Quiz : No:2

Q:Write a short notes of Communal Award&Give the effect of Hindus &Muslims in the
historical subcontinent?

Under the Act of 1919, after every 10 years new reforms were to be introduced in India by the Indian
British Government and for this purpose a commission was formed. The commission was called the
Simon Commission that was headed by Sir John Simon. This commission was failed in its objective. After
this Nehru report was formed in 1928 but this report was rejected by Muslim leaders and Muhammad
Ali Jinnah presented 14 points against this report but these points were not accepted by Hindus. Under
these conditions the constitutional crisis took a serious shape and to overcome the crisis 3 round table
conferences were held in London from 1930 to 1932. The first and second round table conferences were
failed and it was seemed that it is impossible to resolve the communal problems so in 1932 the British
Government announced its own formula known as Communal Award. This award retained separate
electorate for Muslims and all other minorities. On the basis of weighage Muslim received more
representation in Muslim minority provinces. The European settlers got this privilege in Bengal and
Assam while Sikhs in Punjab and Hindus in Sind and in N.W.F.P also enjoyed this privilege. The right of
separate electorate was also given to the Untouchables. The right of separate electorate of the
untouchables under this award was highly criticized by Gandi and he said that if this right was not taken
back then he will die by observing the fast. The result of this threat was that the Hindu leader D.R
Ambedkar renounced the award for the untouchables.

The hidden motive of the communal Awards.

The hidden motive of the Communal Award was to separate Muslims from the Congress and get support
of the Muslim League

Hinduism and Islam

Hindu relations with Islam and Christianity are in some ways quite different from the ties and tensions
that bind together religions of Indian origin. Hindus live with a legacy of domination by Muslim and
Christian rulers that stretches back many centuries—in northern India, to the Delhi sultanate established
at the beginning of the 13th century. The patterns of relationship between Hindus and Muslims have
been different between north and south India. While there is a history of conquest and domination in
the north, Hindu-Muslim relations in Kerala and Tamil Nadu have been peaceful. Islam came to south
India very early, possibly about the 7th century, through traders and sea routes. There is a vast body of
literature on Islam in Tamil composed over almost a thousand years. The early 19th-century Sira
Puranam, a biography of the Prophet Muhammad, is an excellent example. There are also hundreds of
shared ritual spaces, called dargahs (literally, “doorway” or “threshold”), for Hindus and Muslims. These
mark shrines for revered Muslim (frequently Sufi) leaders and are visited by both Muslims and Hindus.
Moreover, close proximity and daily interaction throughout the centuries has led to efforts to
accommodate the existence of the two religions. One manifestation of such coexistence occurred
among some devotional groups who believed that one God, or the “universal principle,” was the same
regardless of whether it was called Allah or brahman. Various syntheses between the two religions that
emphasize nonsectarianism have arisen in northern India.

Yet there were periods when the political ambitions of Islamic rulers took strength from iconoclastic
aspects of Muslim teaching and led to the devastation of many major Hindu temple complexes, from
Mathura and Varanasi (Banaras) in the north to Chidambaram, Sriringam, and Madurai in the far south;
other temples were converted to mosques. Episodically, since the 14th century this history has provided
rhetorical fuel for Hindu anger against Muslim rulers. The bloody partition of the South Asian
subcontinent into India and Pakistan in 1947 added a new dimension. Mobilizing Hindu sensibilities
about the sacredness of the land as a whole, Hindus have sometimes depicted the creation of Pakistan
as a dismemberment of the body of India, in the process demonizing Muslims who have remained
within India’s political boundaries.

These strands converged at the end of the 20th century in a campaign to destroy the mosque built in
1528 by a lieutenant of the Mughal emperor Bābur in Ayodhya, a city that has traditionally been
identified as the place where Rama was born and ruled. In 1992 militant Hindu nationalists from
throughout India, who had been organized by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP; “World Hindu Council”),
the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS; “National Volunteer Alliance”), and the Bharatiya Janata Party
(BJP; “Indian People’s Party”), destroyed the mosque in an effort to “liberate” Rama and establish a
huge “Rama’s Birthplace Temple” on the spot. The continuing tensions in the Kashmir region have also
spawned outbursts of sectarian violence on both sides, including the destruction of some Hindu temples
there by militant Muslims. Yet, although the relationship between Hindus and Muslims within India
remains complicated and there are occasional eruptions of tension and violence, in many areas they
have been able to coexist peacefully.

Hinduism and Christianity

Relations between Hinduism and Christianity have been shaped by unequal balances of political power
and cultural influence. Although communities of Christians have lived in southern India since the middle
of the 1st millennium, the great expansion of Indian Christianity followed the efforts of missionaries
working under the protection of British colonial rule. Their denigration of selected features of Hindu
practice—most notably image worship, suttee, and child marriage (the first two were also criticized by
Muslims)—was shared by certain Hindus. Beginning in the 19th century and continuing into the 21st, a
movement that might be called neo-Vedanta has emphasized the monism of certain Upanishads,
decried “popular” Hindu “degenerations” such as the worship of idols, acted as an agent of social
reform, and championed dialogue between other religious communities.
Many Hindus are ready to accept the ethical teachings of the Gospels, particularly the Sermon on the
Mount (whose influence on Gandhi is well known), but reject the theological superstructure. They
regard Christian conceptions about love and its social consequences as a kind of bhakti and tend to
venerate Jesus as a saint, yet many resent the organization, the reliance on authorities, and the
exclusiveness of Christianity, considering these as obstacles to harmonious cooperation. They subscribe
to Gandhi’s opinion that missionaries should confine their activities to humanitarian service and look
askance at conversion, finding also in Hinduism what might be attractive in Christianity. A far more
typical sentiment is expressed in the eagerness of Hindus of all social stations, especially the middle
class, to send their children to high-quality (often English-language) schools established and maintained
by Christian organizations. No great fear exists that the religious element in the curriculum will cause
Hindu children to abandon their parents’ faith.