In India we heard a lot about secularism because we are democratic country. Secularism means “the principle of separation of the state from religious institutions”, but is it really so? This word was not a part of preamble of our Constitution drafted by Dr. B. R. Ambedkar. It was added in the year 1975, but what was the need to do so? Partition of country was demanded by Muslim League, a political outfit representing Muslims, because they said that both the communities does not have anything in common. All the traditions, cultures, lifestyle, family setup, thoughts, ethos, ethics, eating habits, hobbies are different in both the communities and hence they (Muslims) can’t live with Hindus.

According to Rupa Subramanya, Economist commentator, in her blog written on

“Was there overwhelming support for Pakistan among the Muslims of undivided India?

Lately, some in India have been asserting this. As evidence, they refer to statistics from the 1946 provincial assembly elections, in which the Muslim League captured 4.5 million of about 6 million Muslim votes. On the face of it, this would seem to suggest that 75% of Indian Muslims voted for the Muslim League and its demand for Pakistan.

This claim glosses over the crucial fact that the 1946 elections, based on the Sixth Schedule of the 1935 Government of India Act, had a limited franchise, which means that only a small percentage of adults those with money and property were eligible to vote. In fact, only 3% of the population could vote for the Central Assembly and only 13% could vote for the Provincial Assemblies. That means only 30 million people could vote in assembly elections out of a total adult population of 120 million.”

In my opinion, even if 90% Muslims had not voted, they gave their approval to partition on the basis of religion and accepted it, as they never opposed it as they did every other day in the country. Here more interesting is the fact that those voted in favour were from Bihar, U.P., A.P. but Punjab, Sindh and Bengal were divided where Muslim population was not in majority. More strange is the fact that those who voted for partition never went to Pakistan and those who remained silent had shifted there.

Now the point is if 90% Muslims were not in favour of partition then why it happened? Who did that and for what purpose? It clearly shows that the partition was planned with ulterior motives by some politicians to satisfy their personal power hunger. Why the public remained silent and had not opposed this ill act of politicians? It seems that the public was befooled by those self-centred and selfish politicians. This fact stood proved because after dividing the country on religious basis, those leaders entered into an agreement called “Liyaqat Pact” thereby agreeing that no population transfer is needed and people can live wherever they wish to. 

In ideal situation the public should have opposed that decision or should not have accepted it even after its approval.  

When partition took place on religious basis and Muslims were given Pakistan why they all have not moved out? Pakistan declared itself as Islamic country where Sharia law is applicable and Hindu, Sikhs, Bodh, Jains are living miserable life. The percentage of minorities (Hindu, Sikhs, Bodh, Jain, Christians) has reduced from 23% to just 3% and in India Muslim population increased from 9.8% to 14.2% (as per 2011 census). Considering the fact that India’s population is seven times of Pakistan, the increase in Muslims population is too huge. Besides illiteracy, their religious preachers are also to be blamed for this irrational increase because they oppose population control measures suggested by the Government giving plea of their religion.

I fail to understand the mind set of that so called highly educated politicians that if Hindus and Muslims were to remain wherever they wish to live, why partition was done? It clearly establishes, beyond any doubt that the partition was done just because Jinnah and Nehru wanted to become Prime Minister of country and their greed, selfishness resulted in displacing 12 million people and death of lakhs of people.

If there was tussle between Nehru and Jinnah, why Gandhi ji not chose a third person as Prime Minister. At that time many other renowned and intelligent persons like Sardar Patel, Shashtri ji, Govind Vallabh Pant, Dr. Rajendra Prasad and many more were present. Even Sardar Patel was unanimously elected as a leader of Congress Party in preference to Nehru.

Dr. B. R. Ambedkar had advocated that the partition will not be complete until the exchange of whole population takes place, in other words, he supported that all Muslims should go to Pakistan and Hindus should come to India. Had we acted according to his advice today there would not have been this word Secularism because no other religions such as Sikhs, Hindu, Jain, Bodh, Parsi have any problem with each other.

Secularism is used to play victim card by one particular minority. Here I would like to mention few instances which will prove that how this game of secularism is being played with Sanatanis giving preference to one particular religion:

*सेक्युलर कहते है,

तीन तलाक़ धार्मिक आस्था..!!

सेक्युलर कहते हैं कि…

देवदासी प्रथा वेश्यावृत्ति थी,

हलाला पवित्र नारी-शुद्धिकरण…!!

सेक्युलर कहते हैं कि…

बहुविवाह एक अनैतिक प्रथा थी, 

चार-निक़ाह ईश्वरीय आदेश… !!

सेक्युलर कहते हैं कि…

चुटिया रखना धार्मिक ढोंग है,

बिना मूंछ की बकर-दाढ़ी ईश्वर का नूर है… !!

सेक्युलर कहते हैं कि…

यज्ञोपवीत पहनना धार्मिक कट्टरवाद है,

लेकिन अरबी लबादा ओढ़ना धार्मिक पहचान है…!!

सेक्युलर कहते हैं कि…

तिलक लगाना दकियानूसी कट्टरता है,

लेकिन मत्थे पे ईंट से रगड़कर बनाया काला निशान आध्यात्मिक है…!!

सेक्युलर कहते हैं कि…

कर्ण छेदन असभ्य क्रूरता है,

ख़तना अलौकिक प्रक्रिया…!!

सेक्युलर कहते हैं कि…

पितृपक्ष तर्पण एक ढोंग है,

लेकिन मरहूमों की मज़ारों पर चढ़ावा चढ़ाना श्रद्धा… !

सेक्युलर कहते हैं कि…

तीर्थ-यात्रा पैसा कमाने का मनुवादी ढोंग,

लेकिन लाखों रुपये फूँककर हज़-उमरा पवित्र ईश्वर का दर्शन… !!

सेक्युलर कहते हैं कि…

जल्लीकट्टू पशु उत्पीड़न है,

लेकिन पशुओं की गला रेतकर क़ुर्बानी धार्मिक आस्था… !!

सेक्युलर कहते हैं कि…

गौरक्षा मांसाहार के अधिकार का हनन है,

लेकिन सूअंर खाने वाले शैतान हैं… !!

सेक्युलर कहते हैं कि…

दही-हांडी ख़ेल ख़तरनाक़ है,

लेकिन छाती-पीट कर ख़ूनी मातम करना धार्मिक आस्था… !!

सेक्युलर कहते हैं कि…

संस्कृत गुरुकुल कट्टरवाद सिखाते थे,

लेकिन मदरसों में आधुनिक वैज्ञानिक शोध होते हैं…!!

सेक्युलर कहते हैं कि…

व्रत-उपवास दकियानूसी ढोंग हैं,

लेकिन रोज़े वैज्ञानिक शारीरिक तपस्या है… !!

सेक्युलर कहते हैं कि…

हिंदुओं में खानपान की छुआछूत अमानवीय है,

लेकिन शिया-सुन्नी-अहमदिया का आपसी क़त्लेआम स्नेहिल भाईचारा है… !!

सेक्युलर कहते हैं कि…

हज़ारों साल पुरानी सारी इंसानी किताबें झूठी-बकवास हैं,

लेकिन धरती चपटी बतानेवाली 1400 साल पुरानी आसमानी किताब में ब्रह्माण्ड का सारा ज्ञान-विज्ञान है…!!

सेक्युलर कहते हैं कि…

गुजरात में दुनिया का सबसे बड़ा दंगा हुआ,

लेकिन 84 में देश के अंदर हज़ारों सिखों और कश्मीरी पण्डित मारे खुशी के स्वर्ग सिधार गए और लाखों ने हंसते हुए कश्मीर में अपना घरबार सब छोड़ दिया… !!

सेक्युलर कहते हैं कि…

बाक़ी मज़हबों पर संविधान लागू होता है,

लेकिन हुज़ूर का मज़हब ख़ुद में संविधान है… !!

सेक्युलर कहते हैं कि…

फिलिस्तीनियों पर बहुत अत्याचार होता है,

लेकिन यज़ीदी दुनिया की सबसे खुशहाल कौम है… !!

सेक्युलर कहते हैं कि…

रोहिंग्या मुसलमान शरणार्थी हैं,

लेकिन पाकिस्तानी-अफगानी शरणार्थी सिख, हिन्दू भारत के लिए बोझ हैं… !!

हालांकि कहने को तो और बहुत कुछ है, लेकिन शालीनतावश सब कुछ नहीं लिख सकते…..लेकिन इतना ही काफी है ये समझने और समझाने के लिए !

Hope that the above examples are enough to prove the fraud of secularism and appeasement.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *