CHAPTER VII—Hindu Alternative to Pakistan - Page 154

z:\ ambedkar\vol 08\vol8 03.indd MK SJ+YS 28 9 2013 129

CHAPTER VII

HINDU ALTERNATIVE TO PAKISTAN

I

Thinking of the Hindu alternative to Pakistan, the scheme that at once comes to one’s mind is the one put forth by the late Lala Hardayal in 1925. It was published in the form of a statement which appeared in the Pratap of Lahore. In this statement, which he called his political testament, Lala Hardayal said :—

“I declare that the future of the Hindu race, of Hindustan and of the Punjab, rests on these four pillars: (1) Hindu Sangathan, (2) Hindu Raj, (3) Shuddhi of Moslems, and (4) Conquest and Shuddhi of Afghanistan and the Frontiers. So long as the Hindu nation does not accomplish these four things, the safety of our children and great-grand children will be ever in danger, and the safety of the Hindu race will be impossible. The Hindu race has but one history, and its institutions are homogeneous. But the Musalmans and Christians are far removed from the confines of Hindustan, for their religions are alien and they love Persian, Arab and European institutions. Thus, just as one removes foreign matter from the eye, Shuddhi must be made of these two religions. Afghanistan and the hilly regions of the frontier were formerly part of India, but are at present under the domination of Islam . . . . . Just as there is Hindu religion in Nepal, so there must be Hindu institutions in Afghanistan and the frontier territory; otherwise it is useless to win Swaraj. For mountain tribes are always warlike and hungry. If they become our enemies, the age of Nadirshah and Zamanshah will begin anew. At present English officers are protecting the frontiers; but it cannot always be ....... If Hindus want to protect themselves, they must conquer Afghanistan and the frontiers and convert all the mountain tribes.”

I do not know how many Hindus would come forward to give their support to this scheme of Lala Hardayal as an alternative to Pakistan.

In the first place, Hindu religion is not a proselytising religion. Maulana Mahomed Ali was quite right when, in the course of his address as President of the Congress, he said:

“Now, this has been my complaint for a long time against Hinduism, and on one occasion, lecturing at Allahabad in 1907,1 had pointed out