Skip to main content

Hindutva, Muslim League founders 'insisted' on separate nations for Hindus, Muslims

By Ram Puniyani* 

Recently, the Indian National Congress released its manifesto, called Nyay Patra (Promise for Justice), for 2024 General Elections. It prominently talked of caste census, raising the cap of 50% on reservations, jobs for youth, internship, and economic support for the poor among others. Its focus has been on justice for women, Advises, Dalit-OBCs, farmers, and student-youth. One of its spokespersons of Congress stated that the Manifesto addresses the steps needed to undo the injustices heaped on different sections of society during the last ten years of BJP rule.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi criticized this manifesto by saying that it has the divisive imprint of Muslim League of yore and the remaining part has been filled by the left ideology. One was immediately reminded of the fountainhead of Hindu nationalist ideology, RSS’s, second Sarsanghchalak MS Golwalkar, who in his ‘Bunch of thoughts’ articulates that Hindu nation has three internal threats, Muslims, Christians and Communists. 
The two of these threats have been invoked by the BJP at various levels and are being reiterated now. In a way it is a sort of communal dog whistle, the main weapon of BJP. Muslim League manifesto and program for 1937 Assembly elections revolved around Muslim identity demands and never talked of affirmative action for the weak. Its programs were parallel and opposite of what Hindu nationalists have been pursuing.
Mallikarjun Kharge, the Congress President in response to BJP’s allegations, correctly brought out the collaboration of BJP’s ancestors-leaders with Muslim League. What is the truth? As such these ‘Religious Nationalists, Muslim League and Hindu Mahasabha-RSS share a lot in common. Their origin is the declining sections of society in the light of changes which took place in colonial India. 
As industrialization, modern education-judiciary-administration and communication came up the new social classes started emerging, the Working classes, modern educated classes and modern industrialists. The old rulers, landlords and Raja-Nawabs, started feeling threatened as their social- political-economic hegemony was declining.
From the rising classes emerged the organizations of workers led by Narayan Meghaji Lokhande and  Singarvelu and many more. The political expression of different emerging groups gave rise to the Indian National Congress among others. Their basic values were a nascent form of liberty, equality and fraternity. From the declining classes of landlords-kings first came the United India Patriotic Association, which pledged its loyalty to the British. 
Their core ideology was hierarchy of caste and gender. In due course this organization split, Muslim League in 1906 and Hindu Mahasabha in 1915. In 1923 Savarkar in his book ‘Essentials of Hindutva’ articulated that there are two nations in this country, Hindu nation and Muslim Nation. Taking off from this RSS came up with the agenda of Hindu Rashtra In 1925. Some pro Muslim League followers studying in London came up with the word Pakistan.
The common thread of both these streams was that they looked at the rule of Hindu kings or Muslim kings as the glorious, golden period. They supported the British all through against the national movement for Independence. Their strategy was to ally with the British to counter the Hindu or Muslims as the case may be. 
Savarkar, the main ideologue of Hindu nationalism in 19th session of Hindu Mahasabha in Ahmedabad, said, “India cannot be assumed today to be a Unitarian and homogenous nation, but on the contrary there are two nations in the main: the Hindus and the Moslems, in India.”
Based on the “two nation theory”, Jinnah demanded separate a Muslim nation, Pakistan, in 1940 in Muslim League’s Lahore convention.
RSS unofficial mouthpiece "Organiser" on 14th August, 1947 wrote, “...that in Hindustan only the Hindus form the nation and the national structure must be built on that safe and sound foundation…the nation itself must be built up of Hindus, on Hindu traditions, culture, ideas and aspirations.”
Muslim League and Hindu Mahasabha formed joint ministries in Bengal, Sindh and NWFP in 1939. It was in Sind that the Muslims League passed the Pakistan resolution in the Assembly as Hindu Mahasabha members kept silent. Later Subhash Chandra Bose in a broadcast from Germany appealed to both Muslim League and Hindu Mahasabha to join the anti British movement. 
RSS kept aloof from the massive 1942 movement. Savarkar supported the British in its war efforts in a very active way
These organizations and RSS kept aloof from the massive 1942 movement. Savarkar supported the British in their war efforts in a very active way: “… every branch of the Hindu Mahasabha in every town and village must actively engage itself in rousing the Hindu people to join the [British] army, navy, the aerial forces and the different war-craft manufactories [sic].” As Subhash Bose’s Azad Hind Fauj was fighting against the British army, when Savarkar was helping the British army.
One can clearly see that both Hindu Mahasabha and Muslim League acted in the interests of the British. Subhash Chandra Bose was very much against the communal politics of both these organizations. His appeal of joining the struggle against the British was totally ignored by both these organizations. Shyama Prasad Mukherjee, as part of joint ministry with Muslim League in Bengal wrote to the British viceroy to control the 1942 movement, promising him that in Bengal he will ensure that the movement is suppressed there. 
In a letter dated July 26, 1942. He wrote “Let me now refer to the situation that may be created in the province as a result of any widespread movement launched by the Congress. Anybody, who during the war, plans to stir up mass feeling, resulting internal disturbances or insecurity, must be resisted by any Government that may function for the time being”
As Subhash Chandra Bose categorized both these ideologies of Muslim nationalism and Hindu nationalism in the same group, similar was the analysis of Bhimrao Babasaheb Ambedkar. In his book Pakistan or Partition of India, 1940, he writes, “Strange as it may appear, Mr Savarkar and Mr Jinnah instead of being opposed to each other on the one nation versus two nations issue are in complete agreement about it. Both agree, not only agree but insist, that there are two nations in India -- one the Muslim nation and the other the Hindu nation.”
No wonder any commitment for the downtrodden has to be condemned by BJP-RSS as that goes against the agenda of Hindu Rashtra. We can see the fate of deprived sections in Pakistan, which came up as Muslim Nation. Modi’s criticism of this hope giving manifesto is in tune with what his ideological forefathers were saying.
---
*Political analyst. Youtube, Facebook, InstagramTwitter, Pinterest, My Website, My App

Comments

TRENDING

Swami Vivekananda's views on caste and sexuality were 'painfully' regressive

By Bhaskar Sur* Swami Vivekananda now belongs more to the modern Hindu mythology than reality. It makes a daunting job to discover the real human being who knew unemployment, humiliation of losing a teaching job for 'incompetence', longed in vain for the bliss of a happy conjugal life only to suffer the consequent frustration.

CFA flags ‘welfare retreat’ in Union Budget 2026–27, alleges corporate bias

By Jag Jivan  The advocacy group Centre for Financial Accountability (CFA) has sharply criticised the Union Budget 2026–27 , calling it a “budget sans kartavya” that weakens public welfare while favouring private corporations, even as inequality, climate risks and social distress deepen across the country.

From water scarcity to sustainable livelihoods: The turnaround of Salaiya Maaf

By Bharat Dogra   We were sitting at a central place in Salaiya Maaf village, located in Mahoba district of Uttar Pradesh, for a group discussion when an elderly woman said in an emotional voice, “It is so good that you people came. Land on which nothing grew can now produce good crops.”

When free trade meets unequal fields: The India–US agriculture question

By Vikas Meshram   The proposed trade agreement between India and the United States has triggered intense debate across the country. This agreement is not merely an attempt to expand bilateral trade; it is directly linked to Indian agriculture, the rural economy, democratic processes, and global geopolitics. Free trade agreements (FTAs) may appear attractive on the surface, but the political economy and social consequences behind them are often unequal and controversial. Once again, a fundamental question has surfaced: who will benefit from this agreement, and who will pay its price?

Why Russian oil has emerged as the flashpoint in India–US trade talks

By N.S. Venkataraman*  In recent years, India has entered into trade agreements with several countries, the latest being agreements with the European Union and the United States. While the India–EU trade agreement has been widely viewed in India as mutually beneficial and balanced, the trade agreement with the United States has generated comparatively greater debate and scrutiny.

Penpa Tsering’s leadership and record under scrutiny amidst Tibetan exile elections

By Tseten Lhundup*  Within the Tibetan exile community, Penpa Tsering is often described as having risen through grassroots engagement. Born in 1967, he comes from an ordinary Tibetan family, pursued higher education at Delhi University in India, and went on to serve as Speaker of the Tibetan Parliament-in-Exile from 2008 to 2016. In 2021, he was elected Sikyong of the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA), becoming the second democratically elected political leader of the administration after Lobsang Sangay. 

'Big blow to crores of farmers’: Opposition mounts against US–India trade deal

By A Representative   Farmers’ organisations and political groups have sharply criticised the emerging contours of the US–India trade agreement, warning that it could severely undermine Indian agriculture, depress farm incomes and open the doors to genetically modified (GM) food imports in violation of domestic regulatory safeguards.

From Puri to the State: How Odisha turned the dream of drinkable tap water into policy

By Hans Harelimana Hirwa, Mansee Bal Bhargava   Drinking water directly from the tap is generally associated with developed countries where it is considered safe and potable. Only about 50 countries around the world offer drinkable tap water, with the majority located in Europe and North America, and a few in Asia and Oceania. Iceland, Switzerland, Finland, Germany, and Singapore have the highest-quality tap water, followed by Canada, New Zealand, Japan, the USA, Australia, the UK, Costa Rica, and Chile.

Territorial greed of Trump, Xi Jinping, and Putin could make 2026 toxic

By N.S. Venkataraman*  The year 2025 closed with bloody conflicts across nations and groups, while the United Nations continued to appear ineffective—reduced to a debate forum with little impact on global peace and harmony.