Parvaiz Rasool: Best of Luck My Country Man.

"I'm not aware of any mistakes I've made this summer", this was Ted Dexter chairman of selectors after England got caned in the 1989 ashes. Selecting a side is never say; making an impression over the over greased selectors even difficult, in India, where the sheer weight of baggage is enormous that a player has to carry before catching a selectors eye. Parvez Rasool did catch. Playing for Board President's XI ( Yes, the head honcho of irregularities has an XI) against Australia, Parvez's drift and guile duped 7 unprosperous Aussies. The shy boy from a small town of Bijbehara- a town that connects us with India through a jalopy laden highway- started making noises in the gray corridors of BCCI HQ at Mumbai. An IPL selection for Pune few months later boosted the boy's confidence further.

In between BCCI had a harmless scheduled tour to Zimbabwe. Mugabe's godforsaken land still plays cricket. Who hoots?  "I want everyone to play cricket in Zimbabwe; I want us to be a nation of gentlemen", Mugabe had said famously in 1984. The story didn't turn the way he had expected. Despots paint a picture and then ruin it themselves. But, that is for another day. 

Parvez was named in the  touring squad of 15. Took me at least by surprise. Was this is a Sadbhavna gesture? The mind kept boggling. Nevertheless, seeing a fellow countryman doing well, bloated our chests. After all, there are only two things that get us Kashmiris excited for all dime and reasons: Saal batte and cricket. We loathe; we bemoan; we rue and we sing the blues, over a well gelled Yakhni and a copybook cover drive: in same measure. 

The Boy waited patiently on the bench, cooling his heels. I don't know if he got a chance to catch the African Safari all those days. Or was he too nervous already, to test the african wildlife. Meanwhile, the nation gasped its breathe back home. After each game the back-fence whispers started gaining vigor- from narrow snaky alleys of Bijbehara to the over-heated 'navid vaan'  in an unusual hot summer,  in downtown Srinagar. The buzz was common: they won't play him: Virat Kohli is Jansangh: this was just an eye-wash. The speculations came true. Sadly. Parvez returned home without playing a game. Knee-jerk reactions poured left and right. We blamed the poor boy- a traitor, a friend called him. He deserved this disgrace. Good lord! He is just trying to lure the batsman with his flight. State's cute, fish mouthed CM joined the bandwagon. He demands he has a right to opinion-ate in one of his tweets. We agree. If only he did on more serious matters.

All said, Parvez perhaps deserved a chance. Or may be he didn't. But, if he is good he will have his day in the sun. A good Ranji season should get him back in reckoning. India is still searching for a Kumble, a Harbhajan. The Ashwins and Chawlas haven't still earned a permanent place in the XI. Someone remind Parvez, before he loiters depressingly along the fields that run parallel to Jehlum, where he first learned that flight. 

Say that cricket has nothing to do with politics and you say that cricket has nothing to do with life. Prophetic words.

Best of luck my countryman. 

The article appeared in daily Kashmir Observer.

The ism of Existentialism:

What a man is and can become is a fundament question for man. To fail to be human would mean slipping into nothingness. Man, however, is not a self-sufficient entity, but he is constituted by the things he makes his own. In every form of his, man is related to something other than himself. If man wants to grasp himself directly, he ceases to understand himself- to know who he is and what he should do. He faces a state of forever confusion.

The existence of man 'being there' as coined by many existentialists like Dostoevsky and Heidegger can be understood immediately by this key sentence: "the essence of being there lies in its existence." In metaphysics both refer to the reality of anything, from God to a grain of sand. Man exists, and he can be conscious of it, both at the same time. The physics follows him. However, he compounds his problems when he goes into what Sartre called the 'Faith' of self-deception. The problem of self deception evidently stems from the fact that self-deception is faith. It is neither a lie nor a certainty- but simple adherence. Man believes in concepts which he forges to persuade himself. What self-deception on other level does, is, that it makes truth appear as a method of thinking. 

Sartre here simplifies things to some extent, by this doctrine: existence comes before essence. We think of God as the ultimate creator. When He creates he knows precisely what he is creating. God makes man according to a procedure and formula. The essence here precedes existence. We call it the human nature. Something that is common in between a peasant and the bourgeois.

However, Sartre twists this in an interesting way. He says if God does not exist there is at least one being whose existence comes before essence. That being is man or the human reality. What does he mean by existence comes before essence? He means that man first exists, encounters himself, surges up in the world- and then defines himself afterwards. Thus, there is no human nature. Man simply is. Not that he is simply what he conceives himself to be, but he is what he wills. Man is nothing else but what he makes of himself. That is the first principle of existentialism. There is nothing good or evil, only the will of the man. This perhaps explains the extreme steps few beings take: A murder. A heist. A rape. The culprit never sees evil in his acts. He exists and his essence drives him. 

Perturbed I've always been over this: someone born in felony, lawlessness and immorality - with no control over it, can we really blame this 'being'? Isn't his circumstances to be blamed and not him? It is Gods will after all.

'Before the law' is a parable by Kafka in which Before law stands a gatekeeper on guard. A man from the country comes to seek admission to the law. He is stopped. The man understands the power of the gatekeeper- he his tall and stout. He agrees to wait. And he waits for years. When the gatekeeper perceives that the man is at the end of his strength, he bellows in his ear: "No one but you could gain admittance through this door, since this door was intended only for you. I am now going to shut it."  Did the Doorkeeper delude the man? No, he actually didn't. He was deluded himself. He was only following orders. He is a servant to the law. The man is seeking the law, the doorkeeper is already attached to it. For gatekeeper to doubt his integrity is to doubt the Law itself. The gatekeeper never doubts. He never knows what goes inside. He is a mere pawn. The parable ends by this line: it is not necessary to accept everything as true, one must accept it as necessary." A melancholy conclusion. 

Yeh paap hai kya

Yeh punya hai kya,

Reetoon par dharam ki mohren hain.

Har yug main badalte dharmoon ko 

Kaise adarsh banaoge?' 

What is a sin

And what is a good deed?

It is just a stamp of approval or disapproval of the society 

on rituals and customs. 

Allepey: Gods Own Country

Perhaps more than any other place in the world, Allepey is defined by its Gods. There are more than a 100 hundred churches and chapels congregated in this small, lazy town of picturesque canals, lakes and backwater lagoons. The backwaters of Allepey, for which Lord Curzon named it as the 'Venice of the East', is a major tourist attraction, and our reason for being here.

It was not uncommon for me to gather a few rupees, strap on a backpack and spend part of a summer searching through adventures- few years back. Travel gives me a thrill. It tires me. I curse myself for being so tough on myself, postponing the inevitable adult responsibility of 'work'. But it is something where I found my purpose of life. I'm blessed. Very few can claim this.

Things have changed though. The vagaries of everyday life have engulfed this nomad. Consumerism, capitalism: terms I loathed, are a part of the society I'm 
contributing to. However, the nonconformist still shows up, sporadically. My dogeared biography on Karl Marx's Das Kapital, nestled in my backpack,
while I left for Kerala, portrayed this. It wasn't a co-incidence. I was traveling to a place where marxism has deep roots. Kerala emancipated through education, and feudalism was shown the door. In Face to Face- a highly acclaimed malayalam movie, when the aged, alcoholic and disappointed Marxist, Sreedhar is murdered mysteriously, his old union comrades solemnly pledge and march under their red flags, chanting, 'Long live Comrade Sreedharan'- proving death is so much easier to celebrate. 'Without revolutionary theory there can be no revolutionary movement'- a Vladmir Lenin's quote atop a ceremonial gate, in Allepey, proclaimed, while we were driving towards it from Cochin- a distance of around 65 Kms.

Allepey's early mornings are booming and noisy, unlike its afternoons, which are much quieter. The fishermen get busy in traditional methods of fish curing and drying; workers working in processing firms ride on bi cycles to work; annoying trade union members assemble at harbors and markets taking money out of poor fisherman's pocket. This is, this towns, business time. For rest of the day, people just loiter around. Easy going is a term people live by here. 

Houses are neatly built with noticeable colonial architecture. In more prosperous part of the town, along the beach, the walls are low lying, giving a good view of the SUVs parked in almost every home: the Audis, the Toyotas and the BMWs. 

At noon we hired the boat- our vessel de tetra for next 24 hours.The boat was spacious with an open lounge area, two enclosed air conditioned bed rooms and at the back a small kitchen and staff area. We were introduced to our staff. There was a boat master, a helper and a cook named- Joseph Stalin. Yes, the Russian red tsar had a name sake in our boat. The ride was incredibly peaceful with only the clattering of the migratory Kumoan birds breaking its eerie silence. It seemed we were offered banana fritters, fried fish every hour, by our hospitable staff. Some small boats drop off regularly selling fresh fish and vegetables. Cars and trucks can only access the periphery, so everything else ends up going by the water. The parade of the boats and their uses are diverse. We saw small boats dropping students at individual jetties, livestock being carried to pastures, people at taxi depots waiting to go home. Amidst all this, there was visible care taken of the habitat. The canals and these numerous inland waterways stretching hundreds of kms were largely kept clean.

While we were sipping afternoon chai on the open deck of our boat, Mohsin propped up a question. What brings us here? In a hurriedly hustled program-me I packed my bags in Dubai; Akhter joined from Kashmir cursing us all along; Mohsin reported sick to office in Bangalore. And here we were, three of us, sitting atop a boat, in a remote south Indian village. Friedrich Nietzsche has drawn a fantastic conformity to it. He says men are inclined to laziness. They hide behind customs and opinions. At bottom, every human being knows that he is in this world just once, and that no accident, however strange, will throw a second chance. He knows it, but hides it like bad conscience. Why? From the fear of his neighbor who insists on convention. But what compels the individual human being to fear his neighbor? In vast majority it is the desire for comfort, inertia. That inclination to laziness. Only artists hate this slovenly life of borrowed manners and loosely fitted opinions. They unveil the secret, everybody's bad conscience. They dare to show us the human being as he is, down to his last muscle. In his uniqueness he is beautiful and worth contemplating, as novel and incredible as any work of nature. Nietzsche adds that a human being who does not wish to belong to the mass must merely cease being comfortable with himself; let him follow his conscience which shouts at him: 'Be yourself'. 

The boat meanwhile kept on pacing leisurely. At night we pulled into a mooring that was close to Stalin's village, so that he could go home for the night. As evening fell, with picture perfect sunset, we settled in watching lights in the village come on and the night traffic on the canal. For now it seemed everything had a purpose. The birds had a home to reach. The skies had a promise to turn dark. A new dawn had to break somewhere else. Kerala calls itself 'Gods own country'. On a night like this, I think they're right.

Ashes and rivalries.

There are some sporting rivalries that go beyond playing and players. England- Argentina in soccer. Maradona's one genius work, and one Godly work, gave it an all together different flavour- remember Mexico '86.

Then there was Bjorn Borg and McEnroe fighting out on French clay and English grass. Fans sighed. The rockstar Borg had females bating. The head-band and the sweaty forearms had them swooning all over. McEnroe had a temper and personality. Contrasting styles. Great tennis for fans. This was a rivalry called as 'Fire and Ice' by the aficionados.

India- Pakistan in cricket has had its moments. But, it is marred by politics. The rivalry as I see it, is not sporting, but, political. Hence, I keep it away from the discussion.

But there is Ashes: tradition, folklore, heritage. There is something when these two countries meet. First day of the first test at Edbagston or Brisbane. The buzz is in purists. It's time when everything else takes a backseat. Cricket is all what matters. A bouncer is hurled, a hook is played. The Barmy army sings. The urn may be tiny for which they play, but it carries the weight of a century and more. Of sweat and squabs; of long sea voyages in earlier 20th century; of Bodyline and Jardine; of Bradman and Jim Laker; of Botham at Headingley and Warne at Old Trafford.

Why I am an atheist- Bhagat Singh

It is a matter of debate whether my lack of belief in the existence of an Omnipresent, Omniscient God is due to my arrogant pride and vanity. It never occurred to me that sometime in the future I would be involved in polemics of this kind. As a result of some discussions with my friends, (if my claim to friendship is not uncalled for) I have realised that after having known me for a little time only, some of them have reached a kind of hasty conclusion about me that my atheism is my foolishness and that it is the outcome of my vanity. Even then it is a serious problem. I do not boast of being above these human follies. I am, after all, a human being and nothing more. And no one can claim to be more than that. I have a weakness in my personality, for pride is one of the human traits that I do possess. I am known as a dictator among my friends. Sometimes I am called a boaster. Some have always been complaining that I am bossy and I force others to accept my opinion. Yes, it is true to some extent. I do not deny this charge. We can use the word ‘vainglory’ for it. As far as the contemptible, obsolete, rotten values of our society are concerned, I am an extreme sceptic. But this question does not concern my person alone. It is being proud of my ideas, my thoughts. It cannot be called empty pride. Pride, or you may use the word, vanity, both mean an exaggerated assessment of one’s personality. Is my atheism because of unnecessary pride, or have I ceased believing in God after thinking long and deep on the matter? I wish to put my ideas before you. First of all, let us differentiate between pride and vanity as these are two different things.
I have never been able to understand how unfounded, baseless pride or empty vanity can hinder a person from believing in God. I may refuse to acknowledge the greatness of a really great person only when I have got fame without doing any serious efforts or when I lack the superior mental powers necessary to become great. It is easy to understand but how is it possible that a believer can turn into a non-believer because of his vanity? Only two things are possible: either a man deems himself to be in possession of Godly qualities, or he goes a step further and declares himself to be a god. In both these states of mind he cannot be an atheist in the true sense of the word. In the first case, it is not an outright rejection of God’s existence; in the other, he is affirming the existence of some kind of supernatural power responsible for the working of universe. It does not harm our argument whether he claims to be a god or considers God to be a reality in existence above his own being. The real point, however, is that in both cases he is a theist, a believer. He is not an atheist. I want to bring home this point to you. I am not one of these two creeds. I totally reject the existence of an Omnipresent, all powerful, all knowing God. Why so? I will discuss it later in the essay. Here I wish to emphasise that I am not an atheist for the reason that I am arrogant or proud or vain; nor am I a demi-god, nor a prophet; no, nor am I God myself. At least one thing is true that I have not evolved this thought because of vanity or pride. In order to answer this question I relate the truth. My friends say that after Delhi bombing and Lahore Conspiracy Case, I rocketed to fame and that this fact has turned my head. Let us discuss why this allegation is incorrect. I did not give up my belief in God after these incidents. I was an atheist even when I was an unknown figure. At least a college student cannot cherish any sort of exaggerated notion of himself that may lead him to atheism. It is true that I was a favourite with some college teachers, but others did not like me. I was never a hardworking or studious boy. I never got an opportunity to be proud. I was very careful in my behaviour and somewhat pessimistic about my future career. I was not completely atheistic in my beliefs. I was brought up under the care and protection of my father. He was a staunch Arya Samaji. An Arya Samaji can be anything but never an atheist. After my elementary education, I was sent to D. A. V College, Lahore. I lived in the boarding house for one year. Besides prayers early in the morning and at dusk time, I sat for hours and chanted religious Mantras. At that time, I was a staunch believer. Then I lived with my father. He was a tolerant man in his religious views. It is due to his teachings that I devoted my life for the cause of liberating my country. But he was not an atheist. His God was an all-pervading Entity. He advised me to offer my prayers every day. In this way I was brought up. In the Non-cooperation days, I got admission to the National College. During my stay in this college, I began thinking over all the religious polemics such that I grew sceptical about the existence of God. In spite of this fact I can say that my belief in God was firm and strong. I grew a beard and ‘Kais’ (long head of hair as a Sikh religious custom). In spite of this I could not convince myself of the efficacy of Sikh religion or any religion at all, for that matter. But I had an unswerving, unwavering belief in God.
Then I joined the Revolutionary Party. The first leader I met had not the courage to openly declare himself an atheist. He was unable to reach any conclusion on this point. Whenever I asked him about the existence of God, he gave me this reply: “You may believe in him when you feel like it.” The second leader with whom I came in contact was a firm believer. I should mention his name. It was our respected Comrade Sachindara Nath Sanyal. He was sentenced to life imprisonment in connection with Karachi conspiracy case. Right from the first page of his only book, ‘Bandi Jivan’ (Incarnated Life) he sings praises to the Glory of God. See the last page of the second part of this book and you find praises showered upon God in the way of a mystic. It is a clear reflection of his thoughts.
According to the prosecution, the ‘Revolutionary Leaflet’ which was distributed throughout India was the outcome of Sachindara Nath Sanyal’s intellectual labour. So often it happens that in revolutionary activities a leader expresses his own ideas which may be very dear to him, but in spite of having differences, the other workers have to acquiesce in them.
In that leaflet, one full paragraph was devoted to the praises of God and His doings which we, human beings, cannot understand. This is sheer mysticism. What I want to point out is that the idea of denying the existence of God did not even occur to the Revolutionary Party. The famous Kakory martyrs, all four of them, passed their last day in prayers. Ram Parshad Bismal was a staunch Arya Samaji. In spite of his vast studies in Socialism and Communism, Rajan Lahiri could not suppress his desire to recite hymns from Upanishads and Gita. There was but only one person among them who did not indulge in such activities. He used to say, “Religion is the outcome of human weakness or the limitation of human knowledge.” He is also in prison for life. But he also never dared to deny the existence of God.
Till that time I was only a romantic revolutionary, just a follower of our leaders. Then came the time to shoulder the whole responsibility. For some time, a strong opposition put the very existence of the party into danger. Many leaders as well as many enthusiastic comrades began to uphold the party to ridicule. They jeered at us. I had an apprehension that some day I will also consider it a futile and hopeless task. It was a turning point in my revolutionary career. An incessant desire to study filled my heart. ‘Study more and more’, said I to myself so that I might be able to face the arguments of my opponents. ‘Study’ to support your point of view with convincing arguments. And I began to study in a serious manner. My previous beliefs and convictions underwent a radical change. The romance of militancy dominated our predecessors; now serious ideas ousted this way of thinking. No more mysticism! No more blind faith! Now realism was our mode of thinking. At times of terrible necessity, we can resort to extreme methods, but violence produces opposite results in mass movements. I have talked much about our methods. The most important thing was a clear conception of our ideology for which we were waging a long struggle. As there was no election activity going on, I got ample opportunity to study various ideas propounded by various writers. I studied Bakunin, the anarchist leader. I read a few books of Marx, the father of Communism. I also read Lenin and Trotsky and many other writers who successfully carried out revolutions in their countries. All of them were atheists. The ideas contained in Bakunin’s ‘God and State’ seem inconclusive, but it is an interesting book. After that I came across a book ‘Common Sense’ by Nirlamba Swami. His point of view was a sort of mystical atheism. I developed more interest in this subject. By the end of 1926, I was convinced that the belief in an Almighty, Supreme Being who created, guided and controlled the universe had no sound foundations. I began discussions on this subject with my friends. I had openly declared myself an atheist. What it meant will be discussed in the following lines.
In May 1927, I was arrested in Lahore. This arrest came as a big surprise for me. I had not the least idea that I was wanted by the police. I was passing through a garden and all of a sudden the police surrounded me. To my own surprise, I was very calm at that time. I was in full control of myself. I was taken into police custody. The next day I was taken to the Railway Police lockup where I spent a whole month. After many days’ conversation with police personnel, I guessed that they had some information about my connection with the Kakori Party. I felt they had some intelligence of my other activities in the revolutionary movement. They told me that I was in Lucknow during the Kakori Party Trial so that I might devise a scheme to rescue the culprits. They also said that after the plan had been approved, we procured some bombs and by way of test, one of those bombs was thrown into a crowd on the occasion of Dussehra in 1926. They offered to release me on condition that I gave a statement on the activities of the Revolutionary Party. In this way I would be set free and even rewarded and I would not be produced as an approver in the court. I could not help laughing at their proposals. It was all humbug. People who have ideas like ours do not throw bombs at their own innocent people. One day, Mr. Newman, the then senior Superintendent of CID, came to me. After a long talk which was full of sympathetic words, he imparted to me what he considered to be sad news, that if I did not give any statement as demanded by them, they would be forced to send me up for trial for conspiracy to wage war in connection with Kakori Case and also for brutal killings in Dussehra gathering. After that he said that he had sufficient evidence to get me convicted and hanged.
I was completely innocent, but I believed that the police had sufficient power to do it if they desired it to be so. The same day some police officers persuaded me to offer my prayers to God two times regularly. I was an atheist. I thought that I would settle it to myself whether I could brag only in days of peace and happiness that I was an atheist, or in those hard times I could be steadfast in my convictions. After a long debate with myself, I reached the conclusion that I could not even pretend to be a believer nor could I offer my prayers to God. No, I never did it. It was time of trial and I would come out of it successful. These were my thoughts. Never for a moment did I desire to save my life. So I was a true atheist then and I am an atheist now. It was not an easy task to face that ordeal. Beliefs make it easier to go through hardships, even make them pleasant. Man can find a strong support in God and an encouraging consolation in His Name. If you have no belief in Him, then there is no alternative but to depend upon yourself. It is not child’s play to stand firm on your feet amid storms and strong winds. In difficult times, vanity, if it remains, evaporates and man cannot find the courage to defy beliefs held in common esteem by the people. If he really revolts against such beliefs, we must conclude that it is not sheer vanity; he has some kind of extraordinary strength. This is exactly the situation now. First of all we all know what the judgement will be. It is to be pronounced in a week or so. I am going to sacrifice my life for a cause. What more consolation can there be! A God-believing Hindu may expect to be reborn a king; a Muslim or a Christian might dream of the luxuries he hopes to enjoy in paradise as a reward for his sufferings and sacrifices. What hope should I entertain? I know that will be the end when the rope is tightened round my neck and the rafters move from under my feet. To use more precise religious terminology, that will be the moment of utter annihilation. My soul will come to nothing. If I take the courage to take the matter in the light of ‘Reward’, I see that a short life of struggle with no such magnificent end shall itself be my ‘Reward.’ That is all. Without any selfish motive of getting any reward here or in the hereafter, quite disinterestedly have I devoted my life to the cause of freedom. I could not act otherwise. The day shall usher in a new era of liberty when a large number of men and women, taking courage from the idea of serving humanity and liberating them from sufferings and distress, decide that there is no alternative before them except devoting their lives for this cause. They will wage a war against their oppressors, tyrants or exploiters, not to become kings, or to gain any reward here or in the next birth or after death in paradise; but to cast off the yoke of slavery, to establish liberty and peace they will tread this perilous, but glorious path. Can the pride they take in their noble cause be called vanity? Who is there rash enough to call it so? To him I say either he is foolish or wicked. Leave such a fellow alone for he cannot realise the depth, the emotions, the sentiment and the noble feelings that surge in that heart. His heart is dead, a mere lump of flesh, devoid of feelings. His convictions are infirm, his emotions feeble. His selfish interests have made him incapable of seeing the truth. The epithet ‘vanity’ is always hurled at the strength we get from our convictions.
You go against popular feelings; you criticise a hero, a great man who is generally believed to be above criticism. What happens? No one will answer your arguments in a rational way; rather you will be considered vainglorious. Its reason is mental insipidity. Merciless criticism and independent thinking are the two necessary traits of revolutionary thinking. As Mahatmaji is great, he is above criticism; as he has risen above, all that he says in the field of politics, religion, Ethics is right. You agree or not, it is binding upon you to take it as truth. This is not constructive thinking. We do not take a leap forward; we go many steps back.
Our forefathers evolved faith in some kind of Supreme Being, therefore, one who ventures to challenge the validity of that faith or denies the existence of God, shall be called a Kafir (infidel), or a renegade. Even if his arguments are so strong that it is impossible to refute them, if his spirit is so strong that he cannot be bowed down by the threats of misfortune that may befall him through the wrath of the Almighty, he shall be decried as vainglorious. Then why should we waste our time in such discussions? This question has come before the people for the first time, hence the necessity and usefulness of such long discussions.
As far as the first question is concerned, I think I have made it clear that I did not turn atheist because of vanity. Only my readers, not I, can decide whether my arguments carry weight. If I were a believer, I know in the present circumstances my life would have been easier; the burden lighter. My disbelief in God has turned all the circumstances too harsh and this situation can deteriorate further. Being a little mystical can give the circumstances a poetic turn. But I need no opiate to meet my end. I am a realistic man. I want to overpower this tendency in me with the help of Reason. I am not always successful in such attempts. But it is man’s duty to try and make efforts. Success depends on chance and circumstances.
Now we come to the second question: if it is not vanity, there ought to be some sound reason for rejection of age-old belief in God. Yes, I come to this question. I think that any man who has some reasoning power always tries to understand the life and people around him with the help of this faculty. Where concrete proofs are lacking, [mystical] philosophy creeps in. As I have indicated, one of my revolutionary friends used to say that “philosophy is the outcome of human weakness.” Our ancestors had the leisure to solve the mysteries of the world, its past, its present and its future, its whys and its wherefores, but having been terribly short of direct proofs, every one of them tried to solve the problem in his own way. Hence we find wide differences in the fundamentals of various religious creeds. Sometimes they take very antagonistic and conflicting forms. We find differences in Oriental and Occidental philosophies. There are differences even amongst various schools of thoughts in each hemisphere. In Asian religions, the Muslim religion is completely incompatible with the Hindu faith. In India itself, Buddhism and Jainism are sometimes quite separate from Brahmanism. Then in Brahmanism itself, we find two conflicting sects: Aarya Samaj and Snatan Dheram. Charwak is yet another independent thinker of the past ages. He challenged the Authority of God. All these faiths differ on many fundamental questions, but each of them claims to be the only true religion. This is the root of the evil. Instead of developing the ideas and experiments of ancient thinkers, thus providing ourselves with the ideological weapon for the future struggle, – lethargic, idle, fanatical as we are – we cling to orthodox religion and in this way reduce human awakening to a stagnant pool.
It is necessary for every person who stands for progress to criticise every tenet of old beliefs. Item by item he has to challenge the efficacy of old faith. He has to analyse and understand all the details. If after rigorous reasoning, one is led to believe in any theory of philosophy, his faith is appreciated. His reasoning may be mistaken and even fallacious. But there is chance that he will be corrected because Reason is the guiding principle of his life. But belief, I should say blind belief is disastrous. It deprives a man of his understanding power and makes him reactionary.
Any person who claims to be a realist has to challenge the truth of old beliefs. If faith cannot withstand the onslaught of reason, it collapses. After that his task should be to do the groundwork for new philosophy. This is the negative side. After that comes in the positive work in which some material of the olden times can be used to construct the pillars of new philosophy. As far as I am concerned, I admit that I lack sufficient study in this field. I had a great desire to study the Oriental Philosophy, but I could get ample opportunity or sufficient time to do so. But so far as I reject the old time beliefs, it is not a matter of countering belief with belief, rather I can challenge the efficacy of old beliefs with sound arguments. We believe in nature and that human progress depends on the domination of man over nature. There is no conscious power behind it. This is our philosophy.
Being atheist, I ask a few questions from theists:
1. If, as you believe there is an Almighty, Omnipresent, Omniscient God, who created the earth or universe, please let me know, first of all, as to why he created this world. This world which is full of woe and grief, and countless miseries, where not even one person lives in peace.
2. Pray, don’t say it is His law. If He is bound by any law, He is not Omnipotent. Don’t say it is His pleasure. Nero burnt one Rome. He killed a very limited number of people. He caused only a few tragedies, all for his morbid enjoyment. But what is his place in history? By what names do we remember him? All the disparaging epithets are hurled at him. Pages are blackened with invective diatribes condemning Nero: the tyrant, the heartless, the wicked.
One Genghis Khan killed a few thousand people to seek pleasure in it and we hate the very name. Now, how will you justify your all powerful, eternal Nero, who every day, every moment continues his pastime of killing people? How can you support his doings which surpass those of Genghis Khan in cruelty and in misery inflicted upon people? I ask why the Almighty created this world which is nothing but a living hell, a place of constant and bitter unrest. Why did he create man when he had the power not to do so? Have you any answer to these questions? You will say that it is to reward the sufferer and punish the evildoer in the hereafter. Well, well, how far will you justify a man who first of all inflicts injuries on your body and then applies soft and soothing ointment on them? How far the supporters and organizers of Gladiator bouts were justified in throwing men before half starved lions, later to be cared for and looked after well if they escaped this horrible death. That is why I ask: Was the creation of man intended to derive this kind of pleasure?
Open your eyes and see millions of people dying of hunger in slums and huts dirtier than the grim dungeons of prisons; just see the labourers patiently or say apathetically while the rich vampires suck their blood; bring to mind the wastage of human energy that will make a man with a little common sense shiver in horror. Just observe rich nations throwing their surplus produce into the sea instead of distributing it among the needy and deprived. There are palaces of kings built upon the foundations laid with human bones. Let them see all this and say “All is well in God’s Kingdom.” Why so? This is my question. You are silent. All right. I proceed to my next point.
You, the Hindus, would say: Whosoever undergoes sufferings in this life, must have been a sinner in his previous birth. It is tantamount to saying that those who are oppressors now were Godly people then, in their previous births. For this reason alone they hold power in their hands. Let me say it plainly that your ancestors were shrewd people. They were always in search of petty hoaxes to play upon people and snatch from them the power of Reason. Let us analyse how much this argument carries weight!
Those who are well versed in the philosophy of Jurisprudence relate three of four justifications for the punishment that is to be inflicted upon a wrong-doer. These are: revenge, reform, and deterrence. The Retribution Theory is now condemned by all the thinkers. Deterrent theory is on the anvil for its flaws. Reformative theory is now widely accepted and considered to be necessary for human progress. It aims at reforming the culprit and converting him into a peace-loving citizen. But what in essence is God’s Punishment even if it is inflicted on a person who has really done some harm? For the sake of argument we agree for a moment that a person committed some crime in his previous birth and God punished him by changing his shape into a cow, cat, tree, or any other animal. You may enumerate the number of these variations in Godly Punishment to be at least eighty-four lack. Tell me, has this tomfoolery, perpetrated in the name of punishment, any reformative effect on human man? How many of them have you met who were donkeys in their previous births for having committed any sin? Absolutely no one of this sort! The so called theory of ‘Puranas’ (transmigration) is nothing but a fairy-tale. I do not have any intention to bring this unutterable trash under discussion. Do you really know the most cursed sin in this world is to be poor? Yes, poverty is a sin; it is a punishment! Cursed be the theoretician, jurist or legislator who proposes such measures as push man into the quagmire of more heinous sins. Did it not occur to your All Knowing God or he could learn the truth only after millions had undergone untold sufferings and hardships? What, according to your theory, is the fate of a person who, by no sin of his own, has been born into a family of low caste people? He is poor so he cannot go to a school. It is his fate to be shunned and hated by those who are born into a high caste. His ignorance, his poverty, and the contempt he receives from others will harden his heart towards society. Supposing that he commits a sin, who shall bear the consequences? God, or he, or the learned people of that society? What is your view about those punishments inflicted on the people who were deliberately kept ignorant by selfish and proud Brahmans? If by chance these poor creatures heard a few words of your sacred books, Vedas, these Brahmans poured melted lead into their ears. If they committed any sin, who was to be held responsible? Who was to bear the brunt? My dear friends, these theories have been coined by the privileged classes. They try to justify the power they have usurped and the riches they have robbed with the help of such theories. Perhaps it was the writer Upton Sinclair who wrote (Bhagat Singh is referring to Sinclair’s pamphlet ‘Profits of Religion’ – MIA transcriber) somewhere “only make a man firm believer in the immortality of soul, then rob him of all that he possesses. He will willingly help you in the process.” The dirty alliance between religious preachers and possessors of power brought the boon of prisons, gallows, knouts and above all such theories for the mankind.
I ask why your Omnipotent God does not hold a man back when he is about to commit a sin or offence. It is child’s play for God. Why did He not kill war lords? Why did He not obliterate the fury of war from their minds? In this way He could have saved humanity of many a great calamity and horror. Why does He not infuse humanistic sentiments into the minds of the Britishers so that they may willingly leave India? I ask why He does not fill the hearts of all capitalist classes with altruistic humanism that prompts them to give up personal possession of the means of production and this will free the whole labouring humanity from the shackles of money. You want to argue the practicability of Socialist theory, I leave it to your Almighty God to enforce it. Common people understand the merits of Socialist theory as far as general welfare is concerned but they oppose it under the pretext that it cannot be implemented. Let the Almighty step in and arrange things in a proper way. No more logic chopping! I tell you that the British rule is not there because God willed it but for the reason that we lack the will and courage to oppose it. Not that they are keeping us under subjugation with the consent of God, but it is with the force of guns and rifles, bombs and bullets, police and militia, and above all because of our apathy that they are successfully committing the most deplorable sin, that is, the exploitation of one nation by another. Where is God? What is He doing? Is He getting a diseased pleasure out of it? A Nero! A Genghis Khan! Down with Him!
Now another piece of manufactured logic! You ask me how I will explain the origin of this world and origin of man. Charles Darwin has tried to throw some light on this subject. Study his book. Also, have a look at Sohan Swami’s “Commonsense.” You will get a satisfactory answer. This topic is concerned with Biology and Natural History. This is a phenomenon of nature. The accidental mixture of different substances in the form of Nebulae gave birth to this earth. When? Study history to know this. The same process caused the evolution of animals and in the long run that of man. Read Darwin’s ‘Origin of Species.’ All the later progress is due to man’s constant conflict with nature and his efforts to utilise nature for his own benefit. This is the briefest sketch of this phenomenon.
Your next question will be why a child is born blind or lame even if he was not a sinner in his previous birth. This problem has been explained in a satisfactory manner by biologists as a mere biological phenomenon. According to them the whole burden rests upon the shoulders of parents whose conscious or unconscious deeds caused mutilation of the child prior to his birth.
You may thrust yet another question at me, though it is merely childish. The question is: If God does not really exist, why do people come to believe in Him? Brief and concise my answer will be. As they come to believe in ghosts, and evil spirits, so they also evolve a kind of belief in God: the only difference being that God is almost a universal phenomenon and well developed theological philosophy. However, I do disagree with radical philosophy. It attributes His origin to the ingenuity of exploiters who wanted to keep the people under their subjugation by preaching the existence of a Supreme Being; thus claimed an authority and sanction from Him for their privileged position. I do not differ on the essential point that all religions, faiths, theological philosophies, and religious creeds and all other such institutions in the long run become supporters of the tyrannical and exploiting institutions, men and classes. Rebellion against any king has always been a sin in every religion.
As regard the origin of God, my thought is that man created God in his imagination when he realized his weaknesses, limitations and shortcomings. In this way he got the courage to face all the trying circumstances and to meet all dangers that might occur in his life and also to restrain his outbursts in prosperity and affluence. God, with his whimsical laws and parental generosity was painted with variegated colours of imagination. He was used as a deterrent factor when his fury and his laws were repeatedly propagated so that man might not become a danger to society. He was the cry of the distressed soul for he was believed to stand as father and mother, sister and brother, brother and friend when in time of distress a man was left alone and helpless. He was Almighty and could do anything. The idea of God is helpful to a man in distress.
Society must fight against this belief in God as it fought against idol worship and other narrow conceptions of religion. In this way man will try to stand on his feet. Being realistic, he will have to throw his faith aside and face all adversaries with courage and valour. That is exactly my state of mind. My friends, it is not my vanity; it is my mode of thinking that has made me an atheist. I don’t think that by strengthening my belief in God and by offering prayers to Him every day, (this I consider to be the most degraded act on the part of man) I can bring improvement in my situation, nor can I further deteriorate it. I have read of many atheists facing all troubles boldly, so I am trying to stand like a man with the head high and erect to the last; even on the gallows.
Let us see how steadfast I am. One of my friends asked me to pray. When informed of my atheism, he said, “When your last days come, you will begin to believe.” I said, “No, dear sir, Never shall it happen. I consider it to be an act of degradation and demoralisation. For such petty selfish motives, I shall never pray.” Reader and friends, is it vanity? If it is, I stand for it.
Written: October 5–6, 1930
Source/Translated: Converted from the original Gurmukhi (Punjabi) to Urdu/Persian script by Maqsood Saqib;

Conspicuous Consumerism

Theory

“Conspicuous Consumerism”, the word was coined by famous economist and socialist ‘Thorstein Veblen’ in 1899. Acc. to oxford’s dictionary the word conspicuous means ‘easy to notice; likely to attract’, and the word consumerism means ‘buying and using goods and services’. So collectively any goods or services bought in order to get notice or to attract attention can be called “conspicuous consumerism”. Conspicuous consumerism demands spending capacity therefore only the rich can afford it. Hence, if a person is rich it is most likely that he is intelligent; he may not be virtuous, but most likely intelligent. When the intelligent people squander(to waste money) on materialist things then it becomes a vogue(fashion) for all the classes of people, thus, it becomes infectious to the society. The stigmatic(a feeling of wrong)character of this mentality is no longer considered by the populace(population).

The reasons behind this are somewhat vague and somewhat comprehensive.

Comprehension:

The conspicuous behaviour of rich person attracts people towards him. His actions become more righteous and his materialism becomes the sceptre (consider prize) of his ability to think, ideate and flourish.

Vague:

Such a module of social appreciation seekers is non-sustainable. A better approach  for social admiration is altruism(charity). Altruism not only shows that the individual is rich but also demonstrates that he is virtuous and looks forward to sustainable development of civilization.

Hidden aspects of conspicuous consumerism

Recently, the famous writer, a youth icon and a IIM-A graduate Chetan Bhagat, stated in his column on November 20th, 2011 that “Kingfisher airlines has lost over 1000 crore last year and owes 7000 crore to its lenders. Financial analysts across the globe will agree that airlines sector is one of the worst sectors to make money. But the glamour of owning airlines is what interests people like Mr. Mallaya, anybody will agree that there are only a few business as sexy as owning a airline”. Now the hidden aspect of this scenario is, if kingfisher is not able to come out of this situation public sector banks which have lent thousands of crore to this airline will procure a huge loss and the ultimate effect will come to the common people of India, who will become the victim of some people’s bad decision making. This is one of the best paradigms(example) of conspicuous consumerism in current point of time.

Environmental effects

Conspicuous consumerism gives birth to higher need of materialistic goods, higher consumption of fossil fuels by means of cars (luxury or hedge back). In order to generate these needs the manufacturing of goods is increased thus generating higher co2 and other GHG(green house gases). The price for the fashion of luxury is paid by the environment as most of the amenities are fuelled with electricity or some other kind of fuel which generates GHG. I could go on and on with such examples where conspicuous consumerism is producing unwanted gases and doing unrepairable harm to the environment, from dyed clothes which are made from highly toxic and and polluting chemicals, to luxurious electrical appliances.

Guest post:

Maqbool Bhat- An untold story

“Kapil Sibal appeared on behalf of the petitioner and pleaded that the execution of Maqbool Butt was in gross violation of all prescribed laws and norms as the basic requirement of confirmation of his death sentence, awarded by Sessions court, had not been fulfilled. He produced before the court the certificate of the Registrar of the state High Court. But that was not to be. The Attorney General of India, who represented union of India, took out a piece of an unsigned paper, claiming that to be the confirmation of death sentence by the state High Court. Hon’ble court took cognizance of the attorney general’s paper and dismissed the petition without any further argument.”

Maqbool Butt-An untold story.

By Zafar Meraj

It was one of those chilly evenings of winter of 1984 and I as usual was trying to gather news reports for next day’s issue of AINA which I was associated with, then. The budget session of the state assembly was on in winter capital Jammu and I would call Kashmir Times offices in Jammu to have the latest news about the day’s developments in the assembly. We, at AINA and Kashmir Times, had an understanding for exchanging the news. Kashmir Times had no one in Srinagar to look after the news and so was the case with AINA, without any correspondent in Jammu. Ved Bhasin, happened to be like part of our family, being one of the closet friends of late Shamim Ahmad Shamim and so the two papers decided to share the information on daily basis.

On that evening, if I remember correctly, it was February, 6, that I called Kashmir Times office, and my uncle, and a senior journalist, Mohammad Syed Malik, who was working then for Delhi based English daily Patriot and used to move to Jammu with annual durbar, picked up the phone. After briefing him about Srinagar items, I inquired from him the day’s developments in the assembly. “Zafar Ji, there is a big news, but you have to keep it as a secret till morning, when the paper comes out.......Maqbool Butt is being hanged on February, 11..... and this is our exclusive story. No one else (from amongst journalists) has any clue of this”, he told me in a hushed tone, as if none else could hear him.

And the details of that ‘great exclusive’ story were like this: Earlier in the day, while he assembly was in session, a special envoy from New Delhi landed in Jammu and drove straight to the legislature complex that is situated in civil secretariat complex. The envoy carrying a small black bag, was whisked inside the chief minister’s chambers, where the two remained closeted for about half an hour. In the meantime, chief minister summoned his law minister, chief secretary and the police chief and the closed door meeting lasted for another half an hour. No one could make any guess as to what was going on inside the chief minister’s chamber, had it not been the dramatic entry of a senior judicial officer of the state in the official chamber of the chief minister. It was when Thakur Pavitar Singh, then holding the office of the Sessions Judge of the special court was escorted by one of the close aides of the CM that one of the close friends of Ved Bhasin called him up and told about the high drama that was going on in the legislature complex. And it was from here, that Ved Bhasin and Mohammad Syed Malik picked up the threads to get that ‘exclusive story’.

============================================

On February, 3, Ravindra Hareshwa Mhatre, a senior Indian diplomat was kidnapped while he was on way back to his home in Birmangham. A little known groups, named Kashmir Liberation Army claimed responsibility for the abduction and demanded release of Maqbool Butt in exchange besides 1 million pounds as ransom money. The demand was outrightly rejected by Indian government and two days after his abduction, on February, 5, his body was found by the police in a farm. The killing of the diplomat shocked New Delhi and at a very high level meeting that was held late that evening, with Indira Gandhi in the chair,it was decided to send Maqbool Butt, then lodged in solitary confinement in a high security zone of Tihar jai.

Butt had crossed over to Kashmir, and was arrested near Langate, when he was on his way back to Muzafarabad. He along two of his young associates, Hamid and Riyaz, were handed over to the police by local people after he allegedly shot a bank manager dead. Shiekh Mohammad Abdullah, who happened to be the chief minister that time, decided to shift Butt to Tihar on the advice of his security advisors, who reminded him about Butt’s dramatic escape from Srinagar Jail, in 1969, after he was awarded death sentence for the alleged killing of a state intelligence official. Hamid and Riyaz were lodged in Srinagar central jal and I had a chance meeting with him when I was briefly detained for over a week along late Abdul Ghani Lone. Both Hamid and Riyaz told me some interesting stories regarding the Langate incident as also some aspects of Maqbool Butt’s life and personality, which I will be sharing with the readers sometime next.

===================================================

The abduction and subsequent killing of Mhatre ‘s killing by so called supporters of Maqbool Butt sent shock waves in Delhi, the events started moving fast and Indira Gandhi decided that enough was enough and Butt should be sent to gallows.

A senior Home ministry official was flown with a pre drafted “Black Warrant” to Jammu and the chief minister was asked to get the document signed without any delay.

‘

=========================================

As Thakut Pvitar Singh entered the CM’s chambers, the union Home ministry official took out file from his black brief case and asked him to put his signatures on the “Black Warrant” that had fixed the date of Maqbool Butt’s hanging on Saturday, February, 11. There was complete silence in the small room. Pavitar Singh had a cursory glance at the file, took out the pen and put his signatures, without uttering a word. The silence was broken after the official collected the file from Pavitar Singh and asked the chief minister:“ I beg your leave now. I have to fly back to Delhi t make necessary arrangements”. With this he rose from his seat, shook hands with the chief minister and others in the room and drove to the airport were a special plane was waiting for him.

=====================

As I started looking at the paper on which I had noted the details of the ‘big story’, I was at loss as to how to write it down for the AINA. I had never met Maqbool Butt but I had heard a lot about him. Old memories started haunting my mind. The great escape of 1969, with what Butt became a household name in Kashmir. Some people hailing him as a true “Mujahid” and some labelling him and as a double agent, a person of doubtful integrity. In 1969, when Butt broke the prison walls to make that great escape, I was a college student. The incident had sent shock waves across the valley. I remember my late father telling me that jail break was not a child’s play. Someone from within must have helped Butt in breaking prison walls. After all there are many in the government itself who sympathise with the cause of Kashmir. However, soon Butt was forgotten. And it was in 1976, with his re-arrest near Langate that Maqbool Butt again became the topic of hot news. Shiekh Abdullah was at the helm of affairs, courtesy the 1975 Accord, ‘Rai Shumari (Plebiscite) was buried and so was the Plebiscite Front. Shiekh had now fallen in love with the Congress and ‘great democratic India’. And there was no scope now for reviving that ‘obsolete’ “Rai Shumari”. The tired, aged Lion of Kashmir had accepted the ‘reality’ of Kashmir being an integral part of India there was no question of challenging the finality of accession. In this situation Maqbool Butt crossed over the LoC again, knowing well that he carried a death sentence and if apprehended would be sent to gallows. But, his commitment to his ideology, one may differ with it, made him to take the big risk and he came to Kashmir to revive his old contacts.

Maqbool Butt visited different places and met with different people. They included late Ghulam Nabi Hagroo, who had headed Plebiscite Front for some time when Mirza Afzal Baigh was in prison, Prof. Mohammad Amin Andrabi, Dr. Shoukat Khan and one Porf. Shamim, from Baramulla. According to an unconfirmed report, Butt also called on Shiekh Abdullah who advised him not to pursue with his mission and instead go back and spend his days in Pakistan as the “situation was completely changed following the creation of Bangladesh”. Was it on the advice of Shiekh that Maqbool decided to return?

==========================

Although the Kashmir struggle led earlier by Shiekh Abdullah was almost forgotten, there were some feeble voices reminding the people about it. One of such voice was a small pamphlet that used to be circulated at regular intervals by Amanullah Khan of JKLF. It would have small pieces on Kashmir struggle, the follies of great Kashmir heroes and urging people to struggle for their rights. We used to get a copy of this pamphlet at AINA almost regularly and I still remember the regular column written by Amanullah titled ‘Aur main dekhta chalagaya” (And I went on to see), which used to be very interesting and worth reading. Amanullah’s writings would be very powerful, interesting and informative. For a long time I was under the impression that this man was very much in Srinagar and would wonder how is he being tolerated? He would write about efficacy of an Independent Kashmir, he would talk about Shiekh Abdullah’s great role in freedom struggle and his subsequent ‘sell out’, he would write a lot about Maqbool Butt, portraying his as a hero and also write about the basic philosophy of independent Kashmir. I once asked my great teacher and patron, late Shamim Ahmad Shamim about it and he replied smilingly; “you fool, the man is sitting in London. His writings are all based on imagination. But definitely he writes well and listen, it is good that you read this pamphlet, if there is something very interesting, you should use this in AINA, but not without showing me first”.

I also remember that when Maqbool Butt was re-arrested in Langate, Shamim sahib wrote an editorial in the AINA and I still remember the title “Khwaboon ka Sodagar” (Dream merchant) in which though complimenting him for his stand, Shamim sahib called Butt’s slogan of Independent Kashmir as a dream which was hard to be realised.

=================

It was late that evening that I was able to complete the ‘big’ story. I told my calligrapher that a ‘big’ story was coming that would go as main lead and he will have to wait for some time. My friend Capt. Tickoo, who used to give me company in the office, was thrilled that AINA would be the only paper tomorrow carrying this big story. We discussed the possible reaction it would evoke and our regular Coffee House tablemates will take it. After an hour or so, handed over the text to my calligrapher, but not before making him to swear that he will keep it secret till next morning and not share it with anyone.

As I kept waiting for the proof reading, two of us started discussing Maqbool Butt, who this man was, why was he sentenced to death, was he a criminal or a political activist, who like many others believed in armed struggle. It was during our conversation that an idea struck to me. Can’t Maqbool Butt be saved from being sent to gallows? I shared this thought with Captain and he nodded in agreement. No doubt it is a revenge killing, but how can we do it... one has to go to Supreme Court, collect all details about the case..... we don’t know anything about the man but for what has appeared in some papers and magazines and that too is very sketchy. We need someone who knows Butt very well, could organise things on war footing as only three days are left.... and the man should be having guts to do it...... where to find such a person. Suddenly, I almost shouted “mil gaya”, (I have got it). Who is that, asked Captain. Mian Sawrar, I replied adding that he will definitely do it.

After reading the final proof of the paper, I rang up Mian Sarwar. It was around 10 in the night and I told him that wanted to see him and see immediately. “Sab khariyat hai, itni raat gaye” (Is everything alright, it is late evening now), Mian Sarwar asked. However, I told him that I am just coming and he better wait for me. I asked Captain to stay in office and almost ran to Mian Sarwar’s office cum residence at Budshah bridge. The noble soul, I found, was standing at the main door, dressed in night suit and must have come out of the bed.

========================

I had first seen Mian Sarwar in 1977. Moulvi Iftikhar Hussain Ansari, then a Congress legislator, rebelled and announced to fight Lok Sabha election against Begum Akber Jehan of National Conference. The Moulvi launched his poll campaign with a public meeting at Gandhi Park, now the High Court complex. I went there along few of my senior colleagues to report the event. Besides Moulvi and some of is senior colleagues, I saw a young, tall, healthy person sitting on the dais. I asked late J N Sathu, my senior colleague who this man was and he replied: You don’t know him? He is Mian Sarwar. He was with Alfateh, was in jail for long time.

I first came in contact with Mian Sarwar when he launched first ever Photocopier machine, I think in entire Jammu Kashmir. The huge machine, that it used to be the, was installed in his drawing room and needed a heavy duty air conditioner for maintaining temperature. A huge signboard “Mian’s Photostat Centre” was put on the outer wall of his house, facing Budshah bridge. We wanted copies of some documents that late Shamim needed for a court case. He asked me from where could it be got and I told him about Mian’s Photostat Centre. Oh that Alfateh walla Mian, OK, go and these documents copied immediately and tell him about me, he will definitely give some concession, Shamim sahib told me. I went there, handed over the documents to him and told him that I have been sent by Shamim sahib. Oh, you are Zafar Meraj, Shamim’s nephew, who now runs AINA. I read AINA regularly. Nice paper, but I miss Shamim’s writings. ‘Ab utna maza nahin aata hai, zalim kya likhta hai, jab say siyasat main chalagaya, AINA ko bhula hi dala, us kambakht ko bhi Sshiekh Abdullah nay kharab kardiya’ Mian told me while asking his technician to get the documents copied. He asked me to make myself comfortable as photocopying that time would take some time and ordered for tea. It was over that cup of tea that I came to know real Mian Sarwar. As if I was his old friend, he talked about his life, his Alfateh days, his struggle, his association with Maqbool Butt and what not. I found Mian Sarwar an interesting, honest person and used to be in regular contact with him, mostly in his office chambers, discussing mostly the political issues.

============================

“Kya baat hai, sab khairiyat hay na... aapki to saans phooli hay”, Mian asked me. I told him it was something very important and he alone can do something. We entered his office cum drawing room, he bolted the door from inside and I started narrating the whole story to him.

“Yeh din bhi dekhna tha”(Had I to see this day also), Mian uttered after taking a deep breath and asked, what next? I told him if he could take the task of making a last effort to save Maqbool Butt. He thought for a while and then said “unfortunately Maqbool sahib has been maligned by the government’s propaganda machinery to an extent that very few people know the real Maqbool, azadi ka matwala. We have to think about some good lawyer, other things I can manage. But who will be ready to defend him before Supreme Court. And it will cost a lot of money which we do not have, you know my financial strength and I am aware about you. What to do..... and with this Mian Sarwar went into a deep thought. I also started recollecting my memory and suddenly Muzafar Baigh’s name came to my mind. Baigh was known to be a very capable lawyer, though expensive. He was then closely associated with Peoples Conference led by late Abdul Ghani Lone and also happened to be party general secretary. I almost shouted: Muzafar Baigh, we will engage him. But will he agree and what about his fee, Mian Sarwar asked. Why don’t we take a chance, let us talk to Baigh, I suggested to which Mian Sarwar agreed. Communication those days was not that easy a task and then we had to maintain complete secrecy as any leak would lead us in prison. Mian called one of his friends to enquire about Baigh who informed him that he was Delhi in connection of some court case. It was with great difficult that we got Baigh’s Delhi contact number and asked me to talk to Baigh because I was supposed to know him rather well because of Lone connection. I called up Baigh and narrated the entire story. Will you take this case, but time is short and we have no money to offer. It is just on humanitarian grounds we are working on, I told him. And to my utter surprise and Mian Sarwar’s too, Baigh accepted our request and told me that he would be with us tomorrow afternoon. After all, he said, Delhi walla case itna important nahin hai. Meanwhile, he asked me to get Mian Sarwar on line wherein he told him to get the necessary documents ready and also get Maqbool Butt’s elder brother, Ghulam Nabi Butt, who was living in remote Trehgam village, Butt’s native place. This because the petition had to be filed in the name of immediate blood relation of Maqbool as we all had no locus. Without Ghulam Nabi we can’t do anything, Baigh said and dropped the phone after saying “Inshaullah kal milaingay”

It was around 12 in the night, we had several cups of hot coffee which Sarwar himself prepared, trying to find ways and means to complete the task that we had undertaken voluntarily. Sarwar assured me that he would by tomorrow afternoon collect all the relevant papers that Muzafar Baigh wanted. Some were lying with him and few others he will have to collect from other sources including Ghulam Nabi, who he thought must be still having some papers about the earlier case against Butt. I returned to my office that also happened to be my residence and there I found m mother, my wife and my sister anxiously waiting for me. They wanted to know where the hell I had gone but Captain very skilfully had made them to believe that I was in a meeting with some NC dissidents who had promised support to G M Shah for toppling Farooq Abdullah government.

Next day, around 7 in the evening, I got a call from Mian Sarwar. He had managed not only the required documents and papers for filing the petition before Supreme Court but also brought Ghulam Nabi from Trehgam, who had told villagers that he was feeling very sick and wanted to go to Srinagar for medical check up immediately. Sarwar had put Ghulam Nabi in one of his rooms with the door closed from outside so that nobody could find a trace of him. Baigh had sent a message that he would be visiting Sarwar’s office after dark as otherwise security people would get alerted and foil the attempt to save Butt even before it was made formally.

Baigh arrived around 9 PM and as a professional lawyer would do, he without wasting time asked for papers he had sought and also for Ghulam Nabi. After going through the papers, he asked Ghulam Nabi: Do you have any idea of state High Court confirming Butt sahib’s death sentence after it was awarded by the Session Judge Neel Kanth Ganjoo. Ghulam Nabi thought for a moment and then replied in negative. But yes, he added, when Maqbool sahib escaped from Jail, after sometime, I don’t exactly remember when, government moved high court once and case came up before Justice Murtaza Fazal Ali who was then a high court judge. As there was none to defend Bhat sahib, government hired a lawyer, I think his name was Ghulam Mohammad Mian, as adefence counsel. But what the court decided I really don’t know. We (Butt’s family) were never informed.

OK, let me take the papers along. I will draft the petition at my residence and try to find out details from the High Court tomorrow about what Fazal Ali had done with the confirmation.

Baigh returned to Sarwar’s office next early noon. He seemed jubilant and without waiting for our query he said: We have won half the game. High Court has not confirmed the death sentence passed by the Sessions that is mandatory and without which no one can be hanged. I have managed to obtain a certified copy, attested by Malik Sharifudin, who then happened to be the Registrar of the High Court, saying that Maqbool Butt’s death sentence has not been confirmed till date. How will they (government) execute the Black Warrant, under what law, he said waiving the certificate of Registrar. Baigh was confident that Supreme Court will stay the execution of the death warrant once the certificate was produced before it. No arguments are required it is just production of this certificate that will stay the death sentence. In a hurry, Home ministry seems to have forgotten this most important and vital aspect of the case, he continued to tell us in a very confident voice.

However, here was another problem. Maqbool Butt was labelled as a dreaded terrorist, who had gunned two innocent persons, a CID official and a bank manager. For ordinary Indians he was a killer, a murderer, a criminal and then killing of Indian diplomat in UK was also being attributed to him, though indirectly. Tempers in India were very high after Mhatre episode, there was an outcry and Indira Gandhi wanted something to assuage the feelings of the ordinary India. What best could be but hanging of a person because of whom Mhatre got killed. How will Supreme Court treat Butt’s fresh petition, seeking stay on his execution, in such a surcharged atmosphere. Muzafar Baigh was not an unknown figure. He was known for his close association with Ghan Lone’s Peoples Conference, which was then labelled as “anti India’ for advocating restoration of greater autonomy to Kashmir. Baigh had fought two elections on as PC candidate, one for Lok Sabha and other for state assembly. Would it be prudent for us to put Baigh in forefront? Can’t we have someone else, a “true Indian but a true professional” to appear before the court and plead the case? All these questions came to our minds and at one time we thought we have no way out and all our efforts are bound to fail. Then suddenly, Baigh stood from his chair: I have a solution to this problem in my mind, let me go to Delhi tomorrow morning, in the first available flight. I have a good friend, Kapil SIbal, a distinguished Supreme Court lawyer, a true professional we were trying to look for and I am confident he won’t let us down. With this he beg our leave saying that he will book his ticket but cautioning us against leaking it to anyone what we have been planning. Sarwar in the meantime arranged money for booking Ghulam Nabi’s ticket who wanted to be in Delhi and in case Butt was hanged he would like to take his body for last rites to Trehgam.

Although Muzafar Baigh managed to fly without anyone suspecting what he was upto, Ghulam Nabi was stopped by the security people at the airport and disallowed to board the flight, even after he had checked in.

Next day the formal application for staying Butt’s execution was moved before a special bench of the Supreme Court headed by Justice Chandrachud, who if I correctly remember, was then the Chief Justice of India. Kapil Sibal appeared on behalf of the petitioner and pleaded that the execution of Butt was in gross violation of all prescribed laws and norms as the basic requirement of confirmation of his death sentence, awarded by Sessions court, had not been fulfilled. He produced before the court the certificate of the Registrar of the state High Court, which normally should have been sufficient for the court to pass an appropriate order and stay the execution. But that was not to be. The Attorney General of India, who represented union of India, took out a piece of paper, claiming that to be the confirmation of death sentence by the state High Court. He tried to demolish the arguments advanced by Kapil Sibal on the basis of that piece of paper and which the Hon’ble court took cognizance of and dismissed the petition without any further argument.

And Muzafar Baigh still remembers: The document produced by the Attorney General was just a piece of paper. Though neatly typed, it bore no signature, no seal, nothing. I was amazed how could this paper, unsigned, unauthenticated, override the otherwise properly certified document issued by none else than the Registrar of the High Court, who is supposed to have complete knowledge of the court records. But the court was satisfied with this and accepted Attorbey General’s plea.

However, court was gracious enough to grant a meeting to Maqbool Butt’s lawyers before he was sent to gallows. Muzafar Baigh accompanied by Raja Tufail, a Delhi based Kashmiri lawyer, who assisted Baigh in drafting the petition and one R S Pathak, another Supreme Court lawyer and a sympathiser of Kashmir cause, immediately left for Tihar to have the las glimpse of Butt. However, the Jail superintendent made them to stay in his room for ours together. When the sun was about to set, after which no such meeting can take place, jail superintendent allowed Pathak only to see Butt, that too for ‘five minutes only’ and told Baigh and Tufal that he had orders from above not to allow their meeting.

Inside, there was anything for Pathak to tell Maqbool Butt. The game was over and Butt was to be hanged early next morning. And when the three came out of prison complex, Pathak narrated the story: Maqbool Butt knew that the last attempt to save him had failed and there was no other chance left now. However, he was very cool, very calm. He thanked me and asked to convey his gratitude to Muzafar Baigh and Raja Tufail for having made an attempt against heavy odds and in a very difficult situation. I will be hanged tomorrow and I have no remorse. I am confident that tomorrow my children (people of Kashmir) will realise the truth and legitimacy of what I stood for all these years and for what I am today sacrificing my life.

Next morning, on February, 11, giving a slip to a posse of plain clothed intelligence people, posted around the place he was staying, Muzafar Baigh managed to jump into the vehicle of BBC’s Satish Jacob, who was to report the hanging story for his organistion. Within minutes of their reaching there, an official came out from inside saying it was all over and Butt has been hanged. Baigh jumped out of the vehicle, he was so far hiding in, and approached the official with the authority of Butt’s family (wakalatnama) and claimed his body for performing last rites at his native place. Sorry, can’t help you. It can not be done. The body has already been buried. There were orders from above to this effect. Anything else, you want, the official tried to be very polite. Yes, Baigh said and asked for Butt’s belongings and writings, because Butt was known to be writing a diary sort of think while in solitary confinement. However, the jail official again expressed his inability. There are no such papers you are talking about. He was in jail uniform and where his earlier clothes are, I really do not know. And with this the official took a u turn and went inside and the prison gate was locked, forever, at least as far Maqbool Butt’s mortal remains or his personal belongings are concerned.

Next morning, most of ‘national’ newspapers carried a small new item about Butt’s hanging. However, there was one newspaper that extensively covered the event and that was The Telegraph, published from Kolkata by M J Akbar. Tavleen Singh headed he Delhi bureau of The Telegraph and Louis Fernandes, wife of senior Congress leader and presently a union minister, Salman Khurshid, was associated with it. Tavleen called Muzafar Baigh saying she was sending Louis to him for a detailed account of Maqbool Butt’s case. Baigh gave a long interview and The Telegraph carried it prominently.

Neruda- opaque cities

                                                    Sleeping cadavers that often dance, 
                                                        tied to the pace of my heart,
                                     what opaque cities are we passing through- Pablo Neruda

The walk to the gallows- Afzal Guru.

The winter nights enlarge

Their clouds discharge storm
Upon a Valley of million frozen lakes
and bruises.

The early morning pigeon ride,
had a message from a far off alien land
Slay! It cried in vain, and buried itself.

Those who do not move, do not notice their chains.

The walk to the gallows- Afzal Guru.

For You and Me

                                   The strongest love is the love that can demonstrate its fragility.

I like crimson skies, when she is with me. Close to me. I feel her. Everywhere around me. The waters of the lake are calm, it is one of such evenings. Boats are rowing. There is a bevvy of madness in people, frothing for a ride. We took a ride too, on an enterprising boat, with a cheerful boatman, who sang songs- Wale vasiye gachvoy aabas, duniya chuye neendre khwabas , and paddled gently. Our silence spoke, enamoring words. In such moments, spoken words do little justice; we knew. I kept on looking at her. She tried avoiding my harmless stalking. Or was she tricking herself. The lake enchanted us; the Zabarwan overlooked; the boat carrying lovers. Love is never a may be thing. You know when you love someone. I knew in the moment of that late evening: when a song played in my heart, a poem rose in my chest, and haiku played in my mind.  Pearls from skies, filled the elixir of love in me. I danced. I celebrated.  On a starless night, she in my arms. 

You filled the chalice of my love

You teemed it with a memory of years gone by

Did I woo you when tiny steps we took 

Along that fairy tale village

In the mountains of Pir Panchal,

In age of innocence where it was

feeble wind when glided past

Of old love and quiet primrose

Our song never died

Rich in worship it was,
Pensive am I why now?

Languid are my eyes, why?

I am absent now, but why?