Tag Archives: boundary commission

Pakistan, Short Essays

The Final Resting Place: Gurdwara Kartarpur Sahib

2 Comments

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

In March 2017, in an impromptu adventure, I had the opportunity to visit Kartarpur Sahib in Pakistan. It came amidst an amazing road trip, which took me from the Radcliffe line to the Durand Line (almost). The trip was full of surprises – monuments (old and new) in situ and people on the move – and their discussion, especially of religious spaces and their historical significance. During one of these conversation, Dr. Yaqoob Khan Bangash (ITU Lahore) asked why the Sikhs never demanded Kartarpur Sahib during the discussions of the 1947 Radcliffe Boundary Commission.

Kartarpur is located in Narowal District in Pakistani Punjab. It is about 120 kms/2 hours away from Lahore and is located only 3 kms from the Indo-Pakistan border by the river Ravi. Indeed, Dera Baba Nanak is located about 1 km from the border, on the other side, east of the river Ravi in Indian Punjab. Both are visible to each other on clear days. The Gurdwara is the historic location where Guru Nanak (1469-1539) settled and assembled the Sikh community after his spiritual travels around the world. It is on the banks of the River Ravi and even today there is a nomadic and unkempt, wilderness feel to the place. Guru Nanak spent eighteen years living in Kartarpur, during which he spent time preaching to a growing congregation; the appeal of Nanak spreading from nearby areas to beyond and drawing the first Sangat to the area. Many devotees remained and settled in Kartarpur, dedicating their lives to the mission of Nanak.

The informal led to the formal, with the establishment of the first Gurdwara (the house of the guru) being built circa 1521-2. Here, free communal dinning (langar) was started, feeding all those that came and the langar remains a defining feature of Sikhism – providing free food to everyone without any prejudice. The food is simple and usually vegetarian. It is not a feast, nor does it offend anyone due to their dietary preferences. Everyone, rich or poor, sits together; equal in the house of the guru.

However, for Sikhs, Kartarpur is an especially significant place, as it marks not only the beginnings of Sikhism but also the final resting place of the first guru. The original Gurdwara complex was washed away by floods of the river Ravi and the present-day building was built with donations from Bhupinder Singh (1891-1938), Maharaja of Patiala. More recently, the Government of Pakistan has been contributing to its maintenance. The most fascinating thing about Kartarpur is the appeal of the Gurdwara to all communities. Baba Nanak is revered as a Pir, Guru and Fakir alike.

My trip to Kartarpur was during the “off-season” period and so, mostly Muslims were visiting the shrine/Gurdwara to offer their duas/prayers. Legend has it that when Guru Nanak died, his Hindu and Muslim devotees disagreed about how his last rites should be performed: cremation or burial? During this ruckus, Nanak appeared as an old man before his devotees and, seemingly, suggested delaying the decision until the following day. The following morning, the shroud covering the body was found with flowers, in place of the body. These flowers were divided, with the Hindus cremating theirs, and the Muslims buried theirs. And so, in the courtyard of the Gurdwara is a shrine to symbolise this story. Outside the Sikh tourism that takes place, which is limited, this shrine is mostly frequented by Muslims.

In August 1947, Kartarpur was in Gurdaspur district, which had all (almost) been delineated to be in Pakistan, until the late, controversial changes to the boundary line, which meant that parts of Gurdaspur went to India. Thus, at the last minute, Kartarpur ended being in close proximity of the international border. After Partition, the Sikhs were negligible in their numbers in Pakistan and Kartarpur remained closed and abandoned for over fifty years. More recently, there have been attempts to get a connecting corridor between the communities in India and Pakistan today, but this has not materialised. Going back to the question of why Kartarpur never figured as a specific request before the Boundary Commission, perhaps part of the answer lies in the fact that Sikhs believe in reincarnation of the soul and, therefore, death of the body is not the end of life’s journey.

‘Corridor connecting India with Kartarpur Sahib Shrine in Pakistan ruled out’ by Ravi Dhaliwal:

http://www.tribuneindia.com/news/punjab/community/-corridor-connecting-india-with-kartarpur-sahib-shrine-in-pak-ruled-out/400962.html

‘Visit to Kartarpur Sahib (Pakistan)’ by Dalvinder Singh Grewal: https://www.sikhphilosophy.net/threads/visit-to-kartarpur-sahib-pakistan.49707/

‘How Nanak’s Muslim followers in Pakistan never abandoned Kartarpur Sahib, his final resting place’ by Haroon Khalid: https://scroll.in/article/857302/how-nanaks-muslim-followers-in-pakistan-never-abandoned-kartarpur-sahib-his-final-resting-place

Everyone’s Guru by Yaqoob Khan Bangash: http://tns.thenews.com.pk/everyones-guru/#.WxAxiakh3OQ

India, Partition, Short Essays

The Partition Museum, Amritsar

Leave a comment

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

The Partition Museum is an attempt to preserve the history and memories of 1947, that saw the creation of India and Pakistan and as a result the partition of Punjab and Bengal. Located in Amritsar the museum deals with mostly the effects of partition on Punjab rather Bengal. It is the initiative of Lady Kishwar Desai and The Arts and Cultural Heritage Trust, along with other organisations. The Partition Museum is in Amritsar’s Town Hall and located in the newly renovated area near Hall Bazaar. The renovation work is a delight in the hustle and bustle of the walled city of Amritsar. The surrounding area all carry remnants from the colonial period and ironically the museum itself is housed in the colonial Town Hall built in the 19th century.

The museum contains mainly pictures, a few artefacts and newspaper clippings from the independence period. It is spread across 3-4 rooms which use multimedia, visual and documentary sources to illustrate and memorialize the Partition. It is therefore a small exhibition and largely provides an overview of what happened.

I wish I could have connected better with the endeavours and intentions of the museum but it left me feeling empty and concerned with the lack of reflection. The museum unfortunately reflects the elite vision with which it was conceptualised. Having spent the last sixteen years working on the history of Partition, I realise that people still need to learn more about this period. But sadly, seventy years on we hardly have any empathy for the collective guilt that we all share in this legacy. The newspapers presented were from the Indian perspective, the horrors of violence were those perpetrated by Muslims against Hindus and Sikhs. Had we been on the other side of the Radcliffe Line, I imagine similar one-sided accounts would be shown of how Muslims were killed at the hands of Hindus and Sikhs. So, when do we move away from this communalized history of partition that still lingers on?

The pictures and voices shared were not of the ordinary people suffering but of prominent people and those who have come to “symbolise” partition history. This is certainly not a people’s history. Even the Tree of Hope presented me with little hope as it was covered in nationalistic and jingoistic slogans written by school children and visitors. Hardly giving secular India hope for the future. Instead the Tree of Hope just reinforces the new powerful and bullish India, unleashed by Modi’s vision.

My main concerns were with the well that has been installed in the museum. It is obviously designed to educate people but what sort of story is it trying to tell us? By simply stating that many women were forced to or rather martyred themselves by jumping into the wells is simplifying a very complex history. Women as the torch bearers of community honour were in some cases (we can hardly guess the numbers) forced to jump into wells by the patriarch of the family or community. Some went willingly but others were more reluctant; afraid of what was expected of them. We can most poignantly see this in the film Kamosh Pani. And so, to show this well in the middle of exhibition represents what exactly? If this was the original location, as in Jallianwala Bagh, it would make sense but to install it for effect is problematic. What kind of history and memory is being preserved by these acts to recreate history selectively? With little intellectual engagement with these selective symbolic fragments from our collective past we can only serve to re-enforce the communalised identities that led to 1947 in the first place.

Visit the website: http://www.partitionmuseum.org/

Partition, Short Essays

Dividing Punjab, 1947

2 Comments

Map of Punjab. Scale 1:16 Miles.

Muslim majority Tehsils and contiguous majority areas of Muslims.

Available in the National Documentation Wing, Islamabad.

By the summer of 1947, it was obvious that a one-state solution for British departure from India was not a possibility and so serious discussions were necessary regarding the division of British India. Above is one of the maps used by the Punjab Muslims League, Boundary Commission Office to make its case about how to divide the Punjab.

The 3 June Plan, or as it was more popularly known as the Mountbatten Plan, was accepted by the main leaders, Nehru, Jinnah and the Sikh leader Sardar Baldev Singh. According to the Plan, the areas of Bengal and the Punjab would be divided between Muslim and non-Muslim districts. The Commission consisted of four judges, Justice Din Muhammad and Justice Muhammad Munir (both Muslim) and Justice Mehr Chand Mahajan (Hindu) and Justice Teja Singh (Sikh). The Commission chairman was the British barrister, Sir Cyril Radcliffe. During the public sittings, all the parties were allowed to present their cases to the Commission.

The Muslim case largely rested on the basis that their population majority in contested areas should be considered a major consideration in demarcation of the boundary line. Amongst the numerous documents used by the Commission, the map above highlights the Muslim majority tehsils and contiguous majority areas of Muslims. The yellow area in the middle is around Amritsar in central Punjab. Punjab generally and more specifically this area was incredibly complex and mixed in terms of communal composition and so immediately it is obvious that the dividing up people and land would be no easy task. How would they undo hundreds of years of people living together, co-existing and now being forced into accepting a new nation state? In addition to looking at the distribution of different communities, the Boundary Commission also examined the existing boundary lines of the tehsils, the location of the railway lines, the Grand Trunk Road (which is the main artery of the Punjab and indeed North India, connecting Kabul right through to Calcutta), the rivers and canals, the irrigation system, natural boundaries etc and some of these are marked on the map. Of course each community further made a case before the judges to make recommendations about where the line should be. This is particularly pertinent in areas where we see the concentration or pockets of the “other” community. Justice Mehr Chand Mahajan in his report makes an interesting point about the city of Lahore, which historically and at the time of partition was claimed by all communities. The city has a rich history and was once the seat of power under Ranjit Singh. The Justice says:

“The town of Lahore in my view stands on a special footing. It has been metropolis of the Punjab for several hundred years. Both east and west have contributed to its prosperity. Its economic life has mainly been developed by the enterprise of the non-Muslims. In truth both the Muslims and non-Muslims can legitimately claim Lahore as their own town thought on different grounds…. If I could, I would have suggested that this town should be left in the joint management of both the communities as a free city, it freedom being guaranteed by the two Dominions with a suitable constitution in which one community may not dominate over the other.” (Kirpal Singh (ed), Select Documents on Partition of Punjab 1947 India and Pakistan (Delhi: National Book Shop, 1991, p333-4).

See some of the documents related to Indian independence at British Library: http://www.bl.uk/reshelp/findhelpregion/asia/india/indianindependence/indiapakistan/index.html

Read commentary and analysis by Lucy Chester, ‘The 1947 Partition: Drawing the Indo-Pakistani Boundary’. http://www.unc.edu/depts/diplomat/archives_roll/2002_01-03/chester_partition/chester_partition.html