worsened.
Further, they added, things had got so bad that in the tribal areas the government of Pakistan had agreed to suspend the rule of law under pressure from the Taliban and had conceded that sharia law would reign instead. Interestingly, while most civilised liberals should have been appalled by this surrender to the forces of extremism, many Pakistanis defended this concession.
Imran Khan (Keble College, Oxford, 1973-76) even declared that sharia law would be better because justice would be dispensed more swiftly! (I know this is politically incorrect but the Loin of the Punjab’s defence of sharia law reminded me of the famous Private Eye cover when his marriage to Jemima Goldsmith was announced. The Eye carried a picture of Khan speaking to Jemima’s father. “Can I have your daughter’s hand?” Imran was supposedly asking James Goldsmith. “Why? Has she been caught shoplifting?” Goldsmith replied. So much for sharia law.)
The second contrasting event was one that took place in Los Angeles but which was perhaps celebrated more in India than in any other country in the world. Three Indians won Oscars: A.R. Rahman, Resul Pookutty and Gulzar.
Their victory set off a frenzy of rejoicing. We were proud of our countrymen. We were pleased that India’s entertainment industry and its veterans had been recognised at an international platform. And all three men became even bigger heroes than they already were.
But here’s the thing: Not one of them is a Hindu.
Can you imagine such a thing happening in Pakistan? Can you even conceive of a situation where the whole country would celebrate the victory of three members of two religious minorities? For that matter, can you even imagine a situation where people from religious minorities would have got to the top of their fields and were, therefore, in the running for international awards?
On the one hand, you have Pakistan imposing sharia law, doing deals with the Taliban, teaching hatred in madrasas, declaring jihad on the world and trying to kill innocent Sri Lankan cricketers. On the other, you have the triumph of Indian secularism.
The same people?
Surely not.
We are defined by our nationality. They choose to define themselves by their religion.
But it gets even more complicated. As you probably know, Rahman was born Dilip Kumar. He converted to Islam when he was 21. His religious preferences made no difference to his prospects. Even now, his music cuts across all religious boundaries. He’s as much at home with Sufi music as he is with bhajans. Nor does he have any problem with saying ‘Vande Mataram’.
Now, think of a similar situation in Pakistan. Can you conceive of a Pakistani composer who converted to Hinduism at the age of 21 and still went on to become a national hero? Under sharia law, they’d probably have to execute him.
Resul Pookutty’s is an even more interesting case. Until you realise that Malayalis tend to put an ‘e’ where the rest of us would put an ‘a,’ (Ravi becomes Revi and sometimes the Gulf becomes the Gelf), you cannot work out that his name derives from Rasool, a fairly obviously Islamic name.
But here’s the point: even when you point out to people that Pookutty is in fact a Muslim, they don’t really care. It makes no difference to them. He’s an authentic Indian hero, his religion is irrelevant.
Can you imagine Pakistan being indifferent to a man’s religion? Can you believe that Pakistanis would not know that one of their Oscar winners came from a religious minority? And would any Pakistani have dared bridge the religious divide in the manner Resul did by referring to the primeval power of Om in his acceptance speech?
The same people?
Surely not.
Most interesting of all is the case of Gulzar who many Indians believe is a Muslim. He is not. He is a Sikh. And his real name is Sampooran Singh Kalra.
So why does he have a Muslim name?
It’s a good story and he told it on my TV show some years ago. He was born in West Pakistan and came over the border during the bloody days of Partition. He had seen so much hatred and religious violence on both sides, he said, that he was determined never to lose himself to that kind of blind religious prejudice and fanaticism.
Rather than blame Muslims for the violence inflicted on his community — after all, Hindus and Sikhs behaved with equal ferocity — he adopted a Muslim pen name to remind himself that his identity was beyond religion. He still writes in Urdu and considers it irrelevant whether a person is a Sikh, a Muslim or a Hindu.
Let’s forget about political correctness and come clean: can you see such a thing happening in Pakistan? Can you actually conceive of a famous Pakistani Muslim who adopts a Hindu or Sikh name out of choice to demonstrate the irrelevance of religion?
My point, exactly.
What all those misguided liberals who keep blathering on about us being the same people forget is that in the 60-odd years since Independence, our two nations have traversed very different paths.
Pakistan was founded on the basis of Islam. It still defines itself in terms of Islam. And over the next decade as it destroys itself, it will be because of Islamic extremism.
India was founded on the basis that religion had no role in determining citizenship or nationhood. An Indian can belong to any religion in the world and face no discrimination in his rights as a citizen.
It is nobody’s case that India is a perfect society or that Muslims face no discrimination. But only a fool would deny that in the last six decades, we have travelled a long way towards religious equality. In the early days of independent India, a Yusuf Khan had to call himself Dilip Kumar for fear of attracting religious prejudice.
In today’s India, a Dilip Kumar can change his name to A.R. Rahman and nobody really gives a damn either way.
So think back to the events of the last few weeks. To the murderous attack on innocent Sri Lankan cricketers by jihadi fanatics in a society that is being buried by Islamic extremism. And to the triumphs of Indian secularism.
Same people?
Don’t make me laugh.
(15 votes, average: 4.8 out of 5)
Loading ...
A lovely article Vir…. Such instances make me proud of my country day by day…. But, one thing I have never been able to understand. I am working in US right now and one thing that surprises me is that most people (almost all) know India as a hindu country. I have a hard time convincing them that there are a lot of religions in India. The number of muslims in India is more than the entire population of India. They find is very hard to believe. My point is that being secular is a good thing. Saying that we accept all the cultures is a good thing. Just like the message of peace by Gandhi. So, if India can be famous for Gandhi and peace, why can’t it be famous for secular policies. Why dont we try and spread this word. You being part of media can help doing so.
People have to know how beautiful and sacred my country is.
[Reply]
Ammar Reply:
March 23rd, 2009 at 6:38 pm
Swati, it is extremely sad that you need to read a poorly written essay such as this to feel proud of your country. The ignorant Mr. Vir uses some utterly illogical and weak arguments to make his case - and what case is he making? “My country is better than yours?” - are we children here?
To answer your question, India has PLENTY of human rights abuses and active discrimination which occurs everyday, e.g. the recent anti-muslim comments of Varun Gandhi, who suggested that perhaps the Muslims of India should leave and go to Pakistan. As long as people like yourself and Mr. Vir here refuse to acknowledge or educate themselves of the realities, we will have continued animosity and hate. WAKE UP!
[Reply]
Vidyanag Reply:
March 25th, 2009 at 12:56 pm
Ammar, i STRONGLY disagree with you, VIR SANGHVI is absolutly right, he does not present we are better than them…but just to prove INDIA is secular - prove to whom - our own fellow Indians, those who think Muslim Bashing is communalism…facts and figures do not get the point umteen times .. we INDIANS sad to say ..love self bashing..we want to show-case our open wounds to the whole world and then we think we are intellegent and matured White-collared people…and some outsider glorifies our own wounds…we get OSCARs ….if you still think India has pleanty of human rights issue and muslims are not safe…please ask any Muslim friend of yours and ask him to swear on his GOD and tell that he is not being treated well in this country…(expect Shabana Azmi..)..i am a secular person..i have lots of muslim friends who totally agree with me…we need level headed people to rule us not Hindus, muslims, sikhs or christans
[Reply]
Farhan Reply:
April 23rd, 2009 at 7:49 pm
My dear Vidyanag …you said we need level headed people to rule India … pray my dear .. where do we get level headed people to rule India ?… as for Mr. Sanghvi’s article … well written as he does always .. but Sir … the very reason I do not believe in nation states … a curse of western colonialism for South Asia… is articles like these …
If you partition east and west UP today … as two separate nations … even over a decade … differences are bound to occur … (may be you are not aware about the gulf of Lucknowi Tehzeeb and Delhvi tehzeeb and their differences) … and just as these differences are bound to widen if separated on India-Pakistan line … these differences are bound to disappear if rejoined on East and West Germany style… think again …!!!
I admire the analytical skills of Vir Sanghvi; but the consclusions he is leading us to are fraught. It smacks of an attitude “we are better than them”: taken to extreme leads to “extremism” and fundamentalism that Pakistan is rightly accused of.
(We have our own “Bajrang Dals, Ram Sene, et al, remember….fortunately contained ….)
Yes, the Pakistani’s have taken the wrong direction in their development as a Nation: Religion and nationhood have been at conflict down the ages. Unfortunately, they started on thier journey to “Nationhood” by demanding separation on the basis of religion. And they continued on the same path. (actually they intensified that course over the last two decades in response to other societal failures).
The Pakistanis are our estranged “Cousins” nonetheless. Gone astray, yes.
But should we gloat over it (Hindi Film Style) or watch the developments apprehensively, and just wring our hands? Or lend a helping hand Or may be even bring them back into the warmth and comfrot of the larger “Joint family” or Biradari?
These are some of the choices that will be made in the coming years - again with their respective consequences!!!
[Reply]
[...] Sanghvi, an editor at the Hindustan Times, has written an article (The same people? Surely not) in which he has expressed annoyance at the claims “often advanced by well-meaning but [...]
. Vir Sanghvi has written a very analytical and logical piece - BUT he is one-sided. He forgets that culture is not just religion and politics. In both of these aspects the majority Indian attitudes are far superior to the Pakistani ones. BUT when we say “We are the same people yaar” we refer to the rest of the culture - The food, the language – (Some of the dialects we spoke are almost extinct in India, but still prevalent in Pakistan.) The dress. And MOST Important the music and dancing. The hospitality of the old Punjabis has to be experienced to be believed. It is still there in Pakistan, but has been replaced by Western style insincere hospitality among many modern Indian Pujabis. We miss that. Where you would be offered a glass of Lassi or milk by your hosts, today you may be offered beer. Many of us do miss the Lassi. .
Yes we have proceeded in different directions both on religion and politics - But the rest of the culture is still the same.
When Indian and Pakistani Punjabis meet, the instinctive bon homie, friendliness and feeling of being one comes naturally - because of the close cultural ties. I agree with Vinod Dhall - Pakistanis are our estranged cousins, gone astray.
Jugraj
[Reply]
mr sanghvi.. this is an interesting piece .. but i don’t agree with several points in it.
it is true that punjabi liberals often make this noise about Indians and Pakistanis being the same people. it perhaps enables (indian) Punjabis to claim a larger community than just that of Indian Punjabis.
but what you is condescending. it is in fact kicking a man when he is down. we all know pakistan is going through a difficult time…and this is not the time for beggar-thy-neigbour talk.
let me deal with the trivia first. This story about Gulzar / Sampooran Singh, and why he took that name. He is a poet and that’s his pseudonym. i think the story of making up for hate is just romanticizing something. The word gulzar is an urdu word. In Punjab it has nothing to do with Muslim/ Islam. He comes from the punjab which (on either side of the border today) has an urdu influence. Firaq Gorakkpuri (from the cow belt) .. another famous poet / shaayar.. his name was Raghupati Sahay, and Firaq had no story of hate.
One must also remember , in India, Sikhs are in no way a minority in the same way as Muslims are.
So we see iqbal singh is a common name in punjab . our own old favourite from bollywood .. dara singh.. derives his name from emeperor darius of persia and later dara shikoh… aurangzebs brother. My own father was named Fateh (meaning victory in urdu and persian) as was one of the kings of Mewar/ Rajputana : Fateh Singh. So this is the influence of the Mughals and urdu.. no specific love for Islam or Muslims.
now lets talk specifics
the slum dog story… you use this to say we don’t care in India whether a person is a Hindu or a muslin. the fact is that we do very much care. if a Muslim once in a while rises to prominence, we hoist that like a flag for the world to see and acknowledge that we are a “secular” society. we so love our Muslims when they are successful.. we did it when we made APJ Kalam the president. But Vir Sanghvi probably wont lift a finger when Varun Gandhi badmouths the Muslims.
In contrast to what Sanghvi says, I feel that Hindus today are a lot less tolerant of Muslims than they were at the time of Independence. It may have to do with the tragic story of the partition, the 3 wars with Pakistan , Kashmir and Islamic terrorists. But it CERTAINLY has to do with our political parties dividing us for votes. And the main culprits here are Congress and BJP (including its earlier avatars)
And here is the story of why Dilip Kumar changed his name. (http://movies.indiainfo.com/tales/0611_dilip-kumar.html) Back home Yusuf decided she wasn’t interested and was wondering whether to start another canteen when he got a letter from Bombay Talkies. Devika Rani wanted to meet him again. Reluctantly, Yusuf dragged himself to the studios and was shocked when Devika Rani greeted him with a piece of paper that turned out to be a contract. He was being signed by Bombay Talkies to play the lead opposite a new girl Mridula in their next film, Jwar Bhata. There was only one condition. He’d have to change his name. Devika Rani had three names waiting-Jehangir, Vasudev and Dilip
No… it wasn’t fear of prejudice . One of the alternatives Devika rani offered was Jehangir. Yusuf probably chose Dilip because that name was associated with royalty in the area that yusuf was born.. Maharaja Dilip Singh of Punjab.
The attack on the Srilankan team. I don’t see the logic of claiming Indians and Pakistanis are NOT the same people (and by induction that Indians are superior) just because no foreign cricket team has been attacked in India. We have multiple flashpoints in India too: Naxalbari, Telengana, North east, Godhra. In the name of religion, ideology, community, caste and race, Indians kill more Indians every year than possibly any other people. Hindus kill Hindus in caste conflicts , Hindus kill Muslims (Godhra, Malegaon) ), Hindus kill Christians (Orissa), Muslims kill Hindus (terror attacks in Bombay, Gujarat, Hyderbad, Jaipur, Delhi, Varanasi). Now Mr Sanghvi you will refer to the foreign hand (read ISI Pakistan), but the fact is that the people who actually carried out the terror attacks were Indian. But I wonder if you would then say that Muslims are not Indians !!
So , Mr Sanghvi, let us not gloat and stand on moral high ground of dubious foundations. Before we caste stones at Pakistan, let us turn our gaze inwards. As I mentioned before , we have , since Independence, actually moved away from religious equality.
[Reply]
Its all in a name - In India
I am a Roman Catholic, born in Goa but have lived in Delhi all my
life. My daddy left Portuguese Goa and was a Government servant.
Being a strong nationalist and a staunch Christian, he gave each of
his six children an Indian name and a Christian one. Thus I came to
be named Maria Fatima, after Our Lady of Fatima, however, the Fatima
took care of the Indian side I guess. As we lived in government
colonies, we had friends of every religion, community and hue and
never, ever did our parents try to instill in us that we were
different because we were Christians or insist we have Christian
friends as well, though I must confess that wasn’t always the case in
the convents I studied in.
However, my daddy would have never dreamt that the name he gave his
dearest daughter would end up being the bane of her life. I have
never felt, more than now, that you don’t have to be a Muslim or a
Christian to be looked upon with suspicion and disdain, you just need
to have a name that represents either religion. Over the years, I
have had my name struck of the electoral list twice, for being I don’t
know who, a muslim or a Christian. A policeman once asked me how a
‘musalmani’ could have a brother with a hindu name, an old lady, a
hindu, wanted to know how my parents could do me the gross injustice
of naming me ‘Fatima’ and ‘Chi, Chi’, I should change my name
immediately! While travelling abroad once, I was asked by the
immigration official, when was the last time I transferred money from
Kashmir! I was very surprised obviously and asked why Kashmir and to
where? The last time I travelled to Australia via Malaysia I was
stopped by the customs officials for what they called a routine
questioning of travellers picked by some random system. Though my
destination was Australia, they kept harping on why via Malaysia. Are
they so stupid - I was travelling Malaysian which stops at KL! I
understood fast enough it had something to do with my name and the
lady who questioned me, nodded silently when I asked her about it at
the end. It was only when they saw the place of birth on my passport
did they realise I was a Christian and till then at least, no one
wanted to burn or kill us. All this and more.
I was so scared that night, I could have looked guilty for no reason
at all. Over the past few months, I have started feeling insecure for
the first time in my life and tend to choose which part of my name I
should introduce myself with depending on whom I’m meeting. I have
very often enough thought of changing my name, the old lady would
smile wherever she is, except that changing paperwork of 54 years is a
deterrent - an what the heck, I love my name!
Fatima Pais
[Reply]
Well you do not expect such an jingoistic peice of write up for such a person whom a lot of people take seriously, If you are good,secular ,patriotic that is all fine but it gives you no right to show others as down or bad , I am a proud Indian myself howevr that does’t give me a free hand to redicule other cultures or religion with my rabid and iconoclastic opinions
[Reply]