Pakistan, Caste and dilemma of quislings

[LordOfTheUnderworlds]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pakistan_Movement

Conclusion. Sir Syed Ahmad Khan (1817–1898) philosophical ideas plays a direct role in the Pakistan Movement. ... It was the dissemination of western thought by John Locke, Milton and Thomas Paine, at theAligarh Muslim University that initiated the emergence of Pakistan Movement.

Aligarh :

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aligarh,_Uttar_Pradesh

History

Before the 18th century, Aligarh was known as Kol. The history of the district up until the 12th century is obscure..... Some time before the Muslim conquest, Kol was held by the Dor Rajputs. At the time of Mahmud of Ghazni, the chief of the Dors was Hardatta of Baran.[4] Statues of Buddha and other Buddhist remains have been found in excavations where the citadel of Koil stood, indicating a Buddhist influence. Hindu remains indicate that the citadel probably had a Hindu temple after the Buddhist temple.....

.... In 1194, Qutb-ud-din Aibak marched from Delhi to Kol....

..... in 1341.[5] According to Battuta, it would appear that the district was then in a very disturbed state since the escort of the Emperor's embassy had to assist in relieving Jalali from an attacking body of Hindus and lost an officer in the fight.....

.... Ibrahim Lodhi.... Akbar.... Jahangir....

The Jat ruler, Surajmal, with help from Jai Singh of Jaipur and the Muslim army, occupied the fort of Koil. Koil was renamed Ramgarh and finally, when a Shia commander, Najaf Khan, captured it, he gave it its present name of Aligarh. Aligarh Fort (also called Aligarh Qila), as it stands today, was built by French engineers

Najaf Khan (1723– April 26, 1782) was a Persian adventurer from Isfahan in the court of Mughal emperor Shah Alam II. He came to India around 1740 and may even have come a year earlier His sister married into the family of the Nawab of Awadh. He also held the title of Deputy Wazir of Awadh. He served during the Battle of Buxar

The Battle of Aligarh was fought on 1September 1803 during the Second Anglo-Maratha War (1803–1805) at Aligarh Fort. The British 76th Regiment, now known as the Duke of Wellington's Regiment besieged the fort, which was under the control of the French officer Perron, and established British rule.

Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) is a public central university...... In addition to this it has its three off-campus centres at Malappuram (Kerala), Murshidabad (West Bengal) and Kishanganj(Bihar)........

...... It was established as Madrasatul Uloom Musalmanan-e-Hind in 1875.[5] The college started on 24 May 1875.[6] The Anglo–Indian statesman Syed Ahmad Khan founded the predecessor of AMU, the Muhammadan Anglo Oriental College, ....... The movement of Muslim awakening associated with Syed Ahmad Khan and M.A.O. College came to be known as Aligarh Movement.............. . Before 1939, faculty members and students supported an all-India nationalist movement . After 1939, political sentiment shifted toward support for a Muslim separatist movement. Students and faculty mobilised behind Muhammad Ali Jinnah and the university became a center of Pakistan Movement.....


Notable alumni:
............ ranging from Zakir Husain, 3rd President of India; Pashtun independence activist Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan; the former Vice-President of India Mohammad Hamid Ansari;[52]André Weil the French mathematician of the 20th century;[53]Anwara Taimur the first and the only woman to be the Chief Minister of Assam. [54]Sheikh Abdullah, and Mufti Mohammad Sayeed both former Chief Ministers of Jammu and Kashmir......

 

[LordOfTheUnderworlds]

Worldview

A world view is a mental model of reality — a framework of ideas & attitudes about the.....


http://www.gpccolorado.com/worldviews/
https://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/cultural_frames

Beneath the surface of observable human behavior and socio-cultural institutions are shared values and core worldview assumptions.

Worldview is the “present tense story-grid through which we see and interpret all aspects of life”.

the story-grid of worldview forms the prism through which we perceive everything.

Worldviews are those systems or structures within which our values, beliefs, and assumptions lie. They influence how we see ourselves and others (identities) and how we make meaning of our lives and relationships. Since resolving conflict necessarily involves some kind of change, it is essential to understand the operation of worldviews. When people are asked to change their identity or things they find meaningful, they will resist, sometimes even when the alternative is death. Worldviews keep our lives coherent, giving them a sense of meaning, purpose, and connection.

To understand intractable conflicts, it is essential to understand that there are different levels operating in conflict. Different authors have described these levels in a number of ways. Chris Moore, in The Mediation Process,[1] refers to substantive, psychological, and procedural levels of conflict. By this, he means that people are concerned with the issues that need to be resolved (the 'what' of the conflict); the psychological aspects of the conflict (including power, status, emotions, and other relational parts of the conflictual interaction); and the procedural parts of the conflict (how it is addressed and with what assistance). Stone, Patton, and Heen in Difficult Conversations suggest that three conversations are needed in any conflict: the what conversation, the feeling conversation, and the identity conversation.[2] Schirch, in her 1999 dissertation, suggests that there are three levels to conflict: material/analytical, social/relational, and symbolic/perceptual.[3] In Bridging Troubled Waters,[4] I identify three levels of conflict: material, communicative, and symbolic, emphasizing that each level relates to the others.

What these approaches have in common is an acknowledgement that conflict is about more than appears on the surface. It is involved with identity and meaning -- who we see ourselves to be, and how we make and find meaning in our interactions with others, ideas, and the world. Intractable conflict usually involves some threat -- perceived or real -- to our identity or cherished meanings, or both. It may also be about material goods or resources, and it may be exacerbated by ineffective communication. But because intractable conflict is bound up with meanings and identities, it cannot be resolved by improving communication or finding better ways to deal with resources alone.

Our cultures give us messages about desirable identities (who we are, who we seek to be, and how we relate to others) and sources of meaning (what matters and why). Since our cultures give us different ideas about identity and meaning, our way of pursuing our goals and working out differences can create or escalate conflict.

Our cultures exist within larger structures called 'worldviews'............Mary Clark defines worldviews as "beliefs and assumptions by which an individual makes sense of experiences that are hidden deep within the language and traditions of the surrounding society." ............ Clark tells us that these worldviews are tacitly communicated by "origin myths, narrative stories, linguistic metaphors, and cautionary tales", and that they "set the ground rules for shared cultural meaning

Beginning as a child amidst informal relationships of endearment, we begin to form an overall story-grid by putting smaller stories together. In other words, worldview is learned. Although incredibly powerful, a worldview is implicit, tacitly assumed and generally outside of our awareness. Rarely do we examine our worldview. While outside of our conscious awareness, core worldview assumptions are emotionally embraced and deeply held, restraining and constraining behavior.

Worldview is an unseen force so powerful that it shapes what we “know” is and is not real, who we think we are and are not, and what we feel ought and ought not to be. It defines the indicative and the imperative.

Outward behavior does not just take place. There are factors below the visible surface that shape what we think and feel about reality and relationships.

All aspects of culture are derived from metanarrative, a tenaciously held big picture story of reality developed across time, from which core worldview assumptions are derived.

How are worldviews formed? They are basically formed by the telling of a story (and stories within a story) and drawing inferences from it. All people have their story and draw upon it to sustain their values, institutions, and behavioral patterns (adapted from David J. Hesselgrave). The stories within a story are controlling narratives that are transhistorical and deeply embedded in a particular culture. These controlling master narratives that comport with reality are shared widely and repeated across time. They are resistant to change.

Clustered together, controlling narratives form a metanarrative that is an ultimate authority for people. It is the source of core worldview assumptions.

How easy is it to change a worldview? Any attempt to do so threatens the very foundations of a person’s world. Therefore, people resist such challenges with deep emotion. People are even willing to die for beliefs that make their lives and deaths meaningful.

What is required to impact the worldview of another person? The first and foremost requirement is an authentic respectful relationship. In relationships over time, trust bonds can be formed, language and culture can be acquired, and communication can be exchanged using mutually familiar forms and functions.

(Before anyone gets soft and emotional about that relationship part, please do remember that in case of Pakistan, the only relationship they can comprehend is master-slave/ dominance-submission relationship. That can also be an authentic respectful relationship with trust. Otherwise you risk getting torn and eaten up by the non domesticated wildlings.)

At this point a logical question may be, “Why would I want to impact the worldview of another person?” In a world of ultimate relativism one would not. But, how is that working out so far?

Worldviews can be resources for understanding and analyzing conflicts when fundamental differences divide groups of people. By looking at the stories, rituals, myths, and metaphors used by a group, we can learn efficiently and deeply about group members' identities (who they see themselves to be) and meanings (what matters to them and how they make meaning). When we do this with each party to a conflict, places of connection and divergence may become clearer, leading to a better understanding of the conflict in context:

Worldviews, with their embedded meanings, can be the seedbed from which new shared meanings emerge. These shared meanings may arise as people co-create new stories, design new rituals, and find inclusive metaphors to contain their meanings:

conflicts are about much more than the surface issues, but also involve hidden factors relating to culture and identity. These cultural and identity differences, cause people to see the world in completely different ways, to interpret "facts" and the difference between good and bad, right and wrong differently.

If we make fundamentally different meaning of the world, then all of our attempts to improve communication or expand the pie of our material resources will fail because we may not be addressing our deeper differences that continue to fuel conflicts

When worldviews are not in our awareness nor acknowledged, stronger parties in conflict may advertently or inadvertently try to impose their worldviews on others. Far more profound than trying to impose a particular solution to a conflict or a way of communicating, the imposition of a worldview can be destructive to a whole way of life

 

[LordOfTheUnderworlds]

Identity crisis of a nation
SEPTEMBER 10, 2017 BY FATIMA BATOOL

............... Firstly, who was Sir Syed, and how was he educated? Interestingly, many of us mistook Sir Syed’s long, white beard as a sign of being religious and perhaps being raised in a strictly religious environment where he came up with the ideas that were ultimately going to save the Muslims of sub-continent from British wrath. Nevertheless, before joining East India Company in 1838, he did his LLB from the University of Edinburg............

....... Hindus were already well-versed in western education. Why? Because centuries ago, they learnt: Do in the Empire as the Emperor does. They acquainted themselves with the language of the Mughal court and mastered the order of the day. Muslims, on the contrary, after the fall of Mughal Empire, believed that they (a religious minority), not Mughals (a race), were the rulers. They were too stubborn to change their mindset, and the empire rightfully sensed them as a threat.

Muslim leaders who were educated in England are one type, and the Muslims who never stepped out of their house or India, for getting educated, another. Those who were educated in the local schools and colleges, established by the British or their right arms, embraced western education half-heartedly since it was the pre-requisite of “government job”. Bringing bread was incumbent on them, and there were jobs, other than being the Molvi sahab at a local mosque, out there.

Education changed the economic condition and with it changed the social status. The attitude towards education, however, remained the same; the signs of which can be seen in all that we expect of education today – employment........

There is something inevitably wrong with this land and/or with the people who decided to migrate at the time of partition. They were a people whoperhaps took so much pride in their being Muslim that they decided that living in the land governed by Hindus would be an insult to the centuries of “their” rule. This is just a symptom of the problem that was and is deep seated in the hearts of Muslims of the subcontinent. They do not know who to relate with.

Since most of them were converts, relating with the Jane or Hindumat was out of question. The Mughaldom that they construed to be “theirs” was in fact of Central Asian Turco Mongols. Mughals were as much foreign as British but they happened to be Muslims, a commonality which was sufficient to make the subcontinent’s Muslims believe that they themselves were the ruling body.

The crisis continued along with the Freedom Movement that was initiated with equal zest by Hindu and Muslim politicians, until the Muslims tried to influence the British Raj not to abolish the Ottoman Empire, as they also related themselves with the Muslims of Turkey. It was perhaps then that the Hindus realised that we were more Muslims and less Indian. Conspicuously, the community failed to differentiate the ethnic and religious identities. There has been no way to end this identity crisis which only aggravated with time, and we see its worst forms in today’s Pakistan.

 

[LordOfTheUnderworlds]

A glimpse of Pakistan and her castes.

Imad Uddin Ahmed from Lahore, Pakistan, writes:



Until I moved to Pakistan for a few years after
graduating from college in California, I wouldn’t say that I
saw my Indian or Indian diaspora friends as anything other than fellow South
Asians – brown brothers and sisters who had similar tastes and values, but who
supported the wrong cricket team and prayed in a different way.

In Pakistan, I inquired and discovered what caste
my Hindu ancestors belonged to, having been asked by a colleague on my first
day at work (at a women’s rights NGO!)

In Pakistan, I learned the South Asian prejudices
that South Asian beauty was predicated on a light skin-tone and, for men, sharp
features and height. I learnt too that these features were associated with
higher caste Indians and with Muslims – descendants of invaders were regarded
as more beautiful than the indigenous people who had constructed the Indus’
most ancient civilisations. Why, then, the likes of Shiv Sena only target
Muslims in India as foreigners (many of whose ancestors were Hindu), seems a
bit arbitrary. It was in Pakistan that I learnt how, in spite of inhabiting an
Islamic republic, Pakistanis carried forth their un-Islamic caste prejudices,
and that these prejudices allowed many of us to feel superior. By learning how
somewhat physically different we were from many Indians, I also learnt how
similar our mentalities were to my image of them.

For all the prejudices I ridiculed, I started
subconsciously imbibing them, and my recent friendships with Indians and Hindus
have been coloured by them. Where I previously had yearned for dark and lovely
South Asian girls, I started favouring the light-skinned ones, and I’ve enjoyed
teasing Brahmin girls I’ve dated that they had lost their caste. (Apparently
for fear of losing hers, one of my ancestors refused to share the crockery her
son had used, let alone hug him, once he had converted to Islam.) I now guess
(to myself) a person’s caste by considering their surname and looks, and try to
figure out whether their life choices (profession, partner, extra-curricular
activities) have been affected by it.

Hussein (name changed to protect privacy) was the
first Indian friend I had made since I had started living in Pakistan. We
connected through blogging while I was in Lahore and he was in Mumbai.

We were initially drawn to each other by a
fascination with each other’s otherness. He wanted to know what Pakistan was
like, his thirst having been whet by a book called Husband of a Fanatic about
my (and Amitava Kumar’s) relatives in Pakistan, and about Hindu extremism in
India. I had never known a Muslim Indian, and wanted to know whether he felt
marginalised, what his daily struggles were and which cricket team he
supported. (I myself failed Norman Tebbit’s test of being a true Brit for
failing to support England.)

When we finally became friends in the UK, he shared
with me Tehelka’s coverage of the 2002 Gujarat riots, and then details of his
own tragic loss in those riots.

Despite seeing an indecent proportion of his
compatriots support the man responsible for inciting those riots, he tells me
that he is glad that his grandparents didn’t cross the border – I understand
his view: whereas in India, you aren’t safe being a Muslim, in Pakistan you
aren’t safe being the wrong type of Muslim. Pakistan and India aren’t too
dissimilar.

 

[LordOfTheUnderworlds]

http://blogs.reuters.com/india/2014...a-glimpse-of-pakistans-hindu-past/?print=1&r=

Parts of the book mirror this anxiety, like a visit to the Balmiki Temple located in a nondescript street in Lahore, the capital of Punjab.

Hindus, Christians and Sikhs congregate at the shrine of Balmiki, deity of the untouchable caste. The devotees come together in the belief that renders their respective religions “irrelevant to humanity”. Muslims also join them on important festivals. A cross is also seen inside the temple.

The utopia turns out to be a facade when Abbasi writes that the Hindu residents are expected to adopt Muslim names or Christianity to “avoid upheaval”. Followers of Balmiki, the author adds, consume chicken and fish to avoid being “conspicuous”.

 

[LordOfTheUnderworlds]

An angry comment by one major Agha Amin on a blog about Ayub Khan’s selection as C-in-C

http://www.brownpundits.com/2015/02/27/a-post-from-dr-hamid-hussain/

The following comment is from Major Agha Amin, (from his website here)

Dear Dr Hamid Hussain

you have simply left out joginder singh who stated that ayub khan was in chamar regiment ? joginder was his unit officer and mentioned this incident in his book behind the scenes

Shuja Nawaz had a vested interest as his brother Asif Nawaz was from Ayub Khans unit.

Also note that Shuja Nawaz in his work referred by you as encycolpedic distorted history and elevated his fatherin laws brother abdul ali malik as main hero of Chawinda while Shaukat Rizas official account maintains that Abdul Ali Malik was indecisive and just implored commanding officer 25 Cavalry “Nisar do something”

Problem is that in biased pakistan army hero had to be from between rivers indus and chenab ! Thus all Nishan i Haidars were awarded to people from this region as most generals were from this area.

I interviewed Major General Tajammul Hussain Malik in 2001 and he stated that Major Aziz Bhattis Nishan i Haidar award was not based on merit.

Even in Battle of Sulaimanke 6 FF Pashtun officer Farooq Afzal or Saeed Afzal was ignored.

I dont think that Nishan i Haidar could have been awarded to Karnal Sher and Lalak both non Punjabis if Pakistan Army had a non Punjabi Chief.

Even General Musharraf acknowledged General Kakars extreme parochialism in his book.

General Khwaja Ziauddin told me that on Asif Nawazs death Kakar requested General Ali Kuli to fly to Pindi to convince his relative President Ghulam Ishaq to appoint Kakar Chief.So Kakar was trying to reward his benefactor Ali Kuli.

It is same General Kakar who as per General Ameer Hamza was thrashed by Major Rasheed Warraich at Sulaimanke.

I remember Kakar was so unpopular for illegally stopping armys election allowance of 1993 elections that he was literally hooted by troops in Darbar held at Fortress stadium .I was on leave and went to this darbar to give company to a friend.

Brigadier Nisar main hero of 1965 war was just ignored by promotion boards as he was from Patiala (Pashtun descent) and not from main Punjabi belt.

It is same Nisar who was praised by Indians for his outstanding performance as commander of Changez Force in 1971.

You see Psc and afwc business came only in 1976 when MG Abdullah Saeed (6 FF) GOC 33 Division asked my father to write a paper and in that analysis it was discovered that most serving generals were non Psc or non afwc.Nisar was bypassed long before that time when Psc or afwc became compulsory.

Frankly much of what is going on in Pakistan is a farce.Pakistan seems to exist only between Indian border and Indus river !

In retrospect one may state that partition of 1947 was a failure .Punjabi Hindus regarded as exploiters were replaced by Lahore Gujranwala Faisalabad Sargodha and Pindi Divisions with some Pashtun low caste Khattak Kammis and Hindko Kakar clowns.LTC Feroz , 33 FF my squash partner in Okara in 1993 recounted that kakar counted cherries of his garden as corps commander and suspected that 33 FF guard was pinching the official residences gardens cherries ?

.
.



From same maj Agha Amin:


http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/...aj-retd-agha-humayun-amin-pakistan-army.8982/
http://www.defencejournal.com/2000/nov/pak-army.htm

Historical Background of Superiority Complex in the Pakistan Army

It is necessary to examine the historical reasons for this false feeling of superiority in the Pakistan Army in 1969-71. It may be noted that the vast bulk of Muslims, just like the vast bulk of Hindus of the Indo Pak Sub Continent were caught in a vicious square of "ethnicity” "ideology" "exploitation by feudal and capitalist classes" and above all "British Colonial rule" during the period 1858-1947. In 1857 the common soldiers (sepoys), both Hindu (some three fourth) and Muslims (around one fourth) from modern UP province attempted a rebellion against the British. This rebellion was crushed by the Britishers using European as well as Punjabi (largely Muslim and relatively less Sikh and Hindu) Pathan (less in number than Punjabis) Gurkha and Madrasi troops. The rebellion’s end in 1858 marked a major turn in British policy in India. Till 1857 British policy as executed by various Viceroys of the private English East India Company was markedly egalitarian and anti feudal. A major policy change was introduced from 1858 onwards once the British crown took over the governance of India. Feudals who were viewed as unnecessary anachronisms by Dalhousie were now viewed as allies against future rebels while ethnic/religious factors which were not important in army recruitment before 1857, now became a matter of careful policy, since the pre 1857 was largely one in which soldiers were mixed down to platoon level regardless of race or religion. The British policy now changed since the Hindustani44 Hindus and Muslims regardless of race or religion had jointly rebelled. Thus from 1858 onwards the British introduced the concept of One class companies with soldiers from one religious as well as ethnic class in any single infantry company or cavalry troop. Due to various reasons discussed in detail in the previous volume of this history the British actively followed a policy of Punjabising from 1858 to 1911. As a result by 1911 the Indian Army was largely a Punjabi although not a Punjabi Muslim dominated army45.

The reader may note that during the period 1885—1911 when the ethnic composition of the British Indian Army changed from a Hindustani majority/Hindu/Non Muslim dominated army to a Punjabi Majority/Punjabi Muslim heavy army in 1911; no major war took place; that could prove that Punjabi troops or Punjabi Muslim troops were better than Hindu troops or the Hindustanitroops, and the concept that the British changed the ethnic composition based on proven fighting ability in actual combat; has no connection with any reality of military history. Thus the “Martial Races Theory” was based more on political considerations than on any tangible or concrete military effectiveness or relative combat effectiveness in any war! In any case the pre 1947 Indian Army was never a Muslim majority army at any stage of its history. Many Britishers were crystal clear about the situational or historical relativity of the so called martial effectiveness even in the first half of the nineteenth century. Henry Lawrence a Civil Servant of the English East India Company thus summed up the whole business about martial effectiveness once he said “Courage goes much by opinion; and many a man behaves as a hero or a coward, according as he considers he is expected to behave. Once two Roman Legions held Britain; now as many Britons might hold Italy". On the other hand , the reasons why the British preferred the Punjabis in the army in preference to other races were rationalised by many Britishers by stating that the British preferred the Indian Army to be composed of “Martial Races”46.

The "Martial Races Theory" in reality was an Imperial gimmick to boost the ego of the cannon fodder. Various British writers like Philip Mason frankly admitted that the real reason for selective recruitment was political reliability in crisis situations which the Punjabis had exhibited during the 1857-58 Bengal Army rebellion.47 Another British officer thought that "Martial Races Theory" had a moresentimental and administrative basis rather than anything to do with real martial superiority. C.C Trench thus wrote, “Reasons for preferring northerners were largely racial. To Kiplings contemporaries, the taller and fairer a native, the better man he was likely to be…There was a general preference for the wild over the half educated native as being less addicted to unwholesome political thinking…Brahmins had been prominent in the mutiny, and their diet and prejudices made difficulties on active service48. The “Special Commission appointed by the Viceroy” to enquire into the organisation of Indian Army was more blunt in outlining the political reliability factor once it stated that "lower stratum of the Mohammadan urban population, the dispossessed landholders (many of them, off course, Muslims), the predatory classes, and perhaps the cadets of the old Muhammadan families (as)… the only people who really dislike British rule” 49 . The reason why the Punjabis whether Sikh Hindu or Muslim were more loyal to the British at least till 1919 lay in complex socio-political background of the province and the complex relationship between the Sikhs Hindus and Muslims of the province. Its discussion is beyond the scope of this work. The fact remains that in the first world war the Punjabi case for priority race for recruitment to the army was once again reinforced when the Punjabi soldiers, Sikh Muslim and Hindu loyally served the British in France Mesopotamia Egypt Palestine and Gallipoli. Philip Mason thus wrote that the "Punjabi Muslims were steady as a rock” while “a faint question mark hung over the Pathans” 50. Such was the difference in reliability within the units that when two Pathan squadrons of 15 Lancers passively refused to fight against the Turks in Mesopotamia, the Punjabi Squadrons remained staunch and the Pathan squadrons were disbanded and replaced by Hindustani Hindu Jat Squadrons from 14th Murray Jat Lancers! The Hindustani/Ranghar Muslims were also further discredited once the 5th Light Infantry a pure Hindustani/Ranghar Muslim unit composed of Delhi region Hindustani Pathans, and Ranghar Muslims rebelled and seized Singapore for about a day in 1915.51 It was more a question of political reliability than being more martial that led to further Punjabisation of the army after the first world war. Thus in 1929 as per the “Report of the Statutory Commission on Indian Constitutional Advancement”, military ability was not evenly distributed in the entire population and, the capacity to fight was confined to the martial races! The commission ignored the fact that recruitment was done to fill ethnic quotas as decided by the Indian government and was not open to all classes! As per this commission’s report some 86,000 or some 54.36% Indian Army combatants out of a total of 158,200 were from Punjab province. These did include some Ranghar Muslims who were administratively Punjabi although Hindustani ethnically/culturally, but there is no doubt that the vast bulk of these men were ethnically Punjabi. The important part of the whole business was the fact that once 19,000 Nepali Gurkhas, who were in reality foreigners, included in the above mentioned total of 158,200 men are excluded the Punjabi share in Indian Army rose to 61.8%. The Pathans thanks to their political record in the First World War had been reduced to just 5,600 men 52 or just 4.02% out of which at least a thousand were non Pathans!

The same state of affairs continued till the outbreak of the Second World War with the major change being the Punjabi Sikhs who became relatively less reliable politically because of being under communist influences 53. However the reader may note, so as not to be led astray by any false claims that in 1939 the Indian Army was only 37% Muslim, the rest being non Muslim including about 12.8 % Sikhs 10.9% Hindu Gurkhas and 37.6% other Hindus54. Immense demands of WW Two forced the British to diversify the recruitment pattern of the Indian Army and although Punjab remained the top contributor of recruits, it provided about 754,551 out of a total of 24,61,446, or 30.65% recruits to the Indian Army between 3rd September 1939 and 31 August 1945. 55 The reader may note that some 314,356 or a total of 41.66% from the Punjab contribution and 12.77% recruits were Punjabi Muslims56. Thus although Punjab led positionwise as a province in recruitment, there never was any Punjabi Muslim majority or even Punjabi Muslim majority or even near majority in recruitment to the Indian Army in WW Two. However a myth was widely propagated in Pakistan that the Punjabi Muslims were the most martial race and the Pathan Muslims were the second most martial race57. I may add that I heard this ridiculous and irrational myth thousands of times in the course of my 13 years service in Pakistan Army. On the other hand the knowledge of historical knowledge may be gauged from the fact that as late as 1992 in a book written and published in the staff college a brigadier made the Mughal Emperor Humayun fight the second battle of Panipat, at a time when Humayun was already dead!

In August 1947 the British Indian Army was divided into the Pakistan and Indian armies. Two divergent recruitment policies were followed in both the armies. The Indians broadened their army’s recruitment base, officially declaring that recruitment was open to all Indian nationals.58 Thus the post 1947 Indian Army drifted away from being the pre 1939 Punjabised army. In Pakistan, Mr Jinnah the politician-statesmen who created Pakistan almost single-handedly, as the country’s first Head of State, adopted a sensible policy, to make the army a national army. Jinnah ordered immediate raising of two infantry battalions of Bengali Muslims in 1948 reversing the anti Bengali policy of the pre 1947 British colonial government.59 Jinnah’s far sighted as well as just policy of bringing Bengalis in the fighting arms of the Pakistan Army was discontinued by General Ayub Khan who was the first Pakistani Muslim C in C of the Pakistan Army and became the Army Chief in January 1951. Ayub although allegedly guilty of tactical timidity in the WW Two in Burma60 had a low opinion61 about the Bengalis and discontinued the expansion of the East Bengal Infantry Regiment from 1951 to 1966. Thus by 1966 the Pakistan Army was a predominantly West Pakistani (Punjabi dominated) army. In addition the vast bulk of it except one infantry division was stationed in West Pakistan in line with the strategic concept evolved in Ayub’s time that the defence of East Pakistan lay in West Pakistan. Thus the “Martial Races Theory” was carried on till 1971 and in 1971 the vast bulk of West Pakistanis really felt that they were a martial race. This superiority complex played a major part in the wishful thinking in the Pakistani High Command that somehow the Indians would not invade East Pakistan in strength or even if they did so, the troops of this martial race (which was subdued by an 8 % Sikh minority from 1799 to 1849, till it was liberated by the English East India Company!) would frustrate the Indian Army, despite all the tangible numerical and material Pakistani inferiority. Foreign Secretary Sultan Khan’s memoirs are full of the existence of this irrational belief in the Pakistani High Command. Whatever the case at least the 1971 War proved that the real reason for the Indian Army’s martial fervour or relatively better performance was the British factor, keeping in mind the net total available resources of British Empire or its allies in the two worldwars.

.
.

Martial Races Theory. Myths and Consequences

Major Agha H Amin (retired)

 

[LordOfTheUnderworlds]

Origins of the British East India Company Army

Mughal central authority was rapidly evaporating in eighteenth century India. Many local governors became de facto independent and many soldiers of fortunes were busy carving out their own fiefdoms. In this anarchy, foreign invaders as well as local robber bands frequently descended on helpless population for loot and depart as quickly as possible. East India Company (EIC) expanded its control of large swaths of India only due to superior military organization compared to the military organizations of its opponents. EIC, French, Portuguese, Mughal, Marhattas, Rohillas, Nawab of Arcot, Nizam of Hyderabad, Hyder Ali and his son Tipu Sultan of Mysore and Nawab of Bengal were competing for the spoils and each party was competing and cooperating depending on local circumstances. Many soldiers of fortunes found eighteenth century India a fertile ground. French, English, Dutch, Portuguese, German, Swiss, Pathans, Afghans, Arabs and Africans found ready employment with power brokers. They frequently changed sides depending on the prevailing situation.

In 1744, war broke out between Great Britain and France, and their trading companies in India also got entangled in the conflict. French captured Madras in 1746 and EIC was forced to organize a military establishment. They raised European infantry, artillery and cavalry and native infantry. This was the foundation of Madras army also known as Coast Army. Bodies of sepoys of various strengths were under the command of their own chiefs. Sepoys brought their own arms consisting of matchlock, sword, spears, dagger etc. Chief was given the pay of the men under his command which he distributed. If he owned the arms and loaned it to his sepoy, he charged one rupee a month from the sepoy for the use of his arms. When two or more bodies of sepoys were employed together a European non-commissioned or commissioned officer was sent with the party. Early European soldiers of EIC were soldiers of fortune of different nationalities including English, French, German, Swiss and Dutch. Native sepoys included Rajputs, Hindustanis (mainly from Bombay), Arabs (mainly from their settlements in Bombay), Topasses (Christian offspring of Portuguese and native women) and Coffrees (natives of East Africa and Madagascar brought as slaves). Locals made a very small proportion of the contingent until 1756 when circumstances necessitated local recruitment. When most of the Madras troops were in Bengal, French captured Madras. After this setback company realized the need for a more disciplined force to defend its territories.

Major Stringer Lawrence is considered father of the Indian army. He laid the foundations of what was to become the Indian Army. In January 1748, Major Stringer Lawrence landed at Fort St. David to take charge of the fort when French had defeated the British. Later, Lawrence was appointed Commander-in-Chief of company’s army in India. A very able soldier Muhammad Yusuf was appointed commandant of all native sepoys and a Brahman Poniapa served as Lawrence’s interpreter.

Early recruitment for EIC army was from a wide social base. A number of sepoys were from “untouchable” Paraiya community. All sepoys served together in composite companies with no consideration for caste sensibilities. Bengal army was an exception where high caste Brahmins dominated.

After defeat of French and Marhattas, Bombay army became the smallest establishment of three armies. After the conquest of Sindh in 1843, new regiments were raised to patrol the new border of Sindh and Baluchistan.


In Bengal few hundred natives, four companies of Europeans and one company of artillery were employed to guard factories. In January 1757, when Calcutta was retaken from Siraj-ud-Daula, a battalion of native sepoys was raised with three officers (one captain, one lieutenant and one ensign) from Madras detachment. In early organization of sepoy battalions, European officers were assisted by a Sergeant Major and few Sergeants. A native commandant and native adjutant also assisted commanding officer.

Early officers of EIC army were soldiers of fortune and discontent was mainly over salary and prize money. If a town resisted then normal procedure was to allow soldiers to loot the place for a specific period of time and this loot was later distributed among all according to their station in life. Many officers accumulated reasonable amount of wealth and went back to England.

EIC started as a trading company but quickly got entangled in local intrigues and power play. EIC needed a strong muscle to compete in the power arena that required establishment of an organized military machine. Native peons were transformed into professional soldiers. The impact of EIC army was not limited to military but had a broader social impact on natives. Illiterate villagers were exposed to modern ideas and native lives were changed for generations to come.

http://www.brownpundits.com/2017/01/05/martial-races-theory-myths-and/
The EEIC (English East India Company) since it made its entry from the east had no choice but to recruit from Oudh, parts of Bihar, North West Provinces Madras Bombay Central India etc. In the earlier part of this work we have seen that using a predominantly Hindu army recruited from the Gangetic plain and led by British officers, the pre-1857 Bengal Army defeated all races of India, Pakistan, Nepal, Afghanistan etc. A small contingent of the Bombay Army (made up mostly of Hindu Marhattas) quickly made Persia behave! A couple of Bengal Army Regiments reinforced by an odd European regiment successfully defended Kandahar and Jallalabad against vastly superior forces.

 

[LordOfTheUnderworlds]

Good map of British India

https://cbkwgl.wordpress.com/2013/06/26/list-of-princely-states-of-india/



.
.
Very good list with notes

Provinces of British India

Princely States of India A-J

Princely States of India K-Z

 

[Willy2]

@LordOfTheUnderworlds ,In Rajputana agency Ajmer was an exception , was ruled directly by Britishers .Scindias ceded those territory to Britishers as per treaty ,for how long there was no independent Rajput king or dynasty in Ajmer ?

 

[mayfair]

No. Bahawalpur was always set on joining Pakistan. The nawab is reported to have even paid the salaries for many Pakistani afsaraan post-partition.

 

[F-14B]

No. Bahawalpur was always set on joining Pakistan. The nawab is reported to have even paid the salaries for many Pakistani afsaraan post-partition.

adding to what @mayfair said the Nawab Bahawalpur was one of the most prolific donors to the Indian Muslim league and Nawab and Quaid-i-Azam were close friends and they had great respect for each other even before the creation of Pakistan. The Ameer of Bahawalpur Refugee Relief and Rehabilitation Fund was instituted in 1947 for providing a central organization for the relief of the refugees. The Quaid-e-Azam acknowledged the valuable contribution of the Bahawalpur State for the rehabilitation of the refugees.
adding from Wikipedia
On independence, Bahawalpur State acceded to Pakistan and in 1952, Bahawalpur Infantry was integrated into Pakistan Army as the Bahawalpur Regiment. The regiment was entirely composed of Punjabi Muslims. The Regimental Centre was based at Dera Nawab Sahib.[2] Uniform of the new regiment was of rifle green colour with scarlet facings. Officers' winter mess kit was of French grey cloth with black cuffs and facings, and blue overalls. Cummerband was rifle green. Cap badge of gilding metal consisted of a pelican surmounted by a star and crescent, the whole surrounded by a date palm wreath, with a scroll below, inscribed 'Bahawalpur Regiment'. Backing for the cap badge was of circular maroon cloth. The lanyard was of maroon cord.[5][6].

As part of Bahawalpur army, one field artillery regiment(then, 1st Bahawalpur Artillery Regiment, now 14 Abbasia Field Artillery Regiment was integrated in Pakistan Army as part of integration plan in 1952. Since 1690, 14 Abbasia Field Artillery (14 Bahawalpur Artillery Regiment after partition ) played key role in dismantling enemy forces as well as mutiny rises, with deadly accuracy, and is well known as the best artillery regiment of Pakistan Army.

In July 1948, 5th Bahawalpur Light Infantry was raised from Muslim officers and men of 2nd Patiala Infantry, who had opted for Pakistan. It was redesignated as 4 Bahawalpur in 1952 (Later 21 Baluch Regiment). In 1956, a major re-organization took place in Pakistan Army and the existing infantry regiments were amalgamated to form larger regimental groups. As a result, the Bahawalpur Regiment was merged with the Baluch Regiment. The new line up of Bahawalpur Infantry with its supporting artillery regiment was

• 1st (Sadiq) Battalion The Bahawalpur Regiment - 8th Battalion The Baluch Regiment - 1st Abbasia

• 2nd (Haroon) Battalion The Bahawalpur Regiment - 9th Battalion The Baluch Regiment

• 3rd (Abbas) Battalion The Bahawalpur Regiment - 20th Battalion The Baluch Regiment

• 4th Battalion The Bahawalpur Regiment - 21st Battalion The Baluch Regiment

• 1st Bahawalpur Artillery Regiment - 14 (Abbasia) Field Regiment Artillery

 

[dhananjay1]

Both Bhawalpur and Khairpur were lost in the 18th C. Before that they were ruled by Bhatti Rajputs of Jaisalmer. Even the Rohri hills between these two states were part of Bhatti kingdom. There are records of Bhatti kings taking bath in Sindhu, border of their kingdom reaching upto the river.

 

[LordOfTheUnderworlds]

Forgotten Sindhi Script – Waranki
Posted on June 6, 2013 by Rakesh Lakhani




.

 

[LordOfTheUnderworlds]

Published Sep 04, 2016 07:12am
Raja Todar Mal and his revenue collection system
MAJID SHEIKH

HARKING BACK: Raja Todar Mal and his revenue collection system
MAJID SHEIKH
On the 8th of November, 1589, one of the largest funeral processions ever to leave the Walled City of Lahore headed for the River Ravi outside Mori Gate. The cremation of Raja Todar Mal was taking place and almost every dignitary in the court of Emperor Akbar was there.

The proceedings were supervised by Raja Bhagwan Das, the head of Lahore’s revenue department, and the fire was lighted by Todar Mal’s son Kalyan Das, who would rise to become the Finance Minister in Akbar’s ‘darbar’. The death of this ‘jewel’ among the ‘Nau Ratans’ of Akbar had been preceded by the death of Raja Birbal, and suddenly, it seems, the ‘kitchen cabinet’ or ‘Nau Ratans’ was diminishing, much to the emperor’s dismay. Raja Todar Mal’s eldest son Dhari had earlier been killed in battle fighting for the Mughals in Sindh.

We know of the ‘haveli’ of Todar Mal in Chunian, and my dear friend travel writer Salman Rashid has written an excellent piece on the now dilapidated ‘baradari of Todar Mal’. Inside the Walled City just where did this famous Revenue Minister of Akbar live? Two places have been mentioned, one being in Chuna Mandi and the other near the mosque of Wazir Khan. My guess is that as Chuna Mandi existed in the pre-Akbar Lahore with scores of impressive ‘havelis’, that location seems more likely. The area where today stands the mosque was in the process of being included inside the expanded city and was essentially open space, or in Mughal documents a ‘rahra maidan’.

Raja Todar Mal took over from the famous eunuch, Khawaja Malik Itimad Khan, in 1560. The reason given for this change by the emperor was that the Mughals were not extracting enough revenue for the court and his military campaigns. Raja Todar Mal explained to the emperor that the Khawaja’s strategy of centralised revenue collection had reached its optimum and further forceful tactics will see a decline in collections. The emperor appointed him to overhaul the system and show higher returns.

Raja Todar Mal went about his task in a very methodical manner. First, he introduced standard weights and measures. Based on these standards he carried out a thorough land survey and put into place the principles of a settlement system by first demarcating revenue districts. Once the basics had been put in place he personally appointed revenue officers, with the ‘patwaris’ at the lowest rung. This system of ‘patwar-khanas’ is still used in the sub-continent, though recent computerisation, based on GIS, in both the Indian and Pakistani Punjab have taken the land marking system to an electronic format. The system remains the same.

The new system of revenue was known as ‘zabt’ and the system of taxation was called ‘dahshala’. This system carefully surveyed crop yields and prices over a ten-year period (1570-1580), and on the average, catering for market price ups and downs and yield fluctuations based on weather conditions, fixed on each crop a cash tax. Each province was divided into revenue circles with their own rates of revenue and a schedule of individual crops.

In 1582, Akbar bestowed on Raja Todar Mal the title of ‘Diwan-e-Ashraf’ and his systematic land reforms of 1582 was called the ‘Band-o-bast Nizam’. This system was to prove to be the basis of all subsequent land taxation systems, including the one introduced by the British.

It would be in order to mention that before Raja Todar Mal, the revenue system in place was the one introduced by Sher Shah Suri. In this the cultivated area was measured and a fixed tax imposed based on the area’s crop and optimum known productivity. This, naturally, led to extreme tension between the ruler and the Punjab peasantry when conditions were abnormal. From such situations grew a very potent peasant uprising led by men like Dullah Bhatti and his father. These uprisings were ruthlessly crushed and it was in such a time that thinking men like Raja Todar Mal emerged to advise Emperor Akbar to change to a decentralised ten-year running average system of annual assessment. The former system had also resulted in corruption among local officials.

The new system, amazingly, had a much more humane side to it, for it provided remission to peasants when the harvest failed because of floods or drought. To encourage the use of fallow or uncultivated land, exceptional concessions and low rates of revenue were provided. The standard rate of taxation was a third of the average. It was a one-time tax with no other levies of any sort. Suddenly revenue collections rose sharply.

But the master stroke of Raja Todar Mal was to get the emperor, much against opposition of influential court and military leaders, to agree to let ‘zamindars’ and peasants have hereditary rights. The ‘zamindar’ was tasked with providing peasants with loans, seeds and implements. Against this he had the hereditary right to collect taxes, keep a small amount and hand over the State’s share. Peasants, in return, could not be thrown off land as long as they paid their taxes. It was a win-win situation that brought peace and a lot of money with it.

But built within this ‘new’ agricultural system, one that changed the Punjab forever, was a check and balance mechanism. Revenue officials were provided only three-fourths of their salary. The remaining was given once the assessed revenue was realised. A famous saying of Raja Todar Mal, probably still relevant, goes: “Trust the poor peasant and he will deliver. Trust the powerful and they will never deliver. Leverage is essential to grease any system.”

The system put in place by Raja Todar Mal faced a massive test after his death when a terrible four-year famine hit Punjab from 1596 to 1598, as it did major parts of the Mughal Empire. To fend off mass starvation in Lahore and its environs, Akbar appointed a ‘Famine Officer’ by the name of Sheikh Fareed Bukhari. Three separate kitchens were set up, one each for Hindus, Muslims and ‘Jogis’, a polite name for ‘untouchables’ as caste-based people term still in use, though the word ‘Dalit’ provides surface comfort.

The task was to feed 80,000 starving people who had converged on Lahore. There was a catch which the emperor imposed, and that being that only those who worked free to rebuild Lahore’s city and fort in burnt bricks would get food. Through Todar Mal’s new system the emperor imposed a special ‘famine tax’ at the rate of “ten seers of wheat for every ‘biga’ for as long as the drought lasted”. The tax was fully paid and the system functioned amazingly efficiently. Lahore and its fort got its first bricked walls, mass starvation was avoided and the emperor managed to collect handsome revenue.

Sadly, the famine did produce a lot of misery as bodies lay all over the city every morning. Abdul Hamid Lahori’s ‘Badshahnama’ comments: “Given half a chance men devoured each other”. It was in those days that the term ‘Mooyan de Mandi’ came about, a reference to dead bodies being thrown in heaps every morning on the banks of the Ravi at Mahmood Booti, north of the Walled City. (contradictory statement to the claim in previous paragraph?) Farmers still report finding human bones when they dig deep in their fields.

To the north was ‘mooyan de mandi’ and to the south outside Mori Gate was the place where Raja Todar Mal was cremated, as was almost 1,000 years ago the great Rajput Punjabi ruler Maharajadhiraja Sri Jayapala Deva, who committed ‘jauhar’ after being defeated by the Afghan invader Mahmud. In my view this is ‘the immortals cremation ground’.

Published in Dawn, September 4th, 2016

 

[LordOfTheUnderworlds]

@LordOfTheUnderworlds ,In Rajputana agency Ajmer was an exception , was ruled directly by Britishers .Scindias ceded those territory to Britishers as per treaty ,for how long there was no independent Rajput king or dynasty in Ajmer ?

http://bharatdiscovery.org/india/अजमेर
This page says in 12th century, after Ghauri defeated Pruthviraj Chauhan, ajmer went to muslim rulers of Delhi. Since then fate of Ajmer has been tied to that of Delhi.
http://bharatdiscovery.org/india/तारागढ़_का_क़िला_अजमेर
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taragarh_Fort

From wikipedia

Ajmer subah
Under Mughal imperial rule, Ajmer was a central subah (top-level province)

A Subah (Urdu: صوبہ) was the term for a province in the Mughal Empire. The subahs were established by badshah(emperor) Akbar during his administrative reforms of years 1572-1580; initially they numbered to 12, but his conquests expanded the number of subahs to 15 by the end of his reign. Subahs were divided into Sarkars, or districts. Sarkars were further divided into Parganas or Mahals. His successors, most notably Aurangzeb, expanded the number of subahs further through their conquests. As the empire began to dissolve in the early 18th century, many subahs became effectively independent, or were conquered by the Marathas or the British.

, roughly most of present Rajasthan, one of the twelve original provinces created by Akbar the Great, bordering Delhi (later Shahjahanbad), Agra (later Akbarabad), Malwa, Gujarat, Thatta (Sindh) and Multan subahs.


Ajmer state
In 1950, Ajmer state became a "Part C" state, governed by a chief commissioner appointed by the President of India. Haribhau Upadhyaya, a noted Congress leader, was the Chief Minister of Ajmer state from 24 March 1952 to 31 October 1956.

Ajmer state was merged into Rajasthan state on 1 November 1956

It seems it was power centre for Delhi/Agra rulers right in middle of Rajputana. India is too big. Central rulers didn't have to rule every town directly. They stayed garrisoned in certain power centres and received taxes and tributes. Even now you can see muslims are more in urban areas than villages and concentrated in certain cities. Later such towns had British cantonments on outskirts and now Indian army cantonments.

छावनी{chhavani}=CANTONMENT(Noun)

उदाहरण : छावनी मे सिपाई रहेते है
Usage : army stays in cantonment in times of peace.

Maybe it has something to do with its location.

Towards east there is Jaipur whose rulers had submitted to Mughals and eere junior coalition partners in government. (jaipur is close to Delhi and contiguous with northern plains with no natural protection to use against invaders unlike Mewad state that had hilly areas.).
And towards south is Chittorgarh of Mewad state.

 

[LordOfTheUnderworlds]

Both Bhawalpur and Khairpur were lost in the 18th C. Before that they were ruled by Bhatti Rajputs of Jaisalmer. Even the Rohri hills between these two states were part of Bhatti kingdom. There are records of Bhatti kings taking bath in Sindhu, border of their kingdom reaching upto the river.

Khairpur (princely state) 1775-1955

Kalhora dynasty 1711-1793

Talpur dynasty 1783-1843

Wikipedia says most of Sindh (or at least northern part of Sindh) was ruled from Khairpur by some Talpur clan, who were Baloch.

Talpurs had usurped Khairpur by overthrowing some Kalhora rulers.


BTW Asif Ali Zardari is also supposed to be Baloch. His sister's name is Faryal Talpur.
(internet Pakistanis curse them a lot)

 

[Willy2]

http://bharatdiscovery.org/india/अजमेर
This page says in 12th century, after Ghauri defeated Pruthviraj Chauhan, ajmer went to muslim rulers of Delhi. Since then fate of Ajmer has been tied to that of Delhi.
http://bharatdiscovery.org/india/तारागढ़_का_क़िला_अजमेर
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taragarh_Fort

Interesting ...Though I never found any credible information about it , I always assume that when Rana sangram singh establish independent Rajput confederation in late Lodi rule , there must be some king to administrate Ajmer like other confederate state.

 

[LordOfTheUnderworlds]

^^^

Zardari is of course husband of Slain Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto.

Bhutto family is a big landlord family from Larkana, Sindh.

Benazir's father was PM Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto (Shia) who was hanged by Army and mother was Iranian (according to conspiracy theories, planted by Iranian intelligence agency).

Zulfiqar Ali's father was 'Sir' Shahnawaz Bhutto. He was born and went to school in Bombay, his elder brother was member of legislative assembly.

Bhutto entered the Legislative Council of the Bombay Province, of which Sindh was a part. He became a minister in the Bombay government.......

Bhutto attended the Round Table Conference in 1931 as a leader of Sindhi Muslims demanding separation of Sind from the Bombay province. This was eventually granted in the Government of India Act, 1935, with Sind becoming a separate province on 1 April 1936. Bhutto was appointed as a chief advisor to the Governor of Sind.

This Shahnawaz Bhutto became Dewan/Prime Minister of small princely state of Junagarh in Gujarat. He unsuccessfully tried to accede Junagarh to Pakistan.


This Bhutto family had huge land holding in Larkana and was involved in electoral politics since early days of British rule.

Can't trace family history beyond that except, the family's own claim that they are converted Rajputs and their ancestor called Sheto migrated from Rajputana

History
Bhuttos originally migrated to Sindh in the early 18th century from the neighboring region of Rajputana (now Rajasthan in India). Bhutto's paternal ancestors were HinduRajputs, who converted to Islam in the late 17th century. Sheto was the first member of the Bhutto family, who converted to Islam, to reap tax exemptions for Muslims, during Mughal emperor Aurangzeb's reign. Following the conversion he took the title of Khan, becoming Sheto Khan.[3] In Sindh, Bhuttos under Sheto first settled at Ratodero, a few miles north of Larkana.

Though some internet Pakistanis say they are Arain caste.
.

https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/pakistan/bhutto.htm
Bhutto Family
Pakistan's political system is broken: its political parties are ineffective, functioning for decades as instruments of two families, the Bhuttos and the Sharifs, two clans, both corrupt. The Bhutto-Zardari axis may be considered "left leaning," while the Sharif brothers may be considered "right leaning." The Sharifs are much closer to Pakistan's military, and to Pakistan's Muslim fundamentalists. Punjabi, the Sharifs represent Pakistan's major ethnic bloc, and the devout Sunni Sharif has an advantage over the Bhuttos, who have Shiite ties. Some viewed Bhutto's Shiite origins with suspicion. Benazir Bhutto's mother Begum Nusrat Bhutto is of Pakistani-Iranian Kurdish origin, in the same way of the Shiite Muslim faith. Her father's name, Zulfaqar, was a prominent Shiia name (it refers to the sword of the Blessed Imam Ali), and, in turn, Zulfaqar's father had lived in Iran.

The Mughal Empire administered a patchwork of fiefdoms through a system tax collectors, called Zamindar. The Bhutto clan, one of many such Zamindar tax collectors, have been wealthy time out of mind. The Bhutto clan is centered in Sindh, once the heart of the Mughal Empire. Akhbar the Great was also born in Sindh. The Bhutto clan is rajput, the hereditary warrior caste which dominates the armies of India and Pakistan to this day.

The Bhutto family traces its migration from Jaiselmere in India to Sindh to Setho Khan Bhutto in the fifteenth century AD. The Bhutto family migrated to Sindh during the reign of Mughuls when Kalhoras were ruling in Sindh under the suzerainty of Mughul Emperors. They settled and established themselves in Taluka Ratodero, District Larkana and owned vast tracts of fertile land in the District of Larkana, Jacobabad and Shikarpur. Where rice, cotton and sugarcane was produced in plant. By some accounts the Bhutto family was the biggest and wealthiest landlord in Sindh and their style of living and conducting themselves was totally different from rest of their class in Sindh; they could face any situation any adversary and dignity, and unlike many other landlords they finally believed in pomp, pageantry, dignity and authority.

These Rajput converts probably became Muslims in the 18th century. Doda Khan Bhutto headed of the family during the Talpur Dynasty, and then during Charles Napier's rule of Sindh. Doda Khan Bhutto worked to acquire large tracts of land, and was responsible for the vast land ownership of the Bhutto family. By one account Doda Khan Bhutto was described by the British as "the best and most enterprising zamindar in the whole of sindh".

Dodo Khan Bhutto was one of the most important zamindars in Sind. Doda Khan had three sons, of whom Khuda Baksh Bhutto was the eldest, and Hahi Bakhsh, and Amir Bakhsh. Pir Baksh Bhutto founded the ancestral home of the Bhutto family, Garhi Pir Baksh Bhutto. The Bhutto mausoleum in Garhi Khuda Bakhsh was built by the Zamindar Khuda Bakhsh Khan Bhutto [and hugely enlarged by Benazir Bhutto]. Sardar Murtaza Bhutto built a great estate in Larkana and named it Al Murtaza [he who pleases God].

Pir Bakhsh Khan Bhutto was invited by His Highness Mir Ali Murad Khan Talpur to send his son Allah Bakhsh Khan Bhutto to Khairpur where he was kept an honorable hostage at the Talpur court for five years, "to ensure that my family did not revolt." Such was the rebellion nature of Bhutto family that even the Talpurs to whom Pir Bakhsh Khan owed his allegiance and their ownership of vast areas was confirmed as a friendly gesture by the Talpur rulers, had to be vigilant about them.

The British, who were entertaining the idea of grabbing India, would not spare the Talpurs of Sindh. Against all their promises of friendship and cooperation, they conquered Sindh shamelessly in March 1843. The Talpur rulers and their families were dispatched as prisoner to Calcutta.

When the Talpurs were defeated, overthrown, imprisoned and replaced by the all-powerful Britishers, it is said that most of the landlords frightened and demoralized behaved like cringing cowards and professional flatters to please their new foreign masters. But proponets recoung that credit goes to the Bhutto family, self respecting and to an extent proud, not overawed by the powerful British rulers, and their attitude, ways and behavior were said to have remained unchanged.

Wadero (landholder) Ghulam Murtaza, Khuda Baksh Bhutto's son, was a wealthy man with estates in the Shikarpur and Upper Sind. An endless stream of legal cases was initiated against Mir Ghulam Murtaza Khan and his self respecting father, Khuda Bakhsh Khan [who died in 1896]. They had to pour money for defending against the atrocities and conspiracies of the British, supported by the sycophant Waderas (landholders). Fleeing the British, Ghulam Murtaza escaped into the independent state of Bahawalpur. But after the British threatened to seize the state, Ghulam Murtaza thanked the Nawab for his hospitality and crossed the Indus again to gain sanctuary in the kingdom of Afghanistan, where he was a guest of the royal family. In fury, the British seized all his lands in 1896, and his family was forced by the Superintendent of Police to leave their once luxurious home in Garhi Khuda Bakhsh Bhutto village of Sindh Ratodero Taluka, with only clothes on their bodies.

Finally a compromise was worked out with the British and Ghulam Murtaza returned to Larkana. But his days were numbered. He became ill and began to lose weight. The hakims, or village doctors, suspected poison, though no one could find the source. He had tasters test his food and drinking water, but the poisoning continued until it killed him in 1896 at the young age of twenty-seven. Afterward, the source was found to be his hookah, the water pipe he used to smoke tobacco after dinner. Now the entire burden and responsibility of the eminent Bhutto family fell on immature and inexperienced Shah Nawaz Khan. It was now a stupendous task to look after such a big family, vast areas of lands spread in different Districts, face the family opponents and the hostile administration.

Ratodero is a sub-district city some 28 km away from Larkana in Pakistan. There are Bhutto family bungalows in the town and vast agricultural land in the surrounding area, and many of their relatives live here. The first of the Bhutto family to reside here was Rasool Bakhsh Khan Bhutto, after him Khan Bahadur Ahmed Khan Bhutto became the pagdar. Nawab Nabi Bakhsh khan Bhutto, brother of Sardar Wahid Bakhsh khan Bhutto, was the member of the Delhi Legislative, and for a time the president of District Local Board Larkano. His son Mumtaz Ali Khan Bhutto had been chief minister of Sindh and federal minister in National assembly. This city very well known by the political leaders like Sir Shah nawaz Khan Bhutto, Nawab Nabi Bux Khan Bhutto, Zulifqar Ali Bhutto (PPP), Benzir Bhutto (Chair-Person PPP), and Mumtaz Ali Khan Bhutto (Sindh National Front).

Shahnawaz Bhutto was born on March 8, 1888 in Village Garhi Khuda Bakhsh Khan Bhutto, Taluka Ratodero. Shahnawaz Bhutto was Khuda Baksh Bhutto's grandson, and the son of the Wadero Ghulam Murtaza Bhutto. Sardar Murtaza Bhutto's son Shahnawaz was sent away to school in England. When Shahnawaz returned to India in 1908, he managed to extricate himself and, through education and family background, create a position of importance for himself in British Indian society. Shahnawaz Bhutto had the reputation of being a spokesman of Sindh in British India, having been primarily responsible for the separation of Sindh from Bombay Presidency. In 1925 Shahnawaz Bhutto became President of the Sindh National Mohammedan Association. The Sindh United Party, formed in 1937, drew its early leadership from such leading Muslim landowners as Sir Shah, Nawaz Bhutto, Allah Baksh, Umar Soomro and Yar Muhammad Junejo. In 1940, Sir Shahnawaz Bhutto formed the Sindh Party.

In 1947 he moved to Junagadh, a small Princely State, and became the Dewan [ie Prime Minister] of Junagadh, called Dewan Shahnawaz. In the official version of the story, in 1947 Dewan Shahnawaz forced his erstwhile master the Nawab to cede Junagadh to India. Shahnawaz became Sir Shah Nawaz Bhutto, Companion of the Order of the Indian Empire, and Officer of the Order of the British Empire, for his help in the partition of Pakistan and India.

Coming from a wealthy Zamindar family in the days when taxation was reasonable, and practically non-existent for the Zamindars, the Bhuttos had acquired a vast fortune. Zulifikar Ali Bhutto, the Pakistani political leader, served as President of Pakistan from 1971 to 1973 and as Prime Minister from 1973 to 1977. In 1977, he was ousted in a military coup by General Muhammed Zia-Ul- Haq and was arrested. He was hanged on April 4, 1979 for alledgedly ordering the murder of a political opponent in 1974. His daughter Benazir Bhutto, served as Prime Minister from 1988 to 1990 and from 1993 to 1996.

 

[dhananjay1]

Interesting ...Though I never found any credible information about it , I always assume that when Rana sangram singh establish independent Rajput confederation in late Lodi rule , there must be some king to administrate Ajmer like other confederate state.

Ajmer largely remained under Delhi rule but there were times when it was raided by Rajputs. If I remember correctly Maharana Kumbha raided Ajmer and Naguar more than once. The region was also under Marwad rule for a time.

 

[LordOfTheUnderworlds]

Sufis and the separatist identity
Tahir Kamran November 26, 20172 Comments


Different perspectives in scholarship

Thus the political instrument of Muslim separatism, as projected in our national narrative, has been either Muslim modernists or the literalist ulema like Shabbir Ahmed Usmani, Mufti Muhammad Shafi and Zafar Ahmad Ansari. Subsequent to the secession of East Pakistan, Maulana Maududi too was added to the coterie of such people.From 1949 onwards, these clerics started asserting themselves, the impact of which resonates to this day.

What remains to be properly investigated even to this day, is the role of supposedly more ‘eclectic’ and ‘inclusive’ section of the ulema with Sufi overtones in an extremely complex process of securing a separate state for the Muslims of North India.

Much of the scholarship on Sufism tends to study it from an anthropological prism, thereby discounting their political contribution towards pushing the separatist agenda.

Another myth that has been called into question is the inclusive and peaceful disposition of the Sufis and dargah as the site of mystic spirituality. As they are demonstrated in these texts, Sufis had been politically oriented with separatist tendencies and at times they resorted to violence. That is true not only of Sufis belonging to Naqshbandia Order, which is considered prone to religious literalism but Chishti Sufi (taken in as peaceful and eclectic in their ideology) were no different.

Hussain Ahmad Khan employs the term neo-Sufism to make sense of ‘the tendencies among nineteenth-century Sufis in Punjab’. To them Sikhs and British posed threat to the existence of Islam. In the situation of political decline of the Mughals, the Sufis assumed the role of moral reformers and propounded the notion of Khalifa or Imam for the Muslims. They also resorted to purify the religion as they, like the Ulema, thought deviation from the righteous path had caused the political decline.

Thus the separatist identity of the Indian Muslims had its initiation among the Sufis by ‘Othering’ the non-Muslims. Strangely enough no commonality could be struck even with the Sikhs, the creed embedded in the local Sufi tradition represented in the poetic articulations of Baba Farid Ganj Shakar.

Khan also argues that Hagiographic literature mentions several reasons for the violence that Sufis resorted to, but importantly enough; the Sikhs were suspicious of Sufi circles because of their close nexus with the Muslim power centres. In the late 18th and early 19th centuries, Hafiz Jamal and his followers fought against the Sikhs, along with the army of Nawab Muzaffar Khan, the ruler of Multan. Similarly a Sufi, Mian Muhammad Afzal spearheaded the revolt against Sikhs and was killed along with scores of his followers.

One may argue here that Sufis, despite inclusive nature of their message, were at a loss to come to terms with the situation in which they did not have political patronage from the rulers. Was their existence contingent on the royal patronage?

Another worth asking question is the amenability of the Sufis towards non-Muslims. The much-trumpeted good will that Sufis had enjoyed from non-Muslims stands contested if not entirely exploded. The Jihad Tehreek led by Syed Ahmed Shaheed and Shah Ismael Shaheed is also mentioned in this regard.

Coming to the militant Sufis, one can quote Shah Ghulam Ali (1743-1824) of Shahjahanabad (Delhi) and Fadl-e-Haq Khairabadi (1797-1861). Later was a Sufi scholar from Awadh. He waged jihad against the British in 1857. Haji Imdadullah Makki (1817-99) is yet another example of such Sufis who fought against the British and as a consequence had to flee away to Arabia into self-exile. By that time, neo- Sufism seemed to have taken the centre stage. Religious literalism, the primacy of the text and aggressive methods of proselytization became the principal features of religious discourse of which the traditional Sufism was merely an appendage.

The fact however remains that the general impression about Sufis and Sufism must correspond with historical reality and that contravenes the former.