Muslims in The Post - Independence Era

After considerable research, I discovered that, quite contrary to common belief, the Muslims lot has appreciably improved since partition in 1947. In fact, I found that any Muslim I picked out for assessment, or any Muslim settlement I made the subject of my research, was clearly in a better state than in the past.

It is true that Muslims are faced with certain problems and difficulties. But this should not be made into an issue, considering that in this world it is hardly possible to have a completely problem-free life. A problem-free situation should not, therefore, be set up as the criterion by which to judge the condition of a group or community. It must be borne in mind that God’s law for this world provides for difficulties and ease to exist side by side at all times. If this were not so, life’s struggle would cease altogether. And a society bereft of struggle would no longer spawn living individuals; it would instead become the graveyard of the intellect.

Given this state of affairs, the Muslim condition cannot be judged by utopian standards. It should be judged rather by a set of realistic criteria based on what is patently possible. First of all, I went into the conditions of those misters and maulvis who are held to be the representatives of the Muslims in modern times. I found that each one of them had considerably improved their position in life after 1947. All leaders without exception, whether secular or religious, had a better standard of living that they had enjoyed prior to independence. I spent several weeks investigating matters relating to this topic. Finally, I came to the conclusion that in the post-1947 era, Muslims have clearly made progress in this country. They are, today in a far better state than before.

During this period of research, I visited a Muslim acquaintance of mine who was born in a village in a farmer’s family. After completing his education, he went on to become a gazette officer. We often used to meet a few years ago, and each time he would complain that bias and prejudice in India left no opportunity for Muslims to progress. He would say, ‘Just look at me, I have been an officer here in this department for several years, but I have never been promoted. The Hindu lobby bars the way to my advancement.’

After an interval of three years, I want to see him at his home. He had previously lived in a flat, but was now lodged in a spacious bungalow with guards and a host of servants. About ten acres of land with several different crops growing on it surrounded the bungalow, adding to its magnificence. I learnt that over the past two years he had had several promotions and was now very highly placed. It was due to his position that he had been allotted this palatial bungalow.

I stayed with him for about two hours, during which time he made frequent references – of course, with pride – to this bungalow, his post, and so on. A few years prior to this, every time we met, he could speak only of prejudice. Now he spoke only of his own greatness. It was this experience which made me understand the basic deficiency which has kept Muslims unaware of the actual state of affairs in the country. It is purely and simply the inability to recognize and come to grips with reality.

 

In life, there are good things and bad things. When an individual receives his share of the bad things – one of life’s realities: he begins to complain about being victim of prejudice. But when he receives his share of good things, he considers this the result of his own capability and endeavor, and thus falls a prey to pride. He neither acknowledges the benefits he enjoys as a divine blessing, for which he should be grateful to God, nor does he look to his own shortcomings as the reason for his lack of success. In this way, he fails to see either the positive or the negative situation from the correct angle.  What is worse is that he is highly vocal about his deprivations, while remaining silent about his share of God’s material blessings. So that if gains are never mentioned (whether or not they are appreciated as God’s gift) and only deprivations are emphasized, Muslims successes will never become public knowledge.

The Problem Of Government Services 

 

Regular attempts are made to prove that Indian Muslims suffer deprivation by quoting statistics or their minimal recruitment to government services. An English monthly, brought out in Delhi by Muslims, publishes data in almost every issue which gives the figure of two percent  as the Muslim share in public offices. It is held that with this very low percentage of recruitment, Muslims are grossly under-represented in the country’s administration in terms of the proportion they make up of the national population, i.e. twelve per cent.

Arguments based on this data appear to be logically compelling, but the data itself leaves certain factors out of account, such as the backwardness of Muslims at the college and university levels of education. Eligibility for admission to government service requires candidates to be degree-holders from institutes of higher learning, but the oft-quoted statistics make no mention of the fact that very few Muslims degree holders come forward to seek government posts.

Another factor left unstressed by the above statistics is the composition of the Muslim twelve percent of the population. About half of this percentage is accounted for by women. That means that about half of the potential workforce is permanently out of the picture, because Muslim traditions are against women going out to work in government offices.  In this way, half of the Muslim population is automatically deleted from the list of recruits to government service. This leaves 10 percent, but from that we have to subtract another 3 percent made up of those who are insufficiently educated. The two percent ratio of Muslims in government services, albeit extremely low, does not then appear totally unjustifiable. However, government services are no criterion to gauge the material prosperity of a community in a free, industrial society.

There are at least two definite reasons for this. One that the issue of recruitment to the services is related to the government, and the wielders of power have always taken into account their own political interests in the allotment of posts in the services. Even if these rules are personally sincere, they adopt, due to national and international considerations, a policy in regard to government service where the basis of decision-making is not simply prospering of a balance between the different communities making up the population imperatives. This is a state which exists in all societies and under all government systems.

For instance, the Sindhi Muslims of Pakistan complain that, in the central government services the Punjabi Muslims are over-represented, while they themselves have several fewer posts than their ratio would actually warrant.

 

In India, too, such disparities exist at various levels. However, they do not exist only between Hindus and Muslims, but also between Hindus and Hindus. For instance, in appointments to high government posts, members of the Brahmin cast far outstrip Hindus of other casts. Similarly, the English-educated class bags more government posts than the Hindi-educated class. Muslims, for various reasons, also find themselves at a disadvantage, but this is a problem which is common to most groups land does not affect only the Muslims.

Perhaps a more telling point is that government service relates more to the processes of administration rather than to economies, accounting as it does for a mere two percent of the distribution of the country’s economic resources. There is a much vaster field outside administration in which people may earn a good living. Therefore, if a group is only marginally represented in government services, it does not necessarily follow that it must remain economically deprived. There are innumerable fields open to those seeking employment, and it is quite possible that once they enter them, they may find them more lucrative than even the highest government posts.

Many historical examples can be cited in support of this viewpoint. One example in the recent past is the high level of prosperity attained by the Hindus in the state of Hyderabad, despite the marked preference shown to Muslims in the allocation of government posts.  This was because the Hindus had captured the fields of commerce and industry throughout the state.  By engaging themselves in commercial pursuits they gained a far better economic position than they could ever have expected from positions in the administration.

For the above reasons, in conclude that the economic position of Indian Muslims should be judged not just by their ratio in government services, but by their success (or failure) in the spheres of commerce, industry, science and education. Mere representation in government services is no criterion by which to gauge their true economic growth.