Mahfooz Ali, The Writer

You need not to be close to me, you need to be alone,
You need to feel so guilty, & make your heart as stone.
You need to think you hurt me, because you think I'll walk away,
But despite that fact I need you, what else am I to say?
But, I'll step back & stand aside, & love you from afar,
And secretly I'll wish for you in every shooting star.
I'll want to pull you close to me, to show you how much I care,
But, soon I'd have to let you go, & that I couldn't bear.
I'll do whatever you need me to, just say it & I'll make it so,
But I want to hold you close to me & never let you go.
I've looked inside my heart, & all I saw was you,
But, if you looked in yours, would you see me too?
It's been awhile since I've felt our bodies together as one,
You used to feel so good to me, can you see what love has done?
I've wished upon a star & everything else I could,
But we're still apart, so I guess it's done no good.
But I'm a boy of faith, & dumb enough to believe in love,
So until the day that I die,
You'll be the one I'm dreaming of.

I have had many troubles in my life.
Sometimes I wish I could just use a knife.
And then everything would be all right.
I may try, and use all my might,
But I will never give up the fight.

Parents have hurt me all the time.
Girls have also done this crime.
Using me, that's what people do.
Then they as why I'm feeling blue.
If only they would get a clue.

Over and over, again I cry.
Then I think and ask myself why.
And what did I do to deserve all of this?
This time I know a hug nor a kiss,
Or I'm sorry's won't give me my eternal bliss.

Without you, my days are dark
When I'm unmotivated, you are my spark
When I'm acting moody, you show affection
When I'm confused, you give me direction
When I loose my focus and get demanding
You're by my side and understanding
When I start to rebel, you show me love
I thank the heavens and the stars up above
We're a team, and need each other
You're my adoring girl and loving beloved
I believe I 'm your favorite fan
With all my heart, from your loving man.

I love you too much,
to say goodbye.
If you left me,
I feel like I'd die.
We've been together,
for way to long
to say goodbye and
just go along.
Acting as if,
we were never together.
Because I know we are,
meant for each other.
Please say you love me,
and you will never leave.
Because I love you too much,
for you to leave me.

Sometimes I stop and wonder,
What I saw in you...
Was it in your gentle words?
Or the simplicity in the things you do? 

You always were so calm and kind,
So rare it seems today...
You didn't mind being different,
Or the opinions of what others had to say... 

I found myself attracted to you,
The moment that we met...
The way you made me smile,
I never will forget... 

My friends thought I was crazy,
But it was love at first sight...
And my heart led me to believe,
 

All of the illusions,
That I made up in my mind...
Were so far from truth, 
But I couldn't see it at the time...

It wasn't easy being so close,
Yet, so very far away...
Not knowing how you felt,
Kept me in bondage every day... 

I kept you in my prayers, constantly,
In hopes that you would see, 
Just how much I cared for you,
And maybe one day, you would care for me... 

One day my prayers were answered,
You said that you would like to try...
You thought we’d be good together,
I should have known it was a lie... 

I guess I was just another toy,
A game you liked to play...
I wish I had known sooner,
You never planned to stay... 

All of the empty promises, 
You led me to believe...
How could I be so foolish,
And so easily deceived?

I wish I would have known,
That you needed to be free...
But you're the one who stole my heart,
And now you hold the key... 

My dreams became a nightmare,
The way it had to end...
You left without discussing it,
 

How could you live with yourself?
Knowing what you did...
You didn't act like a mature,
You acted like a kid...

Running from the truth,
Was the easy thing to do...
I wish you had the courage to be honest,
To gently tell me... we were through...

I guess I have come to realize,
That love is a fairy tale...
No matter how I have tried,
I always seem to fail...

Why do some win at love?
And others always lose...
Is it just that I'm unlucky,
Or is it the girl I seem to choose? 

I think that this time;
I will stay by myself...
And take my broken heart,
And put it on a shelf...

Now no one can break it,
Or try to steal the key,
Of the broken pieces, 
Of a heart... that once was free...

Somewhere in time
We fell in love
Our feelings were so strong
Stars sparkled up above

Somewhere in time
Nothing else mattered
We were together
Until our hopes and our dreams were shattered

Somewhere in time
Great memories are there
Our love was once great
Nothing could compare

Somewhere in time
Our love stands still
A love that we lost
Somehow, against our will

Somewhere in time
We'll meet again
Somewhere in time
Our love will never end.

 

I always knew our Love would grow
I have never regretted our very first hello
We both are wrong sometimes and this we know
So we can never let our anger grow

We can't turn back the hands of time
but I know that our hearts are entwined
I promise that things will
Turn out just fine

I want to continue to share our life
I want you  always be my wife
The things I did, the things I do
I 'm so Sorry I never meant to hurt you

From the Heavens above to the
Fire down Below I Will always be your hero And you my queen,
and my love for you will continue to grow

If for any reason we shall part
Just remember you will always
hold the key to my heart
I love you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The modern European forces began arriving in India since 1498. The Portuguese arrived first and later on the English arrived in 1600. Indians speak different languages and their general accents are different from that of the Europeans. The Europeans had some difficulties pronouncing Indian names and they renamed some Indians places so that it was easy for them to pronounce.

In the present wave of nationalism, many Indians places were officially renamed back to their original names or were given new names. But the former names are still used by the general public and sometimes the places are still recognized by their former names rather than by their new official names.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Former and present names of Indian places

Former name Present official name

Alleppey Alappuzha

Broach Bharuch

Madras Chennai Bombay Mumbai

New Bombay Navi Mumbai

Panjim Panaji

Aurangabad Sambhajinagar

Tellicherry Thalasseri

Tanjore Thanjavur

Trivandrum Thiruvananthapuram

Trichur Thrissur

Trichy Tiruchirappalli

Ooty Udhagamandalam

Baroda Vadodara

Nationalist assassinated three important leaders in post-independent India by the surname Gandhi. The first was Mahatma Gandhi who was assassinated in 1948. The second was Indira Gandhi (no family relations to Mahatma Gandhi) who was assassinated in 1984. And the third was her son, Rajiv Gandhi, who was assassinated in 1991. Of the three Mahatma Gandhi was assassinated because of Indian nationalism, the other two were assassinated because of regional nationalism.

During India's independence period there were organizations in India who wanted to establish on the whole of British India a Hindu state. These organizations opposed to the partition of British India into India and Pakistan. After the partition of India these organizations blamed the Indian National Congress and especially its spiritual leader Mahatma Gandhi as responsible for the partition. They saw in Gandhi a traitor. Mahatma Gandhi also took some steps that made him in the minds of Hindu nationalists, pro-Muslim and Pakistan. Because of these reasons a group of Hindu nationalist assassinated Mahatma Gandhi.

Indira Gandhi was the Prime Minister of India in the early 1980s. During her term, there was a demand by the Sikhs for an independent Sikh state in Punjab. These demanders used terror to pressure the Indian government and the leaders of this group found refuge in the holiest Sikh shrine, 'Golden Temple' in Amritsar. These leaders believed that the Indian government would not dare send an army to a holiest place of Sikhs, because of the social consequences this might cause and also because many Indian soldiers belong religiously to the Sikh religion. But Indira Gandhi dare send the army to the holiest Sikh shrine and caused lot of death and destruction, which she ordered soon to rebuild. A few months later in 1984 her Sikh bodyguards shoot her to death.

Rajiv Gandhi was sworn in as India's Prime Minister right after his mother's assassination. His assassination was connected to the problems which existed in Sri Lanka. In Sri Lanka, the Tamils who emigrated from India to Sri Lanka demanded a separate Tamil state in north Sri Lanka. In this warfare between the two sides, Rajiv Gandhi was pressured by Tamilians in India and outside India to intervene. Rajiv Gandhi suggested diplomatic help to the Sri Lankan government, but they refused it, and so Rajiv sent the Indian navy to Sri Lanka. The Sri Lankans who did not have big navy like India agreed to the Indian army to negotiate with the Tamil rebellions in Sri Lanka. The Tamils at first accepted the Indian army with open hands, but slowly a warfare began between the Indian army and the Tamil rebellions in which many Tamilis died. In 1991 during an election campaign, Rajiv Gandhi, then in opposition, arrived in Tamil Nadu. In one of his rallies a suicide bomber exploded near him and killed him.

Even as the country celebrates the 64th anniversary of the Quit India Movement on August 9, echoes of ‘British Quit India’ and ‘Angrezon Bharat Chhodo’ can still be heard within the walls of the Benaras Hindu University and the streets of Lucknow, where the revolutions were primarily led by students.
Sixty-four years ago, students of Kanya kubj College (Now Jai Narain P.G. College) at Lucknow and the Benaras Hindu University (BHU) at Varanasi, took command of the movement. And, the students of BHU went ahead to spread the movement to all districts of Eastern UP, including Pratapgarh, Azamgarh and Basti. The documents related to the inquiries of the infamous BHU sabotage case (where students ransacked the IAF hanger, office of BHU registrar and office of Master General of Ordinance) are still preserved at the State Archives of the city.
‘‘It should be recorded that the sabotage at BHU, IAF hanger and MGO office was led by a number of students and the main accused was Priyaranjan Prasad Sinha,” reads the first inquiry report conducted by Inspector Shankar Lal of the CID, Investigation Branch, United Provinces. The six files at the State Archives, under the code RR 36, give a complete detail of the incident and the inquiry conducted by the CID. And, what it reveals is a fine example of how student power went on to spread the message of ‘Quit India’ even in the remotest parts of the state.
In 1942, after the call of ‘Quit India’ was spread throughout the country, the students of Benaras Hindu University also decided to spread the message around and tumble the tables of the British Empire. In December that year, after a series of planning meetings, a number of students, led by Priyaranjan Prasad Sinha, ex-student Rajendra Prasad, Sita Saran Srivastava and several others, not only ransacked the office of the Registrar of the university, but also the Air Force Hanger and the MGO office. ‘‘It has been found by us that explosive material was used by the students for creating panic and sabotage in these offices,” reads the inquiry report. It adds that on searching the hostel of the university, the CID officials found two revolvers, three ML, country-made pistols, three bottles of some liquid “which might have been used for making bombs” and some powder, which made it clear that the explosives were supplied to the students from outside.
‘‘We have come to know that these arms were earlier hidden at the Jain Boarding House and then, a temple. Some of the unused ones were thrown in the Ganga, which could not be found,” the inquiry officer marked. More than half a dozen students out of the 24 accused were arrested, and booked by the United Provinces CID department for recording their statement under Sect 164 of CRPC. But, the rest managed to flee to their native districts and led smaller movements. ‘‘Some of these students are absconding and we fear that they might sabotage local offices in other places in the east part of United Provinces,” recollects the inquiry report.
At Lucknow, too, places like the Rakabganj Post Office, Chowk and City station, near Wazirganj, felt the heat of the Quit India Movement. Students from KKC like RC Khare, who was one of the prime accused in City Station bomb case, were also arrested by the police. Other significant incidents in 1942 at Lucknow also included the dacoity at the Calcutta Commercial Bank, on Sriram Road on November 12, 1942, where young revolutionaries not only looted the bank, but also distributed pamplets, reading ‘Angrezon Bharat Chhodo’, to the people around. Said OP Srivastava, the assistant director of the State Archives, ‘‘These documents are a fine recollection of the fact that the torch of the Quit India Movement was led by the students at both these places.” Prabhakar Johri, the regional archives officer adds, ‘‘It was through these smaller movements through which the fire of the Quit India Movement spread to the entire state.”

India is a very vast nation geographically; it forms the meeting ground between the East and the West and hence an important destination to conduct trade with the Western nations. This point in particular, attracted many a foreign invaders to lay hands over this nation - known for her rich culture, wealth as well as tradition. India has always seen a variety of religions taking birth in different parts of the country an as a result, a natural tolerance grew for different groups following different religion types. However, as evil follows good, rifts took birth too. And one has been seeing bloodshed over matters of religious bias time and again.

India has seen a variety of rulers including Persians, Greeks, Chinese nomads, Arabs, Portuguese, British and other raiders all of whom conquered over the local Hindu kingdoms who invariably survived their depradations, living out their own sagas of conquest and collapse.

All the while, these local dynasties built upon the roots of a culture well established since the time of the first invaders, the Aryans. The discovery of India's most ancient civilization literally happened by accident. In the mid-1800's, British engineers who were busy constructing a railway line between Karachi and Punjab, found ancient, kiln-baked bricks along the path of the track. This discovery was however treated as a little more than curiosity unless archaeologists later revisited the site in the 1920's and determined that the bricks were over 5000 years old.

Close on heels came the discovery of two important cities: Harappa on the Ravi river, and Mohenjodaro on the Indus. The civilization that laid the bricks, one of the world's oldest, was known as the Indus. People belonging to this creed were highly sophisticated and had a written language. Dating back to 3000 BC, they originated in the south and moved north, building complex, mathematically-planned cities. Some of these towns were almost three miles in diameter and contained as many as 30,000 residents. These ancient municipalities had granaries, citadels, and even household toilets. In Mohenjodaro, a mile-long canal connected the city to the sea, and trading ships sailed as far as Mesopotamia. At its height, the Indus civilization extended over half a million square miles across the Indus valley river.

As far as the history of invaders is concerned, the first group to invade India were the Aryans, who came from the north in about 1500 BC. They were primarily warriors and conquerors. They brought along with them strong cultural traditions that still remain in force till date. They spoke and wrote in a language called Sanskrit, which was later used in the first documentation of the Vedas.

The Aryans lived along the Indus and imposed themselves in the class system which they changed to a caste system thus sowing the seeds of modern Indian religions. They inhabited the northern regions for about 700 years, then moved further south and east when they started developing iron tools and weapons. Eventually, they settled in the Ganges valley and built large kingdoms throughout a greater part of northern India.

It was in 500 B.C. that Persian kings Cyrus and Darius decided upon expanding their reign eastward and conquered the ever-prized Indus Valley. However, the Persian influence was marginal as compared to that of the Aryans. This happened because Persians occupied the Indian land for only a period of 150 years. Compared to the Aryans, the Persian influence was marginal.

The Greeks in turn conquered the Persians under leadership of Emperor Alexander, who swept through the country as far as the Beas River, where he defeated king Porus backed by an army of 200 elephants in 326 BC. The tireless, charismatic conqueror wanted to extend his empire even further eastward, but his own troops (undoubtedly exhausted) refused to continue.

Alexander returned home, leaving behind garrisons to keep the trade routes open. While the Persians and Greeks subdued the Indus Valley and the northwest, Aryan-based kingdoms continued developing in the East. In the 5th century BC, Siddhartha Gautama founded the religion of Buddhism, a profoundly influential work of human thought still espoused by many worldwide.

Next in line came the king known as Chandragupta who swept back through the country from Magadha (Bihar) and conquered his way well into Afghanistan. This was the beginning of one of India's greatest dynasties, the Maurya dynasty. The leadership and foresight of the great king Ashoka (268-31 BC), hrlped the Mauryan empire conquer almost the entire subcontinent, extending as far as Mysore in the south. When Ashoka conquered Orissa, however, his army shed so much blood that the repentant king gave up warfare forever and converted to Buddhism. As dedicated a missionary as a king he was, Ashoka spread Buddhism to a greater part of central Asia. His rule marked the zenith of glory of the Maurya empire, that collapsed only a century afer the death of the mighty emperor.

Things began changing a little after the demise of the Maurya dynasty when regions under the Mauryan dynasty began breaking into smaller parts belomging to different dynasties. The Greeks returned in 150 BC and conquered Punjab, and by this time Buddhism was becoming so influential that the Greek king Menander became a Buddhist himself. The local kingdoms enjoyed relative autonomy for the next few hundred years, occasionally fighting (and often losing to) invaders from the north and China, who seemed to come and go like the monsoons. Unlike the Greeks, the Romans never made it to India, preferring to expand west instead.

Chandragupta II founded the Imperial Gupta dynasty in 319 AD. He conquered the entire north and consolidated the entire area into his empire. He spread his roots in the south of India too to as far as the Vindya mountains. When the reign of the Gupta clan came to an end, a golden age of six thriving and separate kingdoms ensued, and at this juncture some of the most incredible temples in India were constructed in Bhubaneshwar, Konarak, and Khahurajo. It was time of relative stability, and cultural developments progressed on all fronts for hundreds of years, until the dawn of the Muslim era.

Arab traders started visiting the western coast ever since 712, but it wasn't until 1001 that the Muslim world began to make its impact felt. In that year, Arab armies swept down the Khyber pass and hit like a storm. Under the leadership of Mahmud of Ghazi, they raided just about every other year for 26 years. They returned home each time, leaving behind their trail in the form of some ruined cities, decimated armies, and probably a very edgy native population. Then they more or less vanished behind the mountains again for nearly 150 years, and India once again went paved way with destiny.

But the Muslims knew India was still there, waiting with all its riches. They returned in 1192 under Mohammed of Ghor, and this time they meant to stay. Ghor's armies laid waste to the Buddhist temples of Bihar, and by 1202 he had conquered the most powerful Hindu kingdoms along the Ganges. When Ghor died in 1206, one of his generals, Qutb-ud-din, ruled the far north from the Sultanate of Delhi, while the southern majority of India was free from the invaders.

Turkish kings ruled the Muslim acquisition until 1397, when the Mongols invaded under Timur Lang (Tamerlane) and ravaged the entire region. One historian wrote that the lightning speed with which Timur Lang's armies struck Delhi was prompted by their desire to escape the stench of rotting corpses they were leaving behind them. Islamic India fragmented after the brutal devastation Timur Lang left in Delhi, and it was every Muslim strongman for himself.

This however changed in 1527, when the Mughal (Persian for Mongol) monarch Babur came into power. Babur was a ruler of his kind. He hailed from Kabul and loved poetry, gardening and so on. He even wrote cultural treatises on the Hindus he conquered, and took notes on local flora and fauna. Afghan princes in India asked for his help in 1526, and he conquered the Punjab and quickly asserted his own claim over them by taking Delhi.

This sowed the roots of the Mughal dynasty, whose six emperors would comprise most influential of all the Muslim dynasties in India. Babur died in 1530, leaving behind Humayun who was absolutely unlike the father. Humayun's own son, Akbar, however, would be the greatest Mughal ruler of all. Unlike his grandfather, Akbar was more warrior than scholar, and he extended the empire as far south as the Krishna river.

Akbar had a certain level of religious tolerence and got married to a Hindu princess, thus establishing a tradition of cultural acceptance that would contribute greatly to the success of the Mughal rule. And the Mughal reign saw many a leaders change seat as time elapsed. In the year 1605, Akbar was succeeded by his son Jahangir, who passed the expanding empire along to his own son Shahjahan in 1627.

Shah Jahan left behind the colossal monuments of the Mughal empire though he spent much of his time subduing Hindu kingdoms to the south. The monuments included among others the Taj Majal (the tomb of his favorite wife), the Pearl Mosque, the Royal Mosque, and the Red Fort. Shah Jahan's campaigns in the south and his flare for extravagant architecture increased taxes thus bringing distress to his subjects. Due to the prevailing conditions, his own son imprisoned him, seeking power for himself in 1658.

Aurungzebe was very unlike his predecessors and wanted to eradicate indigenous traditions, thus, his intolerance prompted fierce local resistance. Though he expanded the empire to include nearly the entire subcontinent, he could never totally subdue the Mahrathas of the Deccan, who resisted him until his death in 1707.

In this pretext, the legendary figure of Shivaji, a symbol Hindu resistance and nationalism. Aurungzebe's three sons disputed over succession, and the Mughal empire crumbled, just as the Europeans were beginning to flex their own imperialistic muscles.

Next in turn were the Portuguese, who had traded in Goa as early as 1510, and later founded three other colonies on the west coast in Diu, Bassein, and Mangalore. In 1610, the British chased away a Portuguese naval squadron, and the East India Company created its own outpost at Surat. This small outpost marked the beginning of a remarkable presence that lasted for as long as 300 years and eventually dominated the entire subcontinent.

As the British started gaining power, they began to compete with the Portuguese, the Dutch, and the French. Through a combination of outright combat and deft alliances with local princes, the East India Company gained control of all European trade in India by 1769. A seemingly impossible task, it was done through a highly effective and organized system called the Raj.

Treaties and agreements were signed with native princes, and the Company gradually increased its role in local affairs. The Raj helped build infrastructure and trained natives for its own military, though in theory they were meant for India's own defense. In 1784, after financial scandals in the Company alarmed British politicians, the Crown assumed half-control of the Company, beginning the transfer of power to royal hands.

In 1858, a rumor spread among Hindu soldiers that the British were greasing their bullets with the fat of cows and pigs, the former sacred animals to Hindus and the latter unclean animals to Muslims. A year-long rebellion against the British ensued. Although the Indian Mutiny was unsuccessful, it prompted the British government to seize total control of all British interests in India in 1858, finally establishing a seamless imperialism.

The British Raj that entered India as traders gradually expanded their rule and grew in power so much so that the princely states of the country saw their native leaders only as nominal heads. The British had gained control of the country by viewing it as a source of profit. Infrastructure had been developed, administration established, and an entire structure of governance erected.

The British needed a heavy manpower that they sought from India. However, Indian personnel were never allowed any authority in the jobs they earned. They British wanted the reigns of power to be solely under their control. The Indians didn't appreciate this much, and as the 20th century dawned there were increasing movements towards self-rule. Along with the desire for independence, tensions between Hindus and Muslims had also been developing over the years. The Muslims had always been a minority, and the prospect of an exclusively Hindu government made them wary of independence; they were as inclined to mistrust Hindu rule as they were to resist the Raj.

Then came in 1915, Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, calling for unity between the two groups in an astonishing display of leadership that would eventually lead the country to independence. Gandhian views on non-violence, his impact on the people nationwide and his ability to gain independence through a totally non-violent mass movement made him one of the most remarkable leaders the world has ever known. He practised what he preached wearing homespun clothes to weaken the British textile industry and orchestrating a march to the sea, where demonstrators proceeded to make their own salt in protest against the British monopoly.

Indians gave him the name Mahatma, or Great Soul. The British promised that they would leave India by 1947. But independence came at great cost. While Gandhi was leading a largely Hindu movement, Mohammed Ali Jinnah was represented the Muslim group called the Muslim League. Jinnah advocated the division of India into two separate states: Muslim and Hindu, and he was able to achieve his goal. When the British left, they created the separate states of Pakistan and Bangladesh, and violence erupted when stranded Muslims and Hindu minorities in the areas fled in opposite directions. It took only a a few weeks, to kill as many as in the course of the greatest migration of human beings ever in the history of this world.

At that point of time, Gandhiji was ageing and as he couldn't see innocent lives being lost for a wrong cause he vowed to fast until the violence stopped; it did when his health faced serious threat. At the same time, the British returned and helped restore order. Excepting Kashmir, which is still a disputed area (and currently unsafe for tourists), the division reached stability.

India's history since independence has been marked by disunity and intermittent periods of virtual chaos. In 1948, on the eve of independence, Gandhi was assassinated by a Hindu fanaticand Jawarhalal Nehru, became the first Prime Minister of free India. After Nehru, India has seen the leadership of many a leaders, some powerful, some subtle, and so on.

The White tribes that invaded India and disrupted Black civilization there are known as Aryans. The Aryans were not necessarily superior warriors to the Blacks but they were aggesssive, developed sophisticated military technologies and glorified military virtues. After hundreds of years of intense martial conflict the Aryans succeeded in subjugating most of northern India. Throughout the vanquished territories a rigid, caste-segmented social order was established with the masses of conquered Blacks (called Shudras) essentially reduced to slaves to the Whites and imposed upon for service in any capacity required by their White conquerors. This vicious new world order was cold-bloodely racist, with the Whites on top, the mixed races in the middle, and the overwhelming majority of Black people on the very bottom. In fact, the Aryan term varna, denoting one's societal status and used interchangeably with caste, literally means color or complexion and reflects a prevalent racial hierarchy. Truly, India is still a racist country. White supremacist David Duke claimed "that his 1970's visit to India was a turning point in his views on the superiority of the White race."

Caste law in India, based originally on race, regulated all aspects of life, including marriage, diet, education, place of residence and occupation. This is not to deny that there were certain elements of the Black aristocracy that managed to gain prominence in the dominant White social structure. The masses of conquered Black people, however, were regarded by the Whites as Untruth itself. The Whites claimed to have emerged from the mouth of God; the Blacks, on the other hand, were said:

Servitude to Whites became the basis of the lives of the Black people of India for generation after generation after generation. With the passage of time, this brutally harsh, color-oriented, racially-based caste system became the foundation of the religion that is now practiced throughout all India. This is the religion known as Hinduism.

The greatest victims of Hinduism have been the Untouchables. Indeed, probably the most substantial percentage of all the Black people of Asia can be identified among India's 160 Untouchables. These people are the long-suffering descendants of Aryan-Sudra unions and native Black populations who retreated into the hinterlands of India in their efforts to escape the advancing Aryan sphere of influence to which they ultimately succumbed. India's Untouchables number more than the combined populations of England, France, Belgium and Spain.

The existence of Untouchability has been justified within the context of Hindu religious thought as the ultimate and logical extensions of Karma and rebirth. Indus believe that persons are born Untouchables because of the accumulation of sins in previous lives. Hindu texts describe these people as foul and loathsome, and any physical contact with them was regarded as polluting.

The basis status of India's Untouchables has changed littled since ancient times, and it has recently been observed that "Caste Hindus donot allow Untouchables to wear shoes, ride bicycles, use umbrellas or hold their heads up while walking in the street." Untouchables in urban India are crowded together in squalid slums, while in rural India, where the vast majority of Untouchables live, they are exploited as landless agricultural laborers and ruled by terror and intimidation. As evidence of this, several cases from 1991 can be cited: On June 23, 1991 fourteen Untouchables were slaughtered in the estern state of Bihar. On August 10, 1991 six Untouchables were shot to death in the northern state of Uttar Pradesh. On August 16, 1991, an Untouchable woman was stripped in public and savagely beaten in the southern state of Andra Pradesh. On September 6, 1991, in the western state of Maharastra, an Untouchable policeman was killed for entering a Hindu temple. Official Indian figures on violent crimes by caste Hindus against Untouchables have averaged more than 10,000 cases per year, with the figures continuing to rise. The Indian government listed 14,269 cases of atrocities by caste Hindus against Untouchables in 1989 alone. However, Indian human rights workers report that a large number of atrocities against Untouchables, including beatings, gang-rapes, arson and murders, are never recorded. Even when charges are formally filed, justice for Untouchables is rarely dispensed.

Possibly the most substantial percentage of Asia's Blacks can be identified among India's 160 million "Untouchables" or "Dalits." Frequently they are called "Outcastes." Indian nationalist leader and devout Hindu Mohandas K. Gandhi called them "Harijans," meaning "children of god." The official name given them in India's constitution (1951) is "Scheduled Castes." "Dalit," meaning "crushed and broken," is a name that has come into prominence only within the last four decades. "Dalit" reflects a radically different response to oppression.

Mahfooz Ali.

Post independence India has had to deal head-on with nationalist expression based on regions, states, linguistic groups and ethnic, racial origins. The Assam guerilla movement led by the ULFA, and the Punjab Khalistan movement of the 1980s represent the more violent end of the spectrum. The rise of ethnic nationalistic sentiments took place as peoples of various regions, linguistic groups and racial origins sought to discover their place within the wider expression of Indian national consciousness. Some states like Assam deplored the fact that the revenue obtained from the export of tea grown in Assam ended up benefiting other states more than it did the Assamese people, and that it received lesser proportion of Government aid than did larger, more populated states. Assam and neighboring states were also angered by the Chinese incursion into their territory in 1962, which the Indian army failed to prevent, giving rise to a sense of insecurity, and a notion that India would not expend resources to protect its farther, northeastern constituent parts.Similarly, Tamil linguistic nationalism arose after politicians began pushing for Hindi to be adopted as the national language. Many Tamils felt that Tamil, one of the oldest languages of India and with a rich tradition of literature of its own, would be demoted into a second-level tongue and be pushed into extinction by making of Hindi as the lingua franca of India. Many non-Hindi speaking states have resented the adoption of Hindi, and regional languages are thus given official status for the respective state governments.But ethnic nationalism also ranges all the way back to 3000 BC, when the Indus Valley Civilization flourished in western India, and the Indo-Aryans first introduced themselves to the subcontinent. It is postulated that the early Indo-Aryans saw the indigenous people as un-Arya and uncivilized at times, and segregated themselves at times. It is even today a matter of debate whether it is true that the Aryans invaded India, as per the widely-debated Aryan Invasion Theory, or if they were actually indigenous peoples of India. The latter possibility is actively championed by Hindu nationalists in politics, seeking to amend the history curriculum in state-sponsored textbooks. At the same time, many Dravidian and Dalit politicians describe the Aryans as foreign and racist, and equate possible Aryan wars with indigenous peoples as ethnic cleansing. The conflict of modern day Indo-Aryans with the darker-skinned, South-based Dravidian peoples, although more subtle and less important to many, still plays an interesting and indirect role in the progress and problems of India. However this division of "Aryans" and "Dravidians" is played up only by corrupt politicians and few colonial-era historians of today. It has been accepted by many scholars (including Max Muller) that this theory is nonsensical.

Authored By:- Mahfooz Ali

A recent circular of Government of India to keep watch on the anti-national activities of madrassas raised many eyebrows in the country. But if we look back to the historical developments of madrasa in India this Islamic system of education has all along been playing  a prominent role in keeping the movement of Muslim separatism alive in this country.  The British also suspected them.  Contrary to it the Post-colonial India  for reason best known gave special constitutional privilege for the autonomy of madrasas.  But the manner in which the madrasas  promote medieval attitude among the Indian Muslims at the cost of secular education needs to be checked.  Infact, orthodoxy, religious conservatism and obsession to medieval identity remained the main focus of Madrasa education in India.  Being the lifeline of Muslim society madrasa is the real foundation of Muslim education in India. But in absence of clarity of vision about the present day economic and social needs of Indian Muslims, madrasa managers failed to playa  positive role in the scheme of their education and preferred to keep the community subjugated under medieval psyche for their vested political interests.  "Madrasa is an institution of learning, where Islamic sciences including literary and philosophical ones are taught" (Encyclopaedia of Islam - Leiden E.J.Brill). Avowed aim of madrasa education is to inculcate the belief and practice of Islam among its followers and guide them to follow Kuran and traditions of the Prophet.  The foundation of Madrasa education is therefore, basically standing on two pillars of Quran (Collection of God's revelations to Prophet Mohammad) and Sunna (Tradition of Prophet Mohammad).   The history of madrasa, dates back to the establishment of Delhi Sultanate in 1206 A.D. Initially its principal function was to train personnel for government service (Encyclopaedia of Islam) and accordingly curriculum was formulated to cater the administrative needs of Muslim rulers. Gradually with the patronage of these rulers it was extended to different parts of north India. The claim of some Muslim thinkers that religious, rational and natural sciences were also introduced in the curriculum of madrasa in India to meet the educational need of the time appears to be a myth.  "Science flourished in the Golden Age of Islam because there was within Islam strong rationalist tradition, carried out by a group of Muslim thinkers known as Mutazilites" (Parvez Hoodbhoy quoted in 'The Secularist' in its issue no.191 September-October 2002). This tradition however, collapsed by the 14^th century and the Muslim World was "choked in the vice-like grip of orthodoxy" (Ibid).   The organisation of madrasa in India and its working all along remained religion-centric. Subjects related to Islam continually dominated its curriculum in India ever since its inception. While carrying forward the legacy of Perso-Arabic educational thought Indian madrasa steadily propagated the conservative outlook and attitude of a larger section of Indian Muslims.  Madrasa organisers in India never thought of how far its curriculum would be relevant in  the changing environment. Greater importance on theological aspect of Islam in curriculum of Muslim education largely ignored the rational sciences. The religion-based education in these institutions gave birth to bigotry and became a major source of tension in Indian society. There might have been strong rationalist tradition of Islamic education as claimed by Muslim educationists,  but the madrasas in India failed to keep pace with the fast changing modern social and educational environment. With the disintegration of Muslim rule particularly after the advent of British, madrasa education gradually lost its shine it had during Muslim rule. It received a major set back and suffered further reversal with the introduction of modern education.  Madrasa teachers therefore, became restive and developed a more rigid attitude towards religion-centric education for Muslims. The historic participation of madrasa leaders in 1857 revolt against British regime proved that the main objective of traditional Islamic education was to attune the Indian Muslims with aspiration for regaining of political power.  With Ulema playing significant role in the revolt, the British started suspecting madrasas as possible centres of disaffection.  After the failure of 1857revolt Muslim Ulama feared that the Muslim mode of life may got diluted due to western education introduced by British. Their immediate need was to keep a check on the possibility of their community moving towards modern education and ensure to carry forward the Persho-Arab legacy, which was possible only through madrasa education. They launched madrasa movement by establishing an Islamic seminary known as Darul Uloom at Deoband in 1866 with a view to educate Indian Muslims with Islamic system of education.  By the close of nineteenth century madrasas like Farangi Mahal (Lucknow), Dar-al-Ulum (Deoband) and Nadwat-al-Ulama ( Lucknow) emerged as vibrant symbols for Muslim separatist movement in India.  Contrary to Deoband movement Sir Syed Ahmad a British loyalist launched Aligarh movement and "established Madrastul Ulum  at Aligarh in 1873 for imparting education in modern branches of learning, which later became Mohammadan Anglo Oriental College and then Aligarh Muslim University" (Education and Muslims in India since Independence edited by A.W.B.Qadri and others, 1998, page81). Being more realistic he tried to inspire Muslim society towards modern education. "Sayed Ahmad Khan founder of Aligarh Muslim University, found the madrasa sylabus unsuited to the present age and to the spirit of time. He criticised it for encouraging memorising rather than real understanding. The scholar Fazlur Rahman, commented: "By organically relating all forms of knowledge and gearing these to dogmatic theology the very sources of intellectual fecundity were blighted and possibility of original thinking stifled" (Mushirul Hasan in Hindu dated May 21, 2003). Even though both the institutions were anti-thesis of each other, their main objective was to retain the movement of Muslim separatism alive.   With a view to fashioning the education policy exclusively for Indian Muslims, Sir Syed Ahmad formed All India Muslim Educational Conference in 1886. It was in fact a part of Aligarh movement.  Its basic aim was to fashion the education policy for Indian Muslims and encourage them towards the mainstream of western education.  Even today it continues to haunt the community with the ghost of alleged Hindu-biased education in government schools.  This attitude of social exclusivism worked as catalyst in fostering Muslim communal consciousness and caused a major damage to Hindu-Muslim unity in the Indian sub-continent. Later it gave birth to two-nation theory. "Arguably, its contribution to ultimate partition of India, although not greatly evident on the surface of affairs, was not much less great than that of its most famous child, the All India Muslim League" (All India Muslim Eucational Conference by Abdul Rasid Khan, 2001, page 251). This shows that a reformist like Sir Syed Ahmad had no vision for India in which both the Hindus and Muslims could have a common education.   Deriving inspiration from both Deoband and Aligarh, other prominent Islamic seminaries like Nadwatul Ulama and Jamia Millia were later established in Lucknow and Delhi respectively. Nadwa introduced rational sciences and working knowledge of English in its courses of study but its over emphasis on Arabic literature and Islamic History did not bring the desired result for its products in job market.  Jamia Millia tried to combine Deoband and Aligarh in its educational thought but its religious character and obsession to Urdu language as medium of instruction remained a major obstacle for its recognition as a symbol of modern education.   Due to deep-rooted medieval attitude in the minds of Indian Muslims, these Islamic institutions also failed to transform the mindset of their students so that they could think independently for developing a critical perspective and analysing the life in a more meaningful manner suited to contemporary global environment.  Accordingly Nadwa also remained as conservative as Deoband.  Jamia however, accepted modern education to a considerable extent but its obsession to Urdu as medium of instruction could not bring its students at par with other modern educational institutions in the country as far as their job opportunity is concerned.   Though a section of Muslim thinkers supported the Aligarh Movement launched by Sir Syed Ahmad as a positive response to western education, the largest majority of Muslim mass supported Deoband movement, which  favoured Islam centic education. They strongly opposed the Aligarh movement launched by Sir Sayed Ahmad, who tried to inculcate modern and scientific education. With main objective to propagate Islam, madrasas in India formulated socio-political agenda on Perso-Arabic traditions with a view to keep off the Muslim community from the contemporary modern and scientific world.  Even the contemporary rationalist Muslim thinkers, who talk about Islamic modernism have hardly overcome their medieval attitude of intellectual subjugation. They have in fact ignored the real problem that how far madrasa education would be relevant in contemporary social advancement of the country. Factually, there is hardly any difference between madrasa education and modern education imparted by Muslim institutions like Aligarh Muslim University as far as the medieval attitude of their students is concerned. Madrasa education, which is basically for propagation of Islam therefore, always remained an inspiration for modern Muslim educational institutions.  Indian Muslims continue to be obsessed to madrasa education and its Perso-Arab legacy as a result it is difficult for them to admit that sound and fruitful knowledge also exists in any other languages than Arabic and Persian. They cannot think of any knowledge that is not stored in Islamic literatures. Carrying forward the legacy of Perso-Arabic system of education and treating them as Indo-Muslim cultural heritage the madrasas in India played vital role in propogating the ideology of two-nation theory. Partition of the country put similar stigma on madrasas in free India because the largest majority of Muslims in British India were in favour of partition on the basis of two-nation theory.   After partition the largest section of educated Muslims migrated to Pakistan.  But those who stayed back passed through a state of frustration due their apprehension of likely set back in their movement of Muslim separatism. The future of madrasa education in Hindu dominated secular and democratic Indian polity became an issue of primary concern for them. Their leaders in post-colonial India gave them the wrong impression about alleged Hindu-biased education.  In stead of joining hands with Hindus in national reconstruction programmes, Indian Muslims therefore, took up the problem of their separate identity as primary concern and failed to avail the equal opportunity provided to all the Indian citizens under constitution.  Despite the rising tide of anguish of Hindus against the Muslims after partition, Indian leadership gave constitutional protection to Muslims for managing their educational institutions.  Despite this some who stayed back in India sensed a danger to their cultural identity. Taking advantage of Indian constitution providing the minorities special privilege for establishing their educational institutions, there was a spurt in expansion of madrasa education in India.  Accordingly Qazi Mohammad Abdul Abbasi, a senior Congress leader with the support of madrasa leaders organised Deeni Talimi Council in Uttar Pradesh in December 1959 with a view to establish maqtab (Primary school) for imparting the fundamentals of Islam to every Muslim student at primary level.  The council was formed "to fight against what was perceived as Hindu-based education being imparted in various government schools" (Madrasa Education in India - Kuldip Kaur, 1990, page 203).  Abbasi while addressing the Deeni Council in Banaras in 1960 said: "I am of the opinion that we must not seek any government help for this Deeni Talimi Council and must not associate ourselves with the educational department of the government" (Ibid, page 204). Poor response of Muslims to government schools was due to their notion that the education imparted in these schools was against the tradition of Islam. Managers of madrasas while remaining  inflexible  maintaining Islamic traditions and culture, never gave any thought to job opportunities to the products of madrasa education. Even Islamic institutions like Deoband and Nadwa, which had maintained strategic opposition to partition of the country hardly, made any change in their courses of study and method of teaching even after Independence. They have produced thousands of graduates and established a large number of Madrasas over the years but did not provide them an opportunity for the material progress of their products. They are therefore, equally responsible for the material plight of the Indian Muslims and for their economic, social and educational backwardness as we see today. Contrary to the secular education system formulated in India after Independence madrasas were promoted as major obstacles for Indian Muslims in taking the benefit of utilitarian concept of education, which is basically for the material progress of Indian society. They inculcated among Indian Muslims  an obsession to education in purely Islamic environment, which kept them off from government schools. Thus, growth of maqtab and madrasas in different parts of the country also served as nucleus for sustaining a full-fledged movement  in retaining a separate Muslim identity. "Today there are lakhs of Madrasas spread all over the country" (Indian Muslims by Maulana Wahiduddin Khan, page 88) which however, could not enlighten Indian Muslims to develop a positive outlook."  Though, a section of Muslim elite entered into the field of modern education, they could not inspire the common Muslims, who remained under the subjugation of the fundamentalists within the community. They are still obsessed to Islamic interpretation of education by conservative Muslims. "The ultimate aim of Muslim education lies in the realisation of complete submission to Allah on the level of the individual, the community and humanity at large" (New Horizons in Muslim Education by S.A.Asraf, 1985, page 4).  One can understand the reaction of Indian Muslims against Western system of education introduced by British after the collapse of Muslim rule in India because they were deprived of political power. But after Independence if the Muslims who stayed back in India voluntarily remained obsessed to their traditional Islamic education system, they cannot blame anyone except their own leadership for their educational backwardness. If they still enjoy remaining under the subjugation of radical Islamists no one can stop them from slipping rapidly down the educational and economic scale.  ConclusionWhether Madrasa education has led to the decline of educational or economic position of Indian Muslims in present environment may be a debatable issue, but that its Islam-centic teaching is not friendly to the job market in the contemporary world is the ground reality. In the absence of modern knowledge the graduates produced by madrasas are neither able to improve their own material prosperity nor they provide leadership to the Muslim community to face the challenge of modern world. Their job opportunity is restricted to mosques and madrasas.  Even for higher Islamic studies the degrees awarded by madrasas are not recognised by Indian universities except in the theological department of Aligarh Muslim University and Jamia Millia. Similarly such degrees are not recognised for administrative jobs in the government.  Since these degrees are not market friendly, they do not have any practical value.   Without any concern for the material progress of Indian Muslims madrsas are only producing Islamic zealots so that they could remain loyal to Islam and to the political interest of Muslim community.  Emphasis on Islamic education at the cost of secular education is detrimental to national interest. In view of the on going changes in the social, cultural, economic, and political environment drastic change is requied in madrasa system of education so that Indian Muslims could come to terms with the changing needs of contemporary Indian society. The Feeling among the Indian Muslims that government and public schools are loaded with learning related to Hindu culture is to be changed so that Muslim parents could send their children in those schools without hesitation. But the Muslim leaders and thinkers except a couple of exceptions are so much bogged  down with the political problems of their community that they are not found assertive on their modern educational problem, which is the real issue.   A section of Muslim thinkers are in favour of modernisation of madrasa education and transforming them according to the present day need.  But they hardly the oppose the of radical Islamists, who suggest that " in stead of turning Islamic madrasas into English or modern institutions, the modern educational institutions be made Muslim" (Education and Muslims in India since Independence - Edited by A.W.B.Qadri, 1998, page85).   Memorisation of Islamic scriptures without any rational understanding befitting to the contemporary cultural and social environment may not serve the real purpose of education. Concerned with the economic backwardness of their community Muslim rationalists might have a genuine desire to the free the community from the academic bondage of madrasa education but the task is very difficult due to the firm grip of fundamentalist forces over the community. It is a fact that Indian madrasas have produced a number of world famous Islamic scholars, but lakhs of Muslim educated from theses madrasas are deprived of the job opportunities because of their ignorance of modern knowledge.   Madrasa managers might have their own arguments in support of their theological command but keeping off the Muslims with the realities of contemporary world has caused immense harm to the community as far as its economic development is concerned. Curriculum of madrasa ignored the sociology of religion and did not allow any independent thinking on the plea that Islam is a comprehensive, perfect and complete way of life for all the times.  In absence of the clarity of  vision about the contemporary social environment in India madrasa education failed to secularise the behaviour of the Muslim society with social enlightenment.  Madrasa system of edcation was basically meant for preparing the people for Islamic way of life and Islamisation of all the branches of knowledge even though contemporary world does not accept it as sole criteria of education. Theological education, which is a specialised subject, needs segregation from the education for the contemporary worldly need.  But ironically, Indian Muslims are not ready to accept it because their orthodox religious obsession and fear of losing cultural identity pushed them to isolation. Educational backwardness of Indian Muslims is a national problem.  But so long they do not respond to the remedial measures it is difficult to be resolved.  The Country should  be ready for their rescue provided they come forward and make a conscious endeavour to transform their madrasas into modern educational institutions with Islamic subjects as optional courses.

MahfooZ Ali.  

The year 1947, saw the bloody partition of a country under the British Empire into two fragments. One based itself on the two nation theory; the other claimed its roots to prehistoric times. While much of India’s history lay in the harrapa & mohenjadaro, the pride of Pakistanis, i.e the Moghul identity lay much undisturbed in India.

Riots were happening in an unprecedented scale, much due to Mohammed Ali Jinnahs call for "direct action" for a separate nation. Some people argue, Mohammed Ali Jinnah had history to back up his claims for the theory of two nations. I ask what history?

The history of Mohammed’s of Ghor and Ghazni who plundered and ransacked along the areas what today is called Pakistan? Would history call them any better than bandits of a higher order?

Today, we see how easily the two nation theory failed to create a national spirit amongst them Pakistanis. Bangladesh stands witness to that.

India, on the other hand has managed to survive and preserve its secular identity. Ironies exist even today. A nation created for the Muslims has less Muslims than the parent nation from which it was separated.

Four wars, nuclear weapons and much development hindrances have been the result of the two nation theory and Pakistanis attitude to apply the same theory on Kashmir.

Does it stand today? How much of claimed Pakistani identity is true?
What exactly is the identity?

Where actually does Pakistan’s identity and history start? Harrapa and Mohenjadaro? Mahfooz Ali (Bureau Chief) The Hi Time Express.

The Great Revolt that started at Barrackpur under the leadership of a brave soldier Mangal Pandey on 29 March 1857 soon spread to Meerut, Bengal, Delhi and other parts of India. The present discussion goes beyond the military assumption of the revolt and will demonstrate why and how poppy farmers were involved in the uprising.
A great deal of pervasive history has been written about this revolt and its suppression during the last one and half centuries. The colonialist writers traditionally maintained it as 'Sepoy Mutiny' in order to undermine the gravity of the events. The story maintained by the colonialist writers about the refusal of soldiers to use cartridges mixed with objectionable animal fat reflects only the tip of the iceberg. Ralph Moore suggested, however, that the annexation of Oudh in August 1856 was 'the blackest crime' that England had ever committed and was the 'immediate cause' of the uprising of 1857. By contrast, Karl Marx and Frederick Engel’s in their work, The First Indian War of Independence 1857-1859, portrayed the ferocity of the revolt against contemporary British colonialism.
There is also a religious perception that would attach the Muslim community with the revolt. W.W. Hunter in his book, The Indian Musalmans, explained in detail how the loss of economic positions and privileges under colonial rule especially frustrated the Muslims of India and forced them to take part in such a great uprising. In line with Hunter it is widely maintained by religious scholars that the uprising was generally led by Bengal soldiers; coupled with Muslim peasantry in order to confront the British colonial rulers and the Hindu zamindars. For Muslims, it was an attempt to bring back the last Mughal Emperor Bahadur Shah Zafar to power. Long-term economic exploitation and deprivation by the British-zamindars - bhadralok axis stirred up Muslim discontent to revolt. It is also maintained by some that missionary activities and their patronization by colonial state angered the local Muslims during the revolt.
I maintained in my book Drugs in South Asia: from the opium trade to the present day (Houndsmill: Macmillan Press Ltd. & New York: St. Martin's Press, 2000) that along with the soldiers the oppressed poppy farmers in Bengal and northern India took part in a big way in the popular uprising of 1857. After nearly a century of British rule, the peasantry devastated by frequent famines and crushed by new economic burdens under the Bengal Opium Monopoly of 1773 and the Permanent Settlement of 1793, eventuallybecame desperate to stage the great revolt of 1857.
The colonial authorities initiated the Bengal Government Opium Monopoly in 1763 and the land under poppy cultivation reached 303,500 hectares in 1767. By the mid 1850s, the total area engaged under the Bengal opium monopoly (i.e., Bihar Agency) was about 3.1 million hectares (120,000 square miles), while in Benares Agency (northern India including the U.P.) it was about 2.6 million hectares (100,000 square miles). The total area engaged in poppy cultivation in northern India was gradually increasing to match the Bihar agency. Large-scale conversion of fertile paddy fields into poppy cultivation had contributed to the famine in Bengal in 1770 and caused the death of 10 million people in an area that had been traditionally known as 'Golden Bengal' due to its abundance in food production. Famines visited frequently in various parts of the Bengal Presidency during the subsequent years.
At the inception of the opium monopoly, between the early 1770s and 1800s, the BEIC authorities ignored the pains and sufferings of the poppy growers. Contractors forced thefarmers 'to increase their poppy cultivation beyond their means and conveniences' after paying a high price to the colonial authorities. Immediately before the uprising, the number of toiling poppy cultivators reached 1.25 million. Adam Smith indicated that Company officials, in certain cases, forced unwilling farmers to accept advance money to grow poppies in their paddy fields instead of other crops. The government also imposed strict regulations on poppy cultivation and urged poppy farmers to 'refund threefold' the advances for any land, which they did not cultivate according to their undertaking.
In 1777, the Bengal Revenue Consultations reported 'forcible destruction of grain crops in Bihar to make room for poppy had been received in Calcutta'. The intimidation of the farmers by the official authorities was also recorded and criticized by the leading contemporary economist Adam Smith, who wrote: 'A rich field of rice or other grain has been ploughed up, in order to make room for a plantation of poppies; when the chief foresaw that extraordinary profit was likely to be made by opium'. Once a farmer started poppy cultivation, invariably he had to continue production year after year. Considering the crop unprofitable, the farmers were less than enthusiastic about growing poppies and neglected to water them. Reports of Collectors in 1788 noted: 'The opium ryots are not at liberty to relinquish the cultivation of the poppy. If any regulation was to take place declaring them at liberty to cultivate the opium or not … they would all quit the opium cultivation'.
Poppy farmers often suffered and were frustrated by the arbitrary role of the middlemen and ransom taken by the field officers, because every cultivator was bound to sell the whole of his produce to the Opium Departments, at a rate fixed by the government. Under the Regulation of 1816, police and excise officers were authorized to take action against the zamindars’ and other landed aristocrats if there was any connection found that they had encouraged any clandestine cultivation of poppy and illicit sale of opium.

To bring about a change in the government opium policy, there was a growing body of public opinion in India that the government should abolish the system of opium monopoly altogether. The British Indian Association, in a petition to the House of Commons in 1853, urged: 'Justice requires that the interference of the Government with the cultivation should cease'. This appeal, for the emancipation of poppy farmers from forced cultivation of opium poppies, was unsuccessful. The greediness of the contractors led to conflict with zamindars or headmen (chaudhuries), who with interests in alternative crops, opposed poppy cultivation in their areas. To prevent local zamindars from interfering in poppy cultivation, the contractors used the influence of State power. The culmination of a long-term conflict between the local zamindars and the promoters of poppy cultivation helped to provoke rural people into joining hands against the colonial authorities in 1857.
In May 1857, the Indian army at Meerut revolted. The revolt had been secretly organized but turned into a premature outburst and upset the plans of the leaders. It was much more than a 'military mutiny'. Spreading rapidly, it assumed the character of a rebellion and a war of independence. Karl Marx and Frederick Engel’s related in detail in contemporary British newspapers the events consequent upon the revolt in different parts of India. The most vulnerable areas were Oudh, Rohilkhand, Doab, Meerut, Bengal, Bihar, Benares, Gujarat, Bombay and Allahabad, where the rural population extensively took part with the urban people in the uprising. The war was deadly in Oudh, where over 100,000 civilian armed men joined in the uprising.
William Forbes-Mitchell, a British sergeant, who took part in the suppression of the rebellion in UP, maintained in his memoirs, Reminiscences of the Great Mutiny 1857-59 (London: Macmillan and Co., 1893), that the introduction of forced poppy cultivation sparked mass rebellion in the region. Mass uprisings were more serious in the poppy growing areas of northern India, while people in the south generally aided the colonial government. The revolt created serious tension throughout Bangladesh and the resistance in Chittagong and Dhaka and skirmishes at Sylhet, Jessore, Rangpur, Pabna and Dinajpur left the British government in a state of red alert and apprehension in the Presidency.
Despite the wider participation of the mass people with the revolt, for some obvious reasons it was doomed to fail. The role and reaction of the local zamindars were decidedly opposed to the revolting soldiers and their sympathizers, and some of them even collaborated by providing logistic support to the company authorities through supplying carts, carriages and elephants; and informing on the movements of the fleeing soldiers. They organized local volunteer corps to resist the soldiers and militants. The government reciprocated subsequently by awarding them titles of Nawab, Khan Bahadur, Khan Sahib, Rai Bahadur, Rai Sahib, etc., and rewarded them with financial gains.
An absence of central planning and dynamic leadership was responsible for the failure of the revolt. Bahadur Shah Zafar was too old to give leadership to such an uprising. During the revolt, a leader like Sir Syed Ahmed Khan took the line of collaboration and compromise with colonial rulers. Lack of trust and unity among the major communities was equally responsible for the failure of the uprising. In most cases Hindu zamindars, landed aristocrats, 'bhadraloks' and businessmen aided the colonial government by men and material to suppress the revolt. Financial weaknesses of the revolutionaries were among other weak points of the revolt. Use of modern weapons by the British provided strategic advantage to suppress the rebellion. Conspirators who joined the revolutionaries in disguise also sabotaged the plans and programs of the militants.
In summing up, we can argue that the revolt had a popular support base within society and was not just staged by the soldiers alone. Many ulema and down-trodden peasants joined hands with the revolutionary army.
With the failure of the uprising Emperor Bahadur Shah Zafar was deposed and imprisoned, his sons and many others had begun in Delhi in 1204 AD. Although it was generally a Muslim outburst, both Hindus and Muslims took part in the uprising. The revolt also became the benchmark of the end of BEIC rule and the imposition of directCrown rule instead. With this, Jawaharlal Nehru maintains in The Discovery of India, 'India becomes for the first time a political and economic appendage of another country'.

Mahfooz Ali.        

During the Revolt of 1857 the Hindus and Muslims had unity and fought together for the welfare of the country. The British government realized that the unity of the Hindus and Muslims was posing a serious threat and therefore the best thing would be to create a wall between the two communities. Thus, they adopted the "Divide and Rule" that completely destroyed the relationship. So much so that the unrest between the two communities has still not been resolved. As the Muslims had taken a prominent role in the Revolt, they were deprived of patronage in education, business and services and Hindus were given preferential treatment. At a later stage the Policy was reversed. The British used this disharmony to their advantage and widened the gulf between the two major communities. It was on this ground that India had to be partitioned on the event of her independence in 1947.

The maker of phrases survives the maker of things in history. "There is nothing so swiftly forgotten," says Gore Vidal, "as the public's memory of a good action. This is why great men insist on putting up monuments to themselves with their deeds carefully recorded since those they served will not honour them in life or in death. Heroes must see to their own fame. No one else will."

A British historian of south Asia noticed how differently those who supported the movement for Pakistan have come to be remembered as compared with those who devoted themselves to Indian nationalism. Mohammad Iqbal's tomb of sandstone, lapis lazuli and white marble is a place of pilgrimage. Mohammed Ali Jinnah's mazar is a symbol of Pakistan's identity and one of the first places to which the visitor to Karachi is taken.

Maulana Abul Kalam Azad's mausoleum before the Jama Masjid in Delhi, on the other hand, is not greatly frequented. The relative neglect of his tomb suggests that many Indian Muslims may have lost interest in keeping his memory alive. It also suggests that Indian society as a whole may no longer value, as before, and perhaps may not even know the principles for which he stood.

It is not at all surprising why history books in Pakistan make no mention of Azad, except to echo the Quaid-i-Azam's view that he was a Muslim "show-boy" Congress president. What is surprising is how a man of Azad's stature has been submerged beneath the rationalisation of the victors -- the founders of Pakistan -- in our own country. This is the man whom Jawaharlal Nehru called "a very brave and gallant gentleman, a finished product of the culture that, in these days, pertains to few".

Azad was the Mir-i- Karawan (the caravan leader), said Nehru. That he wasn't. Though not detached from the humdrum of political life, he was not cut out to be an efficient political manager. He was comfortable being a biographer rather than a leader of a movement. He was not somebody who traversed the dusty political terrain to stir the masses into activism. That is why he settled for Gandhi's leadership, acted as one of his lieutenants during the Civil Disobedience Movement in 1930-32, and steered the Congress ship through the high tide of the inter-War years.

He spent years in jail, where some of his prison colleagues thought of him as an "extraordinarily interesting companion", with "an astonishing memory" and encyclopaedic information. More importantly, a point is that the Maulana embodied in his position and person perhaps the most important symbol of the Congress aspiration to be a nationalist party. His status was thus the focal point of Gandhi's clash with Jinnah, who maintained that politically no one but a Muslim Leaguer could represent Muslim interests.

Sardar Patel, the hero of the Bardoli satyagraha and the home minister who carried the princely states to the burning ghat of oblivion, spoke and acted from the lofty heights of majoritarianism. Azad, caught up in the crossfire of Hindu and Muslim communalists, did not occupy the same vantage point. He had to play his innings on a sticky turf in rough weather. On occasions, his own party colleagues thwarted his initiatives and turned him into just a titular Congress head during, for example, the vital negotiations with both the Cripps and the Cabinet missions.

The strident Muslim Leaguers, on the other hand, decried him as a 'renegade'. Yet this elder statesman, sitting silently and impassively at Congress meetings, as he always did, with his pointed beard, remained, until the end, consistent in his loyalty to a unified Indian nation. Time and time again, he repudiated Jinnah's two-nations theory. He reaffirmed: "It is one of the greatest frauds on the people to suggest that religious affinity can unite areas which are geographically, economically, linguistically and culturally different." With an insight rare for those from his background, he pointed out that the real problems of the country were economic, not communal. The differences related to classes, not to communities.

Essentially a thinker and the chief exponent of Wahdat-i-deen or the essential oneness of all religions, Azad played around with a variety of ideas on religion, state and civil society. Thoughtful and reflective, he had a mind like a razor, which cut through a fog of ideas (Nehru). Lesser men during his days found conflict in the rich variety of Indian life. But he was big enough not only to see the essential unity behind all that diversity but also to realise that only in unity was there hope for India as a whole. He was a man on the move, his eyes set on India's future which was to be fashioned on the basis of existing cross-community networks. His unfinished Tarjuman-al-Quran was easily the most profound statement on multiculturalism and inter-faith understanding. His political testament, delivered at the Congress session in 1940, was a neat and powerful summation of the ideology of secular nationalism:

"I am proud of being an Indian. I am part of the indivisible unity that is Indian nationality. I am indispensable to this noble edifice and without me this splendid structure is incomplete. I am an essential element, which has gone to build India. I can never surrender this claim."

To a region that has experienced the trauma of Partition the life of Azad shows how during the freedom struggle there were Muslims who worked for the highest secular ideals. To a region beset by religious intolerance the life of Azad reveals how the finest religious sensibility can fashion the most open and humane outlook in private and public life.

"Chalo aao tum ko dikhaain hum jo bacha hai maqtal-i-shehr mein Yeh mazaar ah-i safa ke hain yeh hain ahl-i sidq ki turbatein

(Come along, I will show you what remains in the city's slaughterhouse, These are the shrines of the pious, and here the graves of those with honesty and conviction).”

," Subhas Chandra Bose wrote to his mother when he was only 15, "is God's beloved land." Thirty- three years later, towards the end of his life, he told fellow-Indians: "Never for a moment falter in your faith in India's destiny. There is no power on earth that can keep India enslaved. India shall be free and before long."Subhas' "discovery of India", unlike Jawaharlal Nehru's, occurred very early in life. Born in 1897, he was deeply influenced by the intellectual and cultural milieu of Bengal at the turn of the century. In school and college, he was a pure humanitarian, social reformer and, eventually, a political activist. By the time he graduated from Calcutta University, studied philosophy in Cambridge and qualified for the Indian Civil Service, his sense of mission was not in doubt. Subsequently he resigned from the ICS as he did not want to wear "the emblem of servitude".Subhas' acceptance of Chittaranjan Das as his political guru during the Non-Cooperation and Khilafat movements was a surrender to a man similarly dedicated to the cause of India's freedom based on Hindu-Muslim unity. His exile in Burmese prisons witnessed the transformation of a lieutenant to a leader. A leader, along with Jawaharlal Nehru, of the left-leaning younger generation of anti-colonial nationalists. Between numerous spells in prison, he played a major role in the student, youth and labour movements. India, he believed, should become "an independent federal republic". He warned Indian nationalists not to become "a queer mixture of political democrats and social conservatives".His demand at the Calcutta Congress of 1928 that "complete independence" instead of "dominion status" should be the goal of Indian nationalists was a sign that he was a step ahead of his contemporaries. He repeatedly spoke on behalf of the rights of three large communities -- women, depressed classes and labouring masses. When the Civil Disobedience Movement was launched, Subhas was in prison. He was elected mayor of Calcutta while in jail, in 1932. It was at the Karachi Congress and the second session of the Naujawan Bharat Sabha in the previous year that he spoke of the need for a new, Indian variant of socialism. Eventually in February 1933 he was released after being put on a ship setting sail for Europe. A greater part of his years of enforced exile was spent as an unofficial ambassador of India's freedom. This was the period which saw the transformation of a leader into a statesman. Despite being in poor health, Subhas travelled tirelessly, spreading India's message almost all across Europe and north Africa. Back home as president of the Indian National Congress Subhas provided an incisive analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of the worldwide structure of British imperialism and an egalitarian vision of the socio-economic reconstruction of free India. Towards the end of his first term as president his rift with the Gandhian right-wing of the Congress grew wider over the issues of his uncompromising opposition to the federal part of the 1935 Act, planning for socialism and insistence on inner-party democracy. In 1939, he defeated Gandhi's nominee Pattabhi Sitaramayya to be re-elected Congress president. Faced with a campaign of non-cooperation against him launched by the Mahatma, he resigned months later. Throughout this political crisis he received strong support, as ever, from his brother Sarat Chandra Bose and from Rabindranath Tagore. The poet who regarded Subhas as "Deshnayak" was confident that his apparent defeat would turn into a permanent victory. When on July 2, 1940 Subhas was arrested it was for the 11th time. He was sent home on December 5 after he had been on a fast-unto-death for 10 days. The government had worked out "a-cat-and-mouse policy" of taking him back to prison as soon as he had recovered his health. On the night of January 16-17, 1941, Subhas however made a planned escape. He was driven from his Elgin Road home in Calcutta by his nephew Sisir to Gomoh in Bihar from where he went on to Peshawar. He finally reached Germany. Subhas went to Europe primarily to gain access to Indian soldiers in the British Indian Army who were being held as prisoners of war. He had long believed that subversion of the loyalty of Indian soldiers to the Raj had to be a crucial part of the final phase of the anti-imperialist movement. German invasion of the Soviet Union upset his plans of an armed thrust from the north-west in support of India's unarmed freedom fighters at home. So he left and after a 90-day submarine journey arrived in South-east Asia. Netaji assumed leadership of the Indian National Army (INA) as its supreme commander. More than two million Indian civilians living in South-east Asia responded to his call for "total mobilisation". In his army of liberation Punjabi, Muslim, Sikh and Pathan professional soldiers fought side by side with Tamil and Malayalee rubber plantation workers. In his Azad Hind Movement Netaji was able to demonstrate by example how to achieve Hindu-Muslim unity and amity and also give women their rightful role in public affairs. He proclaimed the Provisional Government of Free India in Singapore and with "Chalo Delhi" on their lips the INA crossed the Indo-Burma frontier. The promised march to Delhi was halted at Imphal and Netaji was forced to retreat on foot with men and women to Malaya. "The roads to Delhi are many," he wrote, "and Delhi still remains our goal."In the winter of 1945 Netaji's soldiers were brought to the Red Fort of Delhi. The trial of some of their officers and the saga of the INA reached every Indian home. "The whole country has been roused," Gandhi observed, "and even the regular forces have been stirred into a new political consciousness and have begun to think in terms of Independence." Netaji had hailed the Mahatma as "the father of our nation"; Gandhi now returned the compliment by describing Subhas as "the prince among patriots"."Nobody can lose," Subhas believed, "through suffering and sacrifice. If he does lose anything of the earth, he will gain more in return by becoming the heir to a life immortal." Long after his mortal end, he remains deathless in the form of an alternative vision. 1897: Born in Cuttack
1919: Joins ICS.
1921: Quits ICS, returns to India to join the freedom movement.
1928: Calls for total independence. 1932: Is elected mayor of Calcutta while in jail.
1939: Retains Congress president ship in spite of Gandhi's opposition. Eventually, he resigns. 1940-41: Arrested for the 11th time. Escaped to Germany.
1943-44: Leaves for Singapore. Forms INA. Its Chalo Delhi march crosses Indo-Burma border but is halted at Imphal.
1945: Reported killed in an air crash in Taiwan.

MAHFOOZ ALI.

The British established a flourishing indigo trade, based largely in Champaran district in Bihar. It consisted of plantations and processing factories. Conditions on these plantations were harsh. The reality was that indigo plantations in the West Indies and America produced better quality indigo, but by the 19th century had switched to more profitable cash crops. It was left to the British in India to meet the indigo requirements of the British textile industry. Literary champions The plight of those involved in the indigo industry was first depicted in literature during the reform movement in Bengal, which took place through much of the 19th century. The play Nil Darpan (The Mirror of Indigo), written by Dinabandhu Mitra and translated by an English missionary, the Rev. James Long, focused wholly on the plight of the peasants of Champaran. This work, along with many others, was the subject of a libel suit, and was later banned through Lord Lytton's Dramatic Performances Act of 1876. Much of the early thinking of the independence movement grew out of the literary endeavours of figures such as Tagore and Bankim Chandra Chatterji, who were to play such a huge role in turning educated Indian opinion against the British. 19th century poverty If anything the situation of the peasants of Champaran got even worse with the chemical replication of indigo from the late 19th century onwards. The pressures on estate owners to make a profit and survive in these circumstances increased the pressure on those involved in indigo cultivation, extraction and processing. Conditions of extreme exploitation in Champaran district were also commented upon extensively by British officials, such as John Beames, but the commercial interests of the East India Company, and its successor interests, prevailed. Much of the indentured labour that was sent to the colonies by the British, particularly to man plantations after the abolition of slavery in the 1830s also originated from these districts, which gives some indication of just how bad conditions must have been. Interestingly, however, records show that many of these people returned, suggesting that conditions elsewhere were even worse. Action on the ground With the return of Gandhi to India in 1915, the trajectory of the independence movement changed. He recognised that dissatisfaction amongst India's intellectual elite was insufficient to create momentum towards independence, and that this needed widespread popular support amongst the smaller towns and villages of India. During the movement of Civil Disobedience, he attempted to mobilise the peasants of Champaran but called it off when the movement turned violent. The exploitation of the Champaran peasants had become evocative of the plight of India itself. It was typically depicted as symbolic of a rich and abundant agricultural country being ground into remorseless poverty by a colonial economic system. This was held to be true of how the British managed the Indian economy as a whole, and thus fitted with Gandhi's vision of a free India centred on its villages and built on a programme of village revival.

MAHFOOZ ALI

There were no shortage of pro-British politicians and intellectuals in India before 1947. They used to receive prestige and privilege due to their alliance with the British establishment. Similarly, the intellectuals of India today derive their recognitions and rewards because of their pro-Western attitude, without which they would not be able to publish in Western journals or by the Western publishers and, as a result, would not be recognized. If some academics would assert their independent opinion to pursue the truth, they would be denounced by the Western writers and editors as nationalist, fundamentalist Hindu or communal.

Due to these pressures, some historians of India recently are pursuing a policy to reflect and amplify the Anglo-American opinion, which is hostile towards India and particularly towards the Indian religions. Rewards for the pro-Western intellectuals and politicians are great and punishments for the seekers of truth are most severe. Rakhal Das Banerjee, who has discovered the ruins of Mahenjodaro, was expelled from the Archeological Survey of India as he has demonstrated direct links between the Indus valley civilization and the ancient Hindu civilization, thereby proving the Aryan invasion theory invented by the British colonialists as groundless. Jadunath Sarkar, by enhancing the British idea about the greatness of the Mughal emperors, received Knighthood. Romila Thaper, by repeating what her British tutors told her, received the Kluge Chair in the Library of Congress in Washington D.C. in USA. Romesh Chandra Mazumdar, even after completing his monumental works on Indian history, could not get any recognition from the British or American but denounced as a communal historian.

The latest victims of these revisionist pro-British historians are the revolutionaries of India, who had sacrificed their lives for the independence of India. In this article I take up the cases of two very important revolutionaries of India, Mangal Pandey and Virendranath Chattopadhaya, both of them have become victims of the pro-British historians of India. The connection between these two historical figures is very important. Mangal Pandey has started India’s first war of independence in 1857. Virendranath Chattopadhya was instrumental in paving the road for India’s second war of independence started by the Azad Hind Fauj in 1942.

Mangal Pandey: a victim of historical distortion

British historians and their Indian agents have tried to prove that the revolt in 1857 was nothing but a mutiny of some undisciplined, uneducated soldiers, who had caused a lot of chaos and destructions but were unconnected to nationalist movement which came later. According to them, the battle of Plassey in 1757 was a war between the French and the British where the Nawab of Bengal foolishly had supported the French. Similarly, they cannot not see the reason why the Indians who were saved from the ‘thugis’ and ‘sati’ would revolt against the British who did their best to bring civilization to this dark sub-continent.

Mangal Pandey was described, by Rudranshu Mukherjee a very pro-British historian in his book ‘Mangal Pandey – brave martyr or accidental hero’, published by the Penguin Press, as a drunk, characterless person suddenly under intoxications had attacked his superior officer and he had nothing to do with the uprising of 1857. The same description of Mangal Pandey was there also in various history books written by the British historians (Sir Colin Campbell, Narrative of the Indian Revolt. London: George Vickers, 1858; John William Kaye, A History of the Sepoy War In India (3 vols). London: W.H. Allen & Co., 1878; Colonel G.B Malleson, The Indian Mutiny of 1857. New York: Scribner & Sons, 1891).

Although the above description of Mangal Pandey was disputed by Ramesh Chandra Mazumdar (Struggle for freedom, Bombay: Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, 1969) and many other notable Indian historians, I will not quote from them, as they are already dismissed by the British historians and their Indian agents as “communal historians”. I am quoting here from Marx and Engels, as they cannot be called ”Hindu fanatics” by any means.

Mangal Pandey according to Karl Marx:

During the revolt of 1857, Karl Marx was writing regularly in the New York Daily Tribune about the progress and the suppressions of that revolt. His description of the Mongal Pandey’s courageous act is as follows:

“On the 22nd of January, an incendiary fire broke out in cantonments a short distance from Calcutta. On the 25th of February the 19th native regiment mutinied at Berhampore; the men objecting to the cartridges served out to them. On the 31st of March that regiment was disbanded; at the end of March the 34th Sepoy regiment, stationed at Barrackpore, allowed one of its men to advance (i.e., Mangal Pandey) with a loaded musket upon the parade-ground in front of the line, and, after having called his comrades to mutiny, he was permitted to attack and wound the Adjutant and Sergeant-Major of his regiment. During the hand-to-hand conflict, that ensued, hundreds of sepoys looked passively on, while others participated in the struggle, and attacked the officers with the butt ends of their muskets.” (Karl Marx on 4 August 1857, New York Daily Tribune).

Thus, Mangal Pandey was not alone; he was not drunk or intoxicated but he was a part of the Sepoys who could not tolerate any more the continuous humiliations or torture of their countrymen by the British.

According to the British historians and Rudranshu Mukherjee Mongal Pandey’s action was unconnected to the subsequent revolt that took place in Meerut much later in 1857. However, according to Karl Marx, the action of Mangal Pandey was the beginning of the revolt, which spread like bonfire after that incident.

Marx wrote, “Subsequently that regiment was also disbanded. The month of April was signalized by incendiary fires in several cantonments of the Bengal army at Allahabad, Agra, Ambala, by a mutiny of the 3rd regiment of light cavalry at Meerut, and by similar appearances of disaffection in the Madras and Bombay armies. (Karl Marx in August 4 1857, New York Daily Tribune).

The cause of the revolt was not just religious taboo or superstitions, as the British historians and their Indian agents have suggested, but torture and humiliations the people suffered in the hands of the army of the East India Company. On August 28, 1857, Marx published an article in The New York Daily Tribune in order to show that “the British rulers of India are by no means such mild and spotless benefactors of the Indian people as they would have the world believe”.

Marx cited the official Blue Books -- entitled "East India (Torture) 1855-57"-- that were laid before the House of Commons during the sessions of 1856 and 1857. The reports revealed that British officers were allowed an extended series of appeals if convicted or accused of brutality or crimes against Indians. Concerning matters of extortion in collecting public revenue, the report indicates that officers had free reign of any methods at their disposal. Marx also refers to Lord Dalhousie`s statements in the Blue Books that there was "irrefragable proof" that various officers had committed "gross injustice, to arbitrary imprisonment and cruel torture".

According to Karl Marx, before this there had been mutiny in the Indian army, but the present revolt is distinguished by characteristic and features. It is the first time that sepoy regiments have murdered their European officers; that “Mussalmans and Hindus, renouncing their mutual antipathies, have combined against their common masters”; that “disturbances beginning with the Hindus, have actually, ended in placing on the throne of Delhi a Mohammedan Emperor;” that the mutiny, “has not been confined to a few localities”; and lastly, that “the revolt in the Anglo-Indian army has coincided with a general disaffection exhibited against English supremacy on the part of the great Asiatic nations, the revolt of the Bengal army being, beyond doubt, intimately connected with the Persian and Chinese wars”.

“The ‘unorganized peasants’ of India fought one of the most powerful empires in the world to near defeat with limited resources and even more limited training. It is clear that British interference governments and the oppression of the Indian people, religious and economic, created a bloody revolution”.

“If there is a lesson to be learned from any of this, it is that a people, once pushed into a corner, will fight for nothing more than the freedom to fight, and live, if not for religion then for their basic right to live in freedom.” (in Marx, Karl & Freidrich Engels. The First Indian War of Independence 1857-1859. Moscow: Foreign Languages Publishing House, 1959).

Mongal Pandey has initiated that first war of independence in 1857 and he should be respected as such. However, the pro-British historians of India, like Rudranshu Mukherjee, are now doing their best to diminish the importance of both Mangal Pandey and the 1857 revolt.

Virendranath Chattopadhya: another victim of historical distortion

While Mangal Pandey had paved the way for the first war of independence in 1857-59, Virendranath Chattopadya, along with Veer Savarkar, has paved the way for the second war of independence of 1942-45. However, just like Mangal Pandey, Virendranath also came under attacks from the pro-British historians of India as some kind of rootless vagabond, anarchist, who has just ”wasted his life” (‘Lost Brother-seeking an enemy’s enemy’ by Rudranshu Mukherjee in The Telegraph, on 5 August 2005; ‘Spies, sex and an Indian anarchist’ by Aditya Sinha, Hindustan Times, 14 August, 2004). Frank Moraes (in his book, Jawaharlal Nehru: A Biography, 1956, p. 115) did the worse by saying, “V. Chatto, a brother of the celebrated poetess and politician Sarojini Naidu, was one of the very few Indians who later worked with the Nazis. Virendranath Chattopadhyaya, for many years had lived a hand-to-mouth existence abroad. He died in extreme poverty in Moscow during the Second World War, friendless and alone.” What Frank Moraes wrote about Virendranath are all false; but he is an established figure among the pro-British journalists in India.

Like Netaji Subhas, Savarkar, Rashbihari Bose, Virendranath has spent all his life to organize supports from the foreign friends of India to drive out the British. Without his efforts, Azad Hind Fauz might not be a reality. It is sad that we do not remember his sacrifice.

Virendranath Chattopadhyaya (affectionately known as Chatto by his friends like Veer Savarkar and Jawarlal Nehru), brother of Sorojini Naidu, was one of the most important leaders of Indian independence movement in Europe during the 1907-1930s.

In 1908, he, mentored by Bipin Pal and Veer Savarkar, was the secretary of the Indian Nationalist Journal "Swaraj" in London. “Swaraj” was founded and edited by Veer Savarkar. When Savarkar was deported to the prison in Andaman Island, Virendranath took charge of ‘Swaraj’ and start publishing articles supporting revolutionaries of the Gaddar Party particularly Madan Lal Dhingra. As a result, British wanted to arrest him too but he had escaped to France, supported by Madame Cama.

He became the leader of Indian revolutionary group in Paris; has published journals, "Bande Mataram" and "Talvar". Virendranath and Nehru attended together the Brussels Conference of the ‘League against Imperialism’ in 1927. Virendranath was one of the general secretaries of the League and always maintained close links with Subhas Chandra Bose. From France he has escaped to Germany and became the leader of German Indian Committee, which was helping revolutionaries in India with weapons and sanctuaries. This committee had supplied weapons to the revolutionary groups in India like Jugantar, Anusheelal Samity, to Jatin Sarkar or Tiger Jatin and to the legendary Surya Sen. This Committee sent Narain Marathe in 1914 to Japan to secure arms. In 1915, they sent Heramba Lal Gupta to Japan. Rash Bihari Bose went to Japan in 1915. They are the frontrunner of the Azad Hind Fauz, organized later by the Japanese friends of Virendranath.

With the arrival of Hitler in German politics, Virendranath could not stay in Germany any longer. In 1933, he has escaped first to Sweden and then to the USSR to seek help from the Soviet Union to free India (Subhas Chandra Bose did the same in 1941). He became the head of the Indian Department of the USSR Academy of Science in Leningrad and became very close with the two very important leaders of the Russian revolution, Lenin`s wife Krupskaya and Kirov. As a result, he has drawn the wrath of Stalin, who has killed almost every leader of the Russian revolution and their associates. Kirov was killed in 1934. Krupskaya died in semi-imprisonment in 1938. Virendranath was arrested in 1937 and was killed in 1940 by Stalin.

His name with photo is exhibited in a room for the revolutionaries at the Nehru Memorial Museum in New Delhi. Some of his works and articles left behind were found at the Dimitrov Museum in Leipzig (in former East Germany or DDR). There was a Chatto section in that Museum.

Famous American writer Agnes Smedley wrote, “To me he was not just an individual, but a political principle. For me he embodied the tragedy of a whole race. Had he been born English or American, I thought, his ability would have placed him among the great leaders of his age.” (in Agnes Smedley, China Correspondent, first published in 1943).

Without Virendranath, the Azad Hind Fauz would not be a reality. He was the guiding spirit of the political organization founded by Japanese intellectuals in Germany, ‘The Association of Revolutionary Asians’.

Japanese government sent over a number of scholars to Germany during 1920s. To this circle in 1926-29, belonged many young scholars who later led the Japanese academics and culture. Rouyama, Arisawa, Kunizaki of Tokyo University, and professors from Kyoto University - Muraichi Horie, Yoshihiko Taniguchi, Katsuichi Yamamoto, and Katsujiro Yamada - were the founding members of ‘The Association of Revolutionary Asians’. In addition to these scholars, there were Japanese artists and journalists in Berlin in this group. Theatre and film personalities of Japan like Koreya Senda, Seki Sano, Yoshi Hijikata, Teinosuke Kinugasa, Souzo Okada, writers like Seiichirou Katsumoto and Seikichi Fujimori, painter like Ousuke Shimazaki, and architect like Bunzou Yamaguchi were also members when this group. Virendranath was the leader of this group of Japanese in the Association of Revolutionary Asians.

These Japanese intellectuals became very prominent upon their return to Japan. They have supported and financed the formation of the Azad Hind Fauz in Japan and hosted Indian revolutionaries including Mohan Singh, Giani Pritam Singh, Satyananda Puri, and Rash Bihari Bose. They have influenced the Japanese government to bring Subhas Chandra Bose from Germany to Japan and to release about 80,000 Indian prisoners of war held by Japan in Singapore in 1942 to fight for the freedom of India. Just like Mongal Pandey in the India’s first war of independence, Virendranath has acted as the catalyst for the second war of independence of India.

Conclusion:

Pro-British journalists and historians of India want to malign and admonish the revolutionaries and important personalities of India, modern, medieval, or ancient. They have taken up the task to satisfy their masters in the West, who as Sarvapalli Radhakrishnan wrote, “… tried their best to persuade India that its philosophy is absurd, its art puerile, its poetry uninspired, its religion grotesque and its ethics barbarous.” [in ‘Indian Philosophy’, Vol.II, Allen& Unwin, London, 1977, p.779].

The historians following the British tradition describe India as an inferior civilization, always poor, always defeated and fragmented. Both James Mill in 19th century (in The History of British India) and Gunner Myrdall in 1970 (in Asian Drama) said that India is a civilization without any quality. According to the British historians, whether MaxMuller in 19th century or F.R.Allchin and Bridget Allchin in 21st century, everything in Indian civilization was borrowed starting with the Sanskrit language and the Aryan civilization, which were both of foreign origin. It is unfortunate that some Indian journalist and historians are propagating for the British journalists and historians to gain favour and the Indian establishment supports them.

Mangal Pandey, following these historians and journalists in India, could have stayed as a loyal soldier of the army of the John Company, could have taken part in the loot that was followed after the suppression of the revolt of 1857, and could end up as the Raja of Balia; instead, he has decided to sacrifice his life for the honour of his people. Virendranath could have completed his study as a Barrister in London, could be a rich lawyer and after independence could be a governor or ambassador or a minister given his background as the brother of Sorojini Naidu; but he has chosen the path of revolutionary fire to free his country. It is sad that rather than respecting Mangal Pandey and Virendranath Chattopadhya for their sacrifice some journalists and historians of India for pure self-interest have decided to be the assassins of their characters.

There are two great Indian fighters of the war of independence who devoted their entire lives for the freedom of the country but after their death they could not get even two yards of land for burial in their beloved country. The first name among such unfortunate persons is that of the hero of India’s first war of independence Bahadur Shah Zafar and the second name of the same period is that of the great warrior lady Begum Hazrat Mahal who took an active part in India’s first war of independence of 1857. When the British imprisoned Wajid Ali Shah and attacked Avadh, she called upon all the people of Avadh and faced the British boldly. After obtaining permission from the last Moghul emperor, Bahadur Shah Zafar declared her son, Nawab Birjis Qadar the ruler of Avadh and announced her independence.

(Begum hazrat Mahal)

The Begum was a brave and intelligent lady. She valiantly fought the British with the help of Maulvi Ahmadullah Shah, Nanasaheb Peshwa and others. The battle of Alambagh is written in letters of gold in the history of India’s war of independence. This is the same field of Alambagh where she selectively put each and every Englishman to death. On 4 July 1857 the Begum announced throughout Avadh that in that dear land of Avadh, we shall not allow even a single Englishman to remain alive. She appealed to all people of Avadh to kill any Englishman wherever they find him but because of mutual rivalry a large army of Englishmen attacked Avadh. The Begum preferred to fight the British bravely rather than surrendering to them and get arrested but ultimately the English forces captured Lucknow on 17 march 58. The Begum, while fighting somehow reached Nepal.

In Nepal, the Begum built out of her own money, a palace, an Imambara and a mosque. As long as she was alive, religious functions were regularly held in the imambara. She also built a small office for the maintenance and upkeep of the mosque and the imambara. When she died in Nepal on 7 April 1879, she was buried in the imambara built by her, in accordance with her will. According to Prince Anjum Qadar, the government of Nepal did not take as much interest in the maintenance and upkeep of her grave and other buildings built by her, as it should have taken. Originally a marble plaque was fixed there which contained information about the Begum and every Indian going to Nepal was in a position to know briefly about her. Prince Anjum Qadar, who died in 1997, had also complaints against Nepal Governments Department of Tourism. His contention was that the department of tourism has not included the mazaar of the Begum and other buildings and documents in the list of items of tourism as a result which lakhs of Indian going there do not get any information about her. He has complaints against Indian embassy also there. According to him, even the Indian government has completely ignored her buildings and the embassy has neither taken any steps for their preservation nor brought out any literature through which people may know about her and pay homage at her mazaar.


Today there is an office of Nepal government in the palace of the Begum. Because of the apathy and lack of interest of the government of Nepal, many people have illegally occupied some of the lands attached to her palace, imambara and mosque. The occupants have also built same unauthorized and illegal structures around her grave as a result of which her mazaar has become indistinct and hidden behind those structures.

The first Prime Minister Pundit Jawaharlal Nehru took great interest in Begum’s matters. It was because of his interest that Begum Hazrat Mahal Park was built in Lucknow. The Indian ambassador to Nepal at that time also took great interest in the maintenance and upkeep of her mazaar on Nehru’s instructions. Later on, the Indian government issued postal stamp also in the honour and memory of the Begum. Through the medium of ‘sound & light’ programme undertaken by the Ministry of Information & Broadcasting, plays depicting the life and history of the Begum were also shown in different parts of the country. But today the condition of her mazaar in Nepal is very bad and the way it is being desecrated is a matter of shame for every Indian.  It is surprising that even today the authorities there know nothing about it. When the Hi Time Express made further enquires it was told that on the other end of Kathmandu’s Durbar Road, on one side of which is the palace of Nepal’s Maharaja, there is definitely a grave in a dilapidated and desolate condition. When the Hi Time Express correspondent reached there and made detailed enquires and came to know that it was the grave of the same warrior lady Begum Hazrat Mahal who in 1857 had raised the head of Indians high.


That mazaar is now a small open grave, which has not even a shade. People have made a small enclosure around it for identification but there is no plaque as a result of which nobody knows whose grave is it and what is his/her relation with history. Some body has opened a paan shop near the grave and another person has opened a saloon. There is no trace of the imambara which was attached to the grave at that time and which the Begum had built with so much devotion in Avadh style of architecture. It was told that quite a few years ago the imambara was demolished and a grand market is situated there now. The beautiful mosque also built by the Begum has been rebuilt in a new style whose grandeur has, of course, been enhanced. The palace built by the Begum in Lakhnawi style near the imambara and the mosque is, of course, still there in its original grandeur but there is an office of Nepal government in it. A mere sight of this building leads one to the conclusion that during the days gone by, this palace must have had a significance of its own.

The last ruler of Avadh, Nawab Birjis Qadar, after the death of his mother Begum Hazrat Mahal, went to Matia Burj, Calcutta, the city founded by his father, Nawab Wajid Ali Shah and thereafter never went to Nepal. Ever since then the grave of Begum Hazrat Mahal had become neglected.

Nawab Wajid Ali Shah had given the Begum the title of ‘Mahak Pari’ (Fragrant Fairy) On reaching the mazar one can remembered one couplet:
Ai bad-e-saba aahista chal
Yahan soee hui hai Mahak Pari
(O’ zephyr, blow sweetly and calmly
Here lies in slumber Mahak Pari).

Mahfooz Ali
(Bureau Chief)
THE HI TIME EXPRESS
Lucknow (I N D I A ).

Well over the years
On this earth
What muslims I have met

Preaching jehad
While attacking others
Were in the Quran does it say
Torment everyday

Were in Quran does
It say destroy thy neighbour

Islam gives forgiveness
To those who need it
But some should practise
What they preach

Before handing out
Guilty
To others
When they are hiding behind the Quran
Which they have not read
if they
this war (Islamic terrorism)
Would 've been dead
Ages ago

When they destroyed
All life
With the rubbish going around (Such as Mumbai blasts on 11/07/2006)

So others when you listen to these
terrorism in the name of jehad
And judge
Remember it could be you next

Terrorists don't like
for the truth being written
think before judge
there are two sides to every story

and why I have been attacked
for telling the truth?

(Remember Islamic terrorists{rism} have nothing to with the Islam and those who follow terrorism in the name of jehad are nothing but the foetus of a virgin mother and an atheist mongrels.)

(c) Mahfooz Ali
15/July/2006

I carry your heart with me(I carry it in
my heart)I am never without it(anywhere
I go you go,my dear;and whatever is done
by only me is your doing,my darling)

I fear
no fate(for you are my fate,my sweet)I want
no world(for beautiful you are my world,my true)
and it's you are whatever a moon has always meant
and whatever a sun will always sing is you

here is the deepest secret nobody knows
(here is the root of the root and the bud of the bud
and the sky of the sky of a tree called life;which grows
higher than soul can hope or mind can hide)
and this is the wonder that's keeping the stars apart

I carry your heart(I carry it in my heart).

Why is she still there?
Talking to her i just cant bear.
I gave her my heart. She gave me nothing.
But i'm used to it.

This life is screwed,
I don't want to deal with it,
I'm just used.

She took my heart,
And took it apart,
She played a cruel game,
And put my life to shame.
But i'm used to it.

This life is screwed,
I don't want to deal with it,
I'm just used.

This is the end, I'll take no more.
I don't need her,
Life's just a friggin bore.

But i'm used to it. This life is screwed.
I don't want to deal with it,I'm just used.

I L O V E M Y I N D I A .

India has significantly improved the well being of its people in recent years. With rapid growth over the past decade, the country has made steady progress in reducing poverty. Key social indicators, especially literacy and school enrollment, have also shown marked improvement (See Box). Today, 108 million children attend primary school in India, making the country’s education system the second largest in the world after China.
Supported by wide ranging reforms over the past decade, India's economic growth has been robust. A vibrant middle class with spending power has emerged, and a new generation of industrialists and entrepreneurs has begun to compete globally. With Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in nominal terms of US$692 billion in 2004, India now has the world’s tenth largest economy.
Real GDP grew by 6.9 percent in 2004/05 compared to 8.5 percent a year earlier. Slower agricultural growth due to weaker monsoon rains was the main cause of the decline. Prospects for India’s real GDP growth for 2005/06 look strong - at about 6.5-7 percent. There are no signs as yet of oil price rise affecting economic growth.

The country’s external position is also significantly stronger. Exports have grown, especially exports of services which grew by 105 percent in 2004/5. Growth in services has largely been fueled by the information technology boom in which India is emerging as a world leader.

Due to high oil prices and increased non-oil imports, the trade deficit has widened. India’s vulnerability to an external crisis, however, remains limited due to its large reserves - which now exceed US$140 billion - and its low level of external debt.
India's fiscal deficit continues to remain high despite good economic growth in the country. A number of reforms are currently underway in the states including the introduction of Value Added Tax (VAT), exercising restraint on hiring, the passage of legislation regarding Fiscal Responsibility, and the modification of policies relating to user charges for services. The Twelfth Finance Commission has provided incentives to the states for debt relief and debt restructuring. However, unless the large fiscal deficits, rigid labor laws, and weak regulatory system are tackled, they will remain a drag on country's economic growth.

While India’s economic and social performance has been impressive, over a quarter of its population remains below the poverty line. Critical health indicators such as maternal and under-five mortality rates have shown little improvement, and minimal progress has been made in addressing malnutrition.
Substantial disparities persist within the country. A growing gulf has emerged between the country’s richer and poorer states. Almost half of India's poor - approximately 133 million - are concentrated in the states of Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, and Madhya Pradesh, which also display some of the worst social indicators. Disparities between the rural and urban areas are particularly marked; poverty is concentrated in the rural areas which are home to three-quarters of India’s poor.

The 2004 elections signaled a shift in the government’s emphasis towards the rural poor. While remaining committed to reform, the coalition government’s policy agenda, known as the “Common Minimum Program”, seeks to ensure that reforms benefit the neediest segments of society, especially in the rural areas (See Box). This includes a focus on the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) such as halving the proportion of people living below the poverty line, and achieving universal primary education.

CURRENT CHALLENGES
Reducing poverty remains India’s greatest challenge. According to official statistics, India is still home to some 260-290 million poor. These numbers rise to some 390 million if poverty is measured by the international standard of those living on less than US$1 a day.

Rural development is essential to raise the incomes of the poor. With an estimated one million or so workers transitioning out of agriculture each year, creating non-farm employment is critical.
Dramatic improvements in infrastructure and the investment climate are required to sustain the country’s recent growth. Severe bottlenecks, including in power, water and transportation services, continue to impede the country’s economic competitiveness.

Basic services, such as improved health and education, need to reach all India's citizens. Major changes will need to be made to ensure the effective delivery of these services, especially to the vulnerable segments of the population.

HIV/AIDS has the potential to upset much of the India’s recent progress. The disease is spreading quickly, with risk factors that put the country in danger of a growing epidemic. While less than one percent of the adult population is currently estimated to be infected, the numbers will soon be greater than any other country in the world because of India's large population.
Environmental sustainability needs to be ensured. Diminishing water sources, increasing pollution, and global climate change are strategic challenges that require long-term vision.

WORLD BANK GROUP SUPPORT TO INDIA

The World Bank is partnering with India to reduce poverty, move closer to achieving the MDGs, and improve the living standards of its people. To achieve these goals, the Bank Group lays emphasis on investing in people and empowering communities, improving the effectiveness of government, and promoting private sector-led growth.

Action plan – 2005-2008. The World Bank Group's India Country Assistance Strategy (CAS) is closely aligned with the Government’s poverty reduction strategy embodied in the country’s Tenth Five-Year Plan covering 2002/3 to 2006/7.

The Bank’s strategy is governed by three guiding principles. It focuses on helping India to achieve its development goals, and targeting the Bank’s limited resources where they are welcomed and can be most effective. The strategy increasingly focuses on providing practical advice to policy makers on the country’s major development challenges by sharing good practices and experience from within the country and abroad.

Lending increase. The Bank envisages a substantial increase in the volume of lending to India, both to the center and the states, to about US$3 billion a year - roughly double the recent average. The focus will be on infrastructure, social development (especially education and health), and rural livelihoods.

Financing National Programs. An important shift in the new strategy is the use of new approaches to finance national programs critical to meeting the MDGs. One such example is the ongoing US$500 million Bank credit to fund India's Elementary Education Program. The program is being co-financed with other development partners under common arrangements. Similar operations for improving national and state health programs, urban development, and rural roads are under preparation.
Spreading support more widely across India's States. Since 1997, the Bank Group has focused its support on reforming Indian states that were the leaders of change. The new strategy, however, aims to spread Bank support more widely. Lending is to be based on “guidelines for engagement” for each key sector, with a special effort to help the poorest and weakest states qualify for support. Policy dialogue, primarily on fiscal and governance reforms, is to be offered in partnership with other donors (ADB, DFID) to the 12 largest states with 90 percent of India’s poor, regardless of their progress in the implementation of reforms. These states are: Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Bihar, Jharkhand, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Orissa, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal. Going beyond the basic dialogue on reforms, capacity building efforts will focus on the four poorest and largest states - Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Orissa, and Jharkhand to enable them to use government funds more efficiently.
The Bank will increasingly assist India to meet major challenges through analytical reports on key developmental issues. It will also ensure that its portfolio performance is of the highest standards in terms of achieving objectives.
In addition, increased IFC lending is envisaged, especially for financing infrastructure and supporting the expansion and globalization of Indian companies.

WORLD BANK LENDING
India joined the World Bank in 1944 and is one of its oldest members. In accordance with the Bank’s strategy, lending to the country touched $2.9 billion in FY 05 – more than double the $1.4 billion lent a year earlier – making India the world’s largest recipient of Bank assistance.
As part of this total, India received IDA credits totaling $1.1 billion - the largest in the world - and IBRD loans totaling $1.8 billion, the fourth highest in the world. IFC financing also rose to over $400 million in this period.
At end-July 2005, the Bank group had 64 active projects with a net commitment of about $13 billion. Of this, US$6 billion was from IDA, US$5.7 billion from IBRD, and US$0.1 billion under the GEF/Montreal Protocol.
The increase in Bank support to India reflects the rapid growth in India's economy with the bulk of the new lending going to much-needed infrastructure and human development projects.
ANALYTICAL AND ADVISORY SERVICES

The following reports are among the key analytical studies to be released this fiscal year:
· India’s Water Economy: Bracing for a Turbulent Future
· Unlocking Opportunities for Forest Dependent People
· Service Delivery in India
· Economic Impact of HIV/AIDS in India
· Climate Change
· Disability Issues in India
· Labor and Employment Study
· Development Policy Review
Total IBRD/IDA Commitments for FY05: US$12.8 billion
(by fiscal year, in nearest US$ billion)

Total IBRD/IDA Commitments for FY05: US$12.8 billion
(by fiscal year, in nearest US$ billion)

Commitments FY 01 FY 02 FY 03 FY 04 FY 05
New 2.6 2.2 1.5 1.4 2.9
Total 13.5 13.0 13.0 12.0 12.8
No. of Active Projects 76 69 70 63 64

Lending by Sector
(as on June 30, 2005)

Lending by State
(% of total Bank lending to India as on June 30, 2005)

The Hindi language comprise of a number of dialects of which those used for literary composition are Khariboli, Rajasthani, Maithli, Brijbhasha and Awadhi. The early period of Hindi literature which is called Adikala is accepted as the period upto mid-14th century. The maingroup of trend setters in this period were:
1) the Siddhas, 2) the Jain poets, 3) the Nathapanthis and 4) the heroic poets. The Siddhas belonged to the later Buddhistic cult called Vajrayana. The Nathapanthis adhered to a cult in which the Hatha yoga was practiced. The works of the heroic poets are known as Rasau poems.

The second period which consists of the mid-14th to mid-17th century is dominated by devotional poetry (Bhakti Kavyas). The Hindi bhakti poetry's consists of two streams : 1)Nirguna, the poets who believed in a formless God or abstract name and 2)Saguna, the poets who believed in singing about a God with attributes.

Kabir (1398-1518) is the most important poet in the Nirguna school. He preached the universal religion of man above and beyond Hindu and Muslim orthodoxy and composed a large number of songs and poems. Guru Nanak (1469-1538), the founder of Sikhism is also accepted as an outstanding poet of this school.

The Saguna stream is related to Vaishnava poets who belong to the two categories, those worshipping Krishna and those worshipping Rama. Surdas whose poems have been compiled under the title Sursagara was a great poet of Krishna poetry. Vidyapati was also a versatile composer of Hindi poems. The great champion of Rama poetry is Tulasidas (1543-1623) whose Ramacharitamanasa is considered as an important classic by all Hindi lovers. He has command over all the important styles of composition - narrative, epic, lyrical and dialectic. He has given a human character to Rama, potraying him as an ideal son, husband, brother, king and so on.

The third period is spoken as the Ritikavyakal. It is also referred to as the Ritismgara Kavya. Riti refers to a special form in which the erotic element is preponderant. Hindi is very rich in both these categories of poetry. During this period Hindi had also a good collection of devotional and historic poetry. In the Bhakti period there were many epics and long narrative poems composed in the dialects of Hindi.

The modern period of Hindi literature commences with the second half of the 19th century. Bharatendru Harishchandra (1850-84) was the pioneer who ushered in the modern era. Other important writers of this formative period are Maithli Sharan Gupta (1886-1964), R.N.Tripathi (1889-1962) and Gopala Sarana Sinha (1891-1960). Maithli Saran revived the epic tradition. The romantic upsurge spoken as Chayavad is an important element of this period.

Jayashankara Prasad, Suryakant Tripathi Nirala and Sumitra Nandan Pant are the leading luminaries of this period. Kamayani (1936) by Jayashankar is hailed as a magnum opus. It is the psycho-biological journey of a man through time and space. Mahadevi Varma is one of the major poets of the Chayavad school.

In the second phase of the modern period which is referred to as the Dwivedi yug, the leading figure obviously was Mahavir Prasad Dwivedi. Poetry, drama, novel, short story and the essay flourished on account of the western impact. Drama in Hindi has a long history from the 14th century. But the prose-drama developed only towards the close of the 19th century.

Bharatendru and Jayashankar prasad have written quite a few plays. In the field of fiction, the great stalwart is Premchand. His novel Godan has been translated into many languages, Indian and foreign. By his novels and short stories, Premchand raised Hindi literature from the plane of entertainment to one of contemporary realism. Other important novelists of the contemporary period are Jainendra Kumar, Phaneshwar Nath Renu and Satchidananda Vatsyayan.

Jainendra Kumar in his novels Sunita and Tyagapatra concentrated on human psyche. Renu gave a new dimension to novel writing by introducing the regional novel, the classical example being his Maila Anchal. Vatsyayan (Ajneya) is the initiator of a new trend in Hindi literature called Prayogavad (experimentalism). Sekhar Ek Jivani (1941) has been acknowledged as his most important novel. Dharma Vir Bharati, Girija Kumar Mathur, Muktiboth, and Lakshmi Kant Verma are other distinguished experimentalists of the post-Independence period.

The Indian subcontinent consists of a number of separate linguistic communities each of which share a common language and culture. The people of India speak many languages and dialects which are mostly varieties of about 15 principal languages.

Some Indian languages have a long literary history--Sanskrit literature is more than 5,000 years old and Tamil 3,000. India also has some languages that do not have written forms. There are 22 officially recognized languages in India and each has produced a literature of great vitality and richness.

Though distinctive in parts, all stand for a homogeneous culture that is the essence of the great Indian literature. This is an evolution in a land of myriad dialects. The number of people speaking each language varies greatly. For example, Hindi has more than 250 million speakers, but relatively few people speak Andamanese.

Although some of the languages are called "tribal" or "aboriginal", their populations may be larger than those that speak some European languages. For example, Bhili and Santali, both tribal languages, each have more than 4 million speakers. Gondi is spoken by nearly 2 million people. India's schools teach 58 different languages. The nation has newspapers in 87 languages, radio programmes in 71, and films in 15.

The Indian languages belong to four language families: Indo-European, Dravidian, Mon-Khmer, and Sino-Tibetan. Indo-European and Dravidian languages are used by a large majority of India's population. The language families divide roughly into geographic groups. Languages of the Indo-European group are spoken mainly in northern and central regions.

The languages of southern India are mainly of the Dravidian group. Some ethnic groups in Assam and other parts of eastern India speak languages of the Mon-Khmer group. People in the northern Himalayan region and near the Burmese border speak Sino-Tibetan languages.

Speakers of 54 different languages of the Indo-European family make up about three-quarters of India's population. Twenty Dravidian languages are spoken by nearly a quarter of the people. Speakers of 20 Mon-Khmer languages and 98 Sino-Tibetan languages together make up about 2 per cent of the population.

The Indian Press has entered the liberalization phase with the government’s decision to open up the print media to foreign direct investment (FDI). This landmark decision, unshackling the Indian Press, is a measure of India’s growing self-confidence.

Foreign direct investment upto 26 per cent has been allowed in news and current affairs publications. In technical, medical and specialized science journals, foreign equity is to be allowed upto 74 per cent.

The new print media policy announced by the Information and Broadcasting Minister, Mrs. Sushma Swaraj, on June 25, 2002 has come after a debate on the policy issue, stretching more than a decade. The government has been cautious in changing the 1955 Cabinet resolution against foreign participation in Indian print media. The country was skeptical about foreign investment in the early years after Independence, especially of its influence in the media, given the memory of colonial rule. However, changed circumstances and new developments in the media sector over the past decades and new challenges in the 21st century necessitated a comprehensive review of the whole matter.

Describing the move as "careful opening up" of the print media, Mrs. Swaraj said it was a "logical decision in line with the opening up of other sectors including broadcasting". However, news agencies will continue to be governed by the 1955 Cabinet decision, prohibiting foreign participation.

The decision to restrict foreign equity to 26 per cent of total equity will mean that only joint ventures would be possible. This will automatically restrict the number of foreign players, since many foreign media groups would like to enter the Indian market with their respective brands.

Controversy

The desirability of allowing FDI in print media has been made by some media houses and journalists ever since foreign satellite channels were permitted to beam into the country a decade ago. However, the divergence of views and perspectives compelled the Government to defer the decision indefinitely.

The argument advanced by those who supported the entry of foreign investment in the print media is that since the foreign entry into electronic media has been permitted, there is little sense in insulating the print media against the foreign entry. According to them, the hold of electronic media on the public mind is far greater than that of the print media. TV has 75 per cent coverage of the population as opposed to the print media coverage of just 16 per cent.

The inconsistency had become even more glaring once foreign television channels and Internet were permitted access to the people. There are more than 40 million cable homes, which have access to 100 per cent foreign- controlled media. There are more than a million Internet users who can access any site. Through these TV channels and Internet sites, millions of Indians are seeing and reading foreign material daily and this has not adversely affected the country in any way. Our main English newspapers- through news-sharing arrangements – carry articles from leading international newspapers, including tirades put out by the Pakistani media - for our consumption. So if the policy of banning foreign investment into print media was aimed at ensuring that our people are not influenced by foreign media, then it never served the purpose.

On the other hand, those who are opposed to the foreign investment argue that the influence of the print media on the public mind is greater than that of the electronic media. Their concern : foreign powers may take over the reigns in the newspaper business, thereby influencing the readers’ minds as per their needs.

The reasons for and against the entry of foreign investment have mostly to do with the business of news. Some media houses are struggling for lack of proper funds and cannot raise resources from the capital market. Those who are opposing are big profitable media houses, which have a comfortable position and do no want to face competition.

The print media is now an industry. So all those facilities, which are available to industry, need to be given to the print media for its growth including opportunity to enter into the capital market of India without any restrictions. Any restriction on raising funds from the Indian capital market is very much counter-productive. Further, if the shares of Indian print media are not allowed to be purchased by foreign buyers the share value of such a company goes down considerably. Only those shares get their fair value where there is no restriction on their trading.

Safeguards

The fears regarding FDI in print are unfounded as the government has brought in adequate safeguards to ensure that the management and editorial control remain in Indian hands. For that the government has done a few things in the case of news and current affairs publications. The Indian shareholding cannot be dispersed and a single largest Indian shareholder must hold at least 26 per cent. Also, if the shareholding pattern is to be changed, prior permission of the I & B Ministry will have to be obtained.

To ensure that editorial control does no go to foreigners, at least three fourths of the board of directors must be resident Indians. All key editorial posts including the chief editor must be resident Indians.

All the applicants’ credentials would be verified by the Home Ministry. The Foreign Investment and Promotion Board (FIP route has been barred for investors entering the news and current affairs business. As FIPB is considered a fast-track clearance route, which may sometimes overlook things, only investors in non-news and non-current affairs publications can follow that route.
(c)Mahfooz Ali.

Whosoever room this is should be ashamed!
His underwear is hanging on the lamp.
His raincoat is there in the overstuffed chair,
And the chair is becoming quite mucky and damp.
His workbook is wedged in the window,
His sweater's been thrown on the floor.
His scarf and one ski are beneath the TV,
And his pants have been carelessly hung on the door.
His books are all jammed in the closet,
His vest has been left in the hall.
And his smelly old sock has been stuck to the wall.
Whosoever room this is should be ashamed!
Mahfooz, Kamal or Yadavji or--Huh?
You say it's mine?
Oh, dear,
I knew it looked familiar!

(c)Mahfooz Ali

Rural marketing has become an important aspect of marketing in the marketing environment today. This attraction towards the rural markets is primarily due to its colossal size of varied demands of millions and millions of people around the globe.
In fact rural markets are expanding all over the globe at such a rapid pace that they have taken over the growth in urban market. Apart from the growth rate of rural markets there are several other factors that are leading marketing managers to go rural. As the urban markets are becoming more and more complex, competitive & saturated rural markets are still a easy path way for marketing people. Rural markets are also emerging stronger and stronger because disposable income among the rural folk is increasing.
This vast untapped potential market is growing at a fast pace everywhere. Governments of various countries are forming the policies largely favoring rural development.
Research programs in various areas have led to heavy production, which leads to more disposable income among the rural folk, and hence the rural markets have started bulging both in size and volume and no one would like to miss this great potential opportunity.
Differences between the Urban and rural Markets –
Through both the urban and rural market are of paramount importance but the policies made for urban markets cannot be simply extended to rural markets. Various aspirations, cultural values and needs of rural people differ from that of urban people.
One main factor still remains strong i.e.- buying in rural area are still done by the eldest male member of the family, where in, in the urban area every one – male, female, children all are free to make purchases. They have enough cash in hand to make purchases, where in rural areas male ensures that he holds cash till his last breath.
Rural purchasing decisions are influenced by social customs, traditions & beliefs. They also require collective social sanction, which is unheard in urban areas.

Marketing Mix for rural areas-
Marketing Mix elements of 4 P and Hi Tech designing of goods done for urban area may not suit the Rural Customers. Distribution channels and retail outlets of urban market may not be successful in rural markets.
Various fares, fates religious & cultural festivals are organized in rural areas. These functions are very popular among the rural lot and can become a very good platform for distribution. Rural markets become alive at these melas and people visit them to make several purchases
Weekly markets –
There are days fixed in rural areas for weekly markets where you can get every thing from a needle to big agricultural machines, vegetables to clothes, cosmetics to medicines. This is another potential low cost distribution channel available for marketers.
Feeder Towns –
Feeder towns generally serve a group of villages. People prefer to go to these areas, especially to the wholesale markets or the 2nd or 3rd grade market to appetize their needs. These markets of feeder towns will easily be able to cover a large section of rural population.
Promotion –
The last of 4 P promotion should also be carefully chosen. Only a small portion of the rural population (10%) has access to news paper. rest all rely on audio visual presentations. Marketers should plan accordingly to convey a correct message to the rural folk.
Other rich traditional medicines such as melas, puppet show, folk dances can also have high impact on the product campaigns.

Pakistan –
Pakistan’s rural sector accounts for more than 70% of employment and 2/3 of the rural employment are in agriculture. To improve the performance in the rural economy and efficiency of financial institutions, rural credit markets government of Pakistan ensured that more credit should be available to agricultural small holders.
The government of Pakistan restructured three cooperatives to improve rural financing. The government ensured that support should reach disadvantaged groups, a special priority was given to the women who need credit, small holders (with 10 acres or less) and rural non farm sector such as live stock, fishery, forestry, rangelands and industrial micro enterprises. Apart from rural financing Pakistan Government also formulated a strategy for expanding telecommunication network to the rural areas of Pakistan.
Apart from telephone services Pakistan government also introduced public phone (PCO) and ensured following standards are met –
· Quality of service is good
· Telephone is in working order
· Quality of lives is satisfactory
· Dealing with public is good
· Cost of service is affordable
· Located conveniently and readily accessible places
· Pay phone cards for available prices .
Bangladesh –
With almost around 90% of rural population Rural marketing in Bangladesh also faces lot of constraints such as infrastructure problems, reliability of electricity, Phone lines etc.
Bangladesh government has been trying to provide better access of information channel for the rural population .

Nepal-
With almost 92% of the rural population, Nepal social marketing distribution in conjunction in collaboration with Ministry of Health has successfully built the demand for idoized salt through the idoized salt societal marketing campaign.
Many Nepalese consumers still prefer to use the loose crystal salt. The challenge was to switch consumer preference to packaged idoized salt, which prevents iodine evaporation to ensure adequate iodine intake for health and mental development.
The group redesigned the logo and packaging and improved the visibility and availability at the retail level. They generated mass awareness through multiple media channels. A significant component of the campaign was a video van out reach program or Video on wheels, which traveled to the rural communities that have limited access to television and organize video shows, conduct retail surveys and work with STC to conduct retail surveys and work with STC to improve the availability of Idoized Salt.
Srilanka –
The marketing team of shell gas Lanka ltd. Launched a Gamata Gas ( Gas to Village ) program
Grocery Shop –
The concept was to make the gas available to a location closest to the customer, which was well accepted both by the consumer and distributors.
They established 60 outlets in 7 distributor areas. They sold 5500 x 12.5 Kg and 150 x 37.5 Kg cylinders in one month. They also established 33-grocery shop outlet in 6 distributor areas selling 2370 x 12.5 Kg new cylinder during a span of 3 weeks.
----------------------------------------------------
* The district is predominantly rural area where firewood is used as a main source of energy and they were able to convert 95 houses into gas users.

(c) Mahfooz Ali.