India, Bharat and Pakistan: The Constitutional Journey of a Sandwiched Civilisation

Bharat Trilogy #2

by J. Sai Deepak

India, Bharat and Pakistan, the second book of the Bharat Trilogy, takes the discussion forward from its bestselling predecessor, India That Is Bharat. It explores the combined influence of European and Middle Eastern colonialities on Bharat as the successor state to the Indic civilisation, and on the origins of the Indian Constitution. To this end, the book traces the thought continuum of Middle Eastern coloniality, from the rise of Islamic Revivalism in the 1740s following the decline of the Mughal Empire, which presaged the idea of Pakistan, until the end of the Khilafat Movement in 1924, which cemented the road to Pakistan. The book also describes the collaboration of convenience that was forged between the proponents of Middle Eastern coloniality and the British colonial establishment to the detriment of the Indic civilisation.

One of the objectives of this book is to help the reader draw parallels between the challenges faced by the Indic civilisation in the tumultuous period from 1740 to 1924, and the present day. Its larger goal remains the same as that of the first, which is to enthuse Bharatiyas to undertake a critical decolonial study of Bharat's history, especially in the context of the Constitution, so that the religiosity towards the document is moderated by a sense of proportion, perspective and purpose.

Genres: History, India, Nonfiction, Politics, Sociology, Indian Literature

1140 pages, Kindle Edition

First published August 11, 2022

About the author

I am an engineer-turned-litigator practising as an arguing counsel before the High Court of Delhi and the Supreme Court of India. I graduated with a bachelor’s degree in mechanical engineering from Anna University (2002-06) and a bachelor’s degree in law from IIT Kharagpur (2006-09). From July 2009 until June 2016, I was a litigator at the NCR-based Firm Saikrishna and Associates. I was an Associate Partner at the Firm when I quit in June 2016 to set up independent practice as an arguing counsel. Civil Commercial litigation, Constitutional law and Competition law are my primary areas of practice. Since 2010, I have been writing intermittently on the blawg “The Demanding Mistress” on civil commercial litigation. Opinions expressed by me here are in my personal capacity, and may not be conclusive. Opinions expressed by guest authors are their own.

Reviews

[Siddhartha · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book discusses about impact of Islamic revivalism on Hindu Civilization. This book at length discusses about Barelvi movement, Dehlawi movement and Deobandi movement and its subsequent impact on developing fissiparous tendencies amongst Muslims which gradually culminated in partition of sacred geography of Bharat.
One shortcoming of this book is that author has reproduced verbatim extracts of speeches and resolutions making it a turgid read. Well I don't mind that but almost half of the book is reproduction of verbatim extracts. A line has to be drawn and such extracts must be limited since it tends to impede the coherency and flow while reading. It eventually loses the essence which books wants to convey. The author could have summarized extracts in his own words and the verbatim extracts could have been added in appendix section and only important part should have been retained in the main body of text.
Personally I find India that is Bhart much more interesting and better in terms of academic research.

[Sajith Kumar · Rating 3 out of 5]

The traditional accounts of India’s freedom struggle make us believe that Muslim League raised the demand of Pakistan with the Lahore Declaration in Mar 1940 and thereby creating the Two-Nation theory. It then grew so strong in the coming years as to receive acceptance even from Gandhi a few years later. As a result, the country was partitioned in 1947. This argument posits that the Two-Nation theory was a political idea put forward by the Muslim League, which was a political party. However, it was not difficult for discerning readers to shred this popular, comforting and infantile fiction to pieces with a little application of common sense. This book attributes the theory as a purely religious one having its origins in the minds of a few bigoted men after the disintegration of Mughal Empire by the middle of the eighteenth century. It is a fundamental principle in Islam that asks its followers to reside in a country where the Sharia law is in place. If it is not, they have two options. One is to fight their way to power by overthrowing the rulers through a holy war and make Sharia rule the land. But if the ruling agency is very powerful, this may not be possible and the believers are then exhorted to migrate to a country where Islamic law is in place. When Mughals ruled India in their prime, the entire land lay under the yoke of Sharia and offered the perfect abode of domicile for Muslims. With the decline of the Mughals, the Marathas, Jats, Sikhs and Rajputs assumed dominance in North India. Islamic revivalist movements came up in this period as a response to this loss of political power which grew into prominence under different guises in the coming centuries. Muslims were pacified under British ascendancy after 1857, but as soon as democratic reforms began to be implemented, they feared Hindu oppression owing to their superior numbers. As far as religious principles went, the British were at least People of the Book, while Hindus were ‘despised polytheists’. The Two-Nation theory thus originated from the reluctance of pious Muslims to live under Hindu rule which came into being in the eighteenth century. This book is the second in the trilogy on India’s constitutional development written by J. Sai Deepak and asserts that the Two-Nation theory cast its shadows on every political development such as the partition of Bengal, establishment of separate electorate for Muslims and the Khilafat Movement. The first volume was reviewed earlier in this blog.

What makes Sai Deepak stand out from the crowd of authors who had handled this subject earlier is his original thinking which found the real origins of the Two-Nation theory to the collapse of the most powerful Muslim empire in India – the Mughals. After its disintegration, the Islamic scholars sought solace in going back to the fundamentals of the religion and to revive it thereby. Shah Waliullah Dehlawi is the most prominent cleric of this period who propounded the bigoted tenets of Wahhabism which he encountered during his stay in Arabia. He exhorted the Muslims of the subcontinent not to integrate into society, since contact with Hindus would contaminate their Islamic purity. He urged them to see themselves as part of a global Ummah (religious community). He mandated them to follow the customs and mores of the Prophet. He was such a Sunni hardliner that he allowed Shias to celebrate their festivals in public but only with strict moderation. The Hindu infidels were not even permitted this somewhat shard of a privilege. Waliullah hated India, his homeland, so much that he invited the Afghan warlord Ahmed Shah Durrani to invade India to teach the infidels a lesson. In his letter, he detailed the strengths and weaknesses of Marathas and Jats. This was how the Two-Nation theory sprouted in India.

The author then lists out the religious movements that spread in all parts of the country like wildfire. The Faraizi Movement in Bengal founded by Haji Shariatullah in the 1820s was a violent organisation. Atrocities against Hindus spread in Bengal as its consequence, including destruction of temples and idols. Under Syed Ahmed Barelwi’s lead, Muslims in Bengal joined pan-Indian networks to fight common enemies such as the Sikh kingdom in Punjab. With Wahhabi influence, it became a practice in some Muslim families to earmark a portion of their earnings for contribution to jihad or to send their men to participate in it at least for a few months. Wahhabi thought was taken forward by other schools such as Ahl-i-Hadith, Deobandi, Barelwi, Nadwah and Aligarh movements.

Clubbing the Aligarh Movement with other hard-line religious associations may surprise some naïve souls. It is true that Aligarh was the only place where Islamic teaching was juxtaposed with modern Western learning, but the religious axis on which it turned was the same as the others. The combined effect of Syed Ahmed Khan and Jamal al-Din Afghani was the simultaneous growth of Muslim nationalism and pan-Islamism. Khan openly professed that Muslims are a separate nation in India and his reconciliation with pan-Islamism did not bode well for India. Liberal thinkers attribute all the blame for religious unrest in India to the ‘Divide-and-Rule’ policy of the British. Here, Deepak makes a sagacious observation. To blame the ‘Divide-and-Rule’ policy is to wistfully and willfully ignore uncomfortable and ‘unsecular’ facts. The British policy succeeded only because there were serious, pre-existing and irreconcilable religious, cultural, linguistic and civilizational fissures between the two communities. We were divided and they ruled.

The partition of Bengal was the definite moment in which the Muslim nation first asserted itself. This critical episode is given a fitting coverage in the book. The partition was more on religious lines than administrative convenience as the newly formed province of East Bengal and Assam was having a Muslim majority and became a centre of consolidation of Muslim interests and the point of convergence of Muslim organisations from across the country. Muslim associations in the new province celebrated Oct 16, 1905, the day on which the partition was officially declared, as a day of rejoicing. Congress and other Hindu organisations strongly opposed the measure and the agitation continued till it was partially withdrawn in 1911. However, Bengali Muslims stayed away from anti-partition protests and remained loyal to the British. Meanwhile, the British introduced reservation for Muslims in government jobs in the new province. Ulemas toured the province with incendiary speeches that led to widespread attacks on Hindus, especially women. This was a dress rehearsal for the ethnic pogrom against Hindus unleashed in 1946-47 in the same regions. When the partition was annulled, Bihar and Orissa was separated from the parent province. Now, the unity of Bengal was ensured, but the entire province then became one with a Muslim majority.

While the Bengal partition produced a physical shape of the Muslim nation, the 1909 Morley-Minto reforms outstretched its vicious tentacles with separate electorates for Muslims. This sordid chapter also finds prominent mention in the book. While all other minorities such as Christians, Parsees, Jews and others were treated as members of the general electorate, Muslims as a community was offered a separate electorate. In this manner, Muslim separatism was constitutionally cemented in the political psyche of India. Not content with that, Muslims were also given more seats than their population numbers warranted in view of the ‘historical and political superiority of Muslims’. The Congress, especially its moderate faction, had taken colonization as a time for beneficial political apprenticeship and wanted to present a united front to Britain to secure self-government. Naturally, they were willing to make critical concessions to Muslim demands to keep them along. The Muslim League realized this weakness early on and exploited it to the hilt. Deepak establishes that appeasement of the Muslim League was entrenched in Congress well before Gandhi took centre-stage. Jinnah assumed an amphibian role at this time by becoming a member of both Congress and the League and put his membership of the Congress to good use of Muslim community by softening the opposition within Congress to separate electorates for Muslims.

Another major contribution of the book is its categorical establishment that Gandhi was not the originator of Congress’ Muslim appeasement. It started right from that party’s birth in 1885 and went into overdrive after Muslim League’s formation in 1906. At least in one instance, it went far more than the League was willing to go – on the issue of the fate of the Turkish sultan who was also the caliph of Muslims who was defeated by Britain and its allies in the First World War. Gandhi’s rise as a national leader was significantly owed to the Khilafat Movement. His agitation against the Rowlatt Act too was made possible due to the support of the Khilafatists. This was the first time Muslims came out on the warpath after 1857, but unfortunately, it was for a cause not even remotely connected to India’s destiny. In fact, its pan-Islamic objectives threatened the national aspirations of India. Maulana Muhammad Ali declared that he will assist the Afghans if they invaded India. This open threat alienated a sizeable cross-section of Hindu supporters. Within no time, the Khilafat agitation changed track and turned into forced conversion and ethnic cleansing of Hindus, especially in Malabar in 1921. The horrifying fact was that the Khilafat leaders refused to condemn the brutal atrocities even after they were widely published by the Press. Maulana Hazrat Mohani, who was one of the founders of the Communist Party of India (CPI), informed in a meeting that ‘since the Moplahs suspected their Hindu neighbours of colluding with the government, they were justified in presenting the Quran to the Hindus. And if the Hindus became Musalmans to save themselves from death, it was a voluntary change of faith and not forcible conversion (p.469). This was how the Khilafat leaders actually justified the murder, rape and forced conversion while the Congress leaders continued to keep their eyes firmly shut.

Another idea this book conveys is the longevity of the fundamental Indic consciousness that animates the Indian communal being. Indic consciousness was able to produce society-based institutions and individuals who constantly and uncompromisingly advanced the Indic civilizational cause and space in the two waves of Middle Eastern and European colonialism. This ability preserved the Consciousness then but is now dulled and stifled under the third wave of colonization, namely, under the Nehruvian Marxist/post-colonial establishment which even refuses to acknowledge the Middle Eastern colonialism which ravaged the country perhaps much more detrimentally than the British.

This book is rather huge even though it covers only the period from 1905 to 1924. It is a worthy follower of the first book of the trilogy – India that is Bharat – in content, but rather less enjoyable due to the frequent and very long extracts from speeches, books, memorials and debates. At least a quarter of the book is filled with verbatim reproduction of speeches on 1909 reforms and the Khilafat. This is very tiring for the reader as the author seems to have taken a temporary leave of absence and left the readers to deal directly with the jargon and vocabulary of politicians who lived more than a century ago. The book consistently uses the terms Bharat/Bharatiya for India/Indian which proclaims its firm mooring to Indian, er, Bharatiya consciousness. The author also emphasizes the Hindu roots of Sikhs and how fanatical Muslims treated both as the same. The unseating of the Khalsa kingdom of Lahore was a sworn objective of Wahhabi extremists in the early half of the nineteenth century. This is especially valid as the Khalistanis are now hand in glove with the Wahhabis.

The book is highly recommended.

[yoursbibliophilic · Rating 5 out of 5]

India, Bharat and Pakistan, the second book of the Bharat Trilogy, takes the discussion forward from its bestselling predecessor, ‘India That Is Bharat’. This book beautifully elucidates, how the real ‘Bharatiya civilization’ has been crushed between the need of Islamic ‘Pakistan’ by Muslims and non-existing secularization of ‘India’ by Congress, an apt title of ‘sandwiched civilization’.

Author provides verbatim extracts from the speeches and resolutions which covers more than half of the book. This may be due to the fact that, he being a lawyer, used to providing evidence as exhibits in the court (providing the document in its original form to prove the content are true and proving the execution of content by providing the reference of events that succeed) to prove his inferences as, res ipsa loquitor (the matter speaks for itself). Personally, this was not needed as it disturbs the flow of reading. However, author could have felt this method was needed as he was alleging big on the national leaders of that time. On completing this book, all the larger than life images of our freedom fighters that our text books has painstakingly built over years, will be pulverized into fine dust. JSD with unquestionable references ( more than 400) changes our openion of our national leaders for ever. However, author also clarifies that he should not "be misunderstood as running down all the contributions of the founders of the Indian National Congress in my decolonial quest, I should clarify something: It could well be argued that coloniality was not just a product of conditioning but was also a pragmatic necessity to survive under the colonial administration" ( Loc 3634-3638 )

while the "First book , evident from its subtitle, was to present the birth of contemporary constitutionalism in Bharat as a continuum of the religious, social, political and economic structures established by the European coloniser in Bharat " (Loc 125-127 ) the second book talks about less spoken middle eastern imperialism.  Starting from Aurangzeb, author gives  panoramic view of all-important events "between 1905 and 1924, which witnessed a partnership of convenience between European and Middle Eastern colonialities. Therefore, not only is it important to assess the Constitution for the impact of European coloniality, it is equally imperative to examine it for the influence of Middle Eastern coloniality "( Loc 141-143 ) which is the main topic of the book. Undoubtedly, "this book may serve as the bridge between the first and the third books"( Loc 183-183 ) where the combined impact of European and Middle Eastern colonialities on the evolution of constitutional is spoken.

The book is divided into 3 section which are between 1740-1898, between 1899-1909 and finally between 1910-1924, in 9 chapters, viz.,

1The Seeds of Pakistan, the main argument presented here is the idea of Pakistan did not start ex nihilo, but was there from the time Mughals got decimated by Maratas which is evident from work & vision of  Dehlawi, Syed Ahmad Sirhindi to reclaim ‘Muslim lands’ had laid out the template not just for the Khilafat Movement, but also for the Pakistan Movement

2 Syed Ahmed Khan,explains the struggle of achieve the goals of the Dehlawite vision through more realistic approach of an Islamic learning  combined with Western education to produce individuals who could navigate the colonial state and reclaim Muslim state power.

3 The Partition of Bengal talks about the events  between 1899 to 1905 that led to the Partition of Bengal in 1905, its effect and the behaviour of Muslim and Hindus

4  Moderate Nationalism talks about the period following the Partition of Bengal in October 1905 and sequence of events leading up to the enactment of the Minto–Morley Reforms of 1909  in some detail.

5 The Indian Councils Act of 1909 charts the journey of the Congress and the Muslim League between 1907 and 1909, which contributed to the Councils Act od 1909

6 Reunification of Bengal,talks about short lived "Ganga–Jamuni Tehzeeb", how Muslim league advanced there Islamic agenda and congress back stabbed hindus for the want of muslim support.

5 From the Home Rule Movement to Rumblings of Khilafat ,discuss the period from 1917 to 1918, which covers the Home Rule Movement, the Montford Reforms and the beginnings of active Khilafat at the end of the First World War.

8 Gandhi, Rowlatt, Government of India Act of 1919, Khilafat and Non-Cooperation chapter discusses the momentous events of the period between 1919 and 1924, which cemented the road to Pakistan through further entrenchment of pan-Islamism and Muslim separatism

9 Malegaon, Malabar, Gulbarga and Kohat The Two-Nation Theory in Action though there were frequent and many riots in Bengal, Punjab and NWFP were to be expected to the point of exodus, author covers only Malegaon (April 1921), Malabar (August 1921), Gulbarga (August 1924) and Kohat (September 1924)

The book ends with George Santayana statement, "those who do not learn from history are doomed, and dare I say, cursed and condemned to repeat it". By constantly drawing the attention of reader to, "Draw parallels between the challenges faced by the Indic civilisation during the tumultuous period of 1905–1924 on the one hand, and present-day Bharat on the other".( Location 167-169 ) leaving the question in the minds, are we living in Khilafat 2.0?

[Preetam Chatterjee · Rating 5 out of 5]

#79th Indian Independence Day

In 2022, on my birthday, my mother gifted me the Bharat Trilogy, and this second volume, India, Bharat and Pakistan: The Constitutional Journey of a Sandwiched Civilisation by J. Sai Deepak, was the one I picked up after finishing the first.

Deepak’s project here is ambitious—he traces the constitutional and political metamorphosis of the subcontinent from the late colonial era through the Partition and into the modern Indian state, attempting to show how Bharat, as a civilisational entity, was caught between the political construct of India and the newly carved Pakistan.

What makes the book intriguing is not just its content but the intellectual posture it adopts: Deepak writes with the zeal of someone trying to excavate a buried narrative, to offer a counterpoint to the dominant, Nehruvian historiography of independent India.

The book moves with meticulous archival detail, blending constitutional history with cultural critique. Deepak often dives into the text of government reports, speeches, and the Constituent Assembly debates, and he juxtaposes them with historical undercurrents stretching back centuries. His central argument—that the civilisational ethos of Bharat was gradually subsumed under an Anglicised legal and political order—gives the narrative a through-line, even when the historical terrain becomes dense.

At times, this density demands a reader’s patience; Deepak assumes a certain familiarity with constitutional terminology and the nuances of legal interpretation. Yet for those willing to persist, the reward is a more layered understanding of how India’s post-1947 identity was shaped.

What struck me most was how the book frames Partition not merely as a geopolitical rupture but as a symptom of deeper epistemic shifts.

Deepak insists that the idea of Pakistan was not only a Muslim League political project but also an outcome of colonial legal structures that failed to accommodate India’s civilisational pluralism on its terms.

He views the creation of Pakistan as both a tragedy and a constitutional inevitability under the given circumstances. This lens recasts familiar events—Mountbatten’s hurried timetable, the failure of the Cabinet Mission Plan, the communal violence—not as isolated historical accidents but as part of a longer civilisational unravelling.

His treatment of the Constituent Assembly debates is particularly forceful. Deepak questions whether the Constitution, as ultimately framed, truly reflected India’s indigenous ethos or whether it represented a continuation of colonial governance with a democratic veneer. He is critical of the overreliance on Western legal frameworks and the marginalisation of Indic jurisprudential traditions. This is where the book becomes polemical, and depending on the reader’s own leanings,

Deepak’s assertive style can feel either invigorating or confrontational. I found myself both agreeing and disagreeing with him in equal measure—sometimes appreciating his call for cultural rootedness, feeling that he underplays the necessity of certain universalist legal principles.

The prose is crisp yet dense, a mix of lawyerly precision and rhetorical flourish. Deepak often pauses the historical narrative to deliver sharp commentary, which, while engaging, occasionally interrupts the flow. Still, these detours are part of his signature style, and they contribute to the sense that the book is as much an argument as it is a history.

By the time I closed the book, I realised that the “sandwiched civilisation” metaphor in the subtitle was more than just a flourish. It captures the predicament of a people negotiating between inherited traditions and imposed modernities, between a cultural past and a political present.

For all its argumentative edges, the book left me with a renewed curiosity about the philosophical foundations of our legal and political systems, and about the costs—both visible and invisible—of modern nationhood.

As the middle entry in the trilogy, it also deepens the arc that began in the first book, setting the stage for the final instalment with a mix of urgency and unresolved questions. For me, that is the mark of a compelling work: it doesn’t just inform; it makes you wrestle with the very ground you stand on.

[Kolkata, August 15, 2025]

[E.T. · Rating 5 out of 5]

The crucial thing first - this book should be mandatory reading along-with Creating a New Medina: State Power, Islam, and the Quest for Pakistan in Late Colonial North India by Venkat Dhulipala and Pakistan Or Partition Of India by Dr.Ambedkar for all people involved in formulating public policy - politicians, senior officers and even UPSC aspirants. There is an urgent need to balance the one-sided and intolerant Leftist narratives.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
School histories teach us that Partition happened because the British played "Divide and Rule".
If you dig one level deeper, you think Jinnah misled his community in unfortunate times. It was a one-off thing that happened due to circumstances.
But if you dig really deep into the subject and think hard, some really disturbing and unpleasant truths will come up. And it is as risky as taking the red pill in "The Matrix".
This book extends the roots of Partition to the fall of the Mughal rule. And successfully and exhaustively argues that Muslim separatism has much deeper roots. It is an intelligently and thoughtfully written book - which ends with the Moplah genocide of Hindus in 1921. There was nothing called Hindu-Muslim unity before Jinnah of the 1930s.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
I have already put my thoughts on Partition in my detailed review of Creating a New Medina: State Power, Islam, and the Quest for Pakistan in Late Colonial North India
One question that has me wondering is - Should schools teach actual history ? Or should they push such unpleasant thoughts under the carpet ?
I think schools should do the latter. And colleges dealing with adults should do the former in a phased manner.
And the manner cannot be inconsistent - when we learn about the treatment of Shudras and Dalits by caste Hindus, we have to teach about the unpleasant history of Islamic rule and Muslim societies. Not to humiliate, but to reform. And hopefully to prevent recurrence. And promote reconciliation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The last chapter on the Moplah genocide in 1921 was quite detailed with comprehensive sources and it shook me. The Khilafat movement (Khilafat - pro-Khalifa therefore pro-Caliphate) was in full swing and things werent looking favourable for the lay Muslim. Were poor Muslims and Hindus also in economic distress ? Yes. Muslims resort to violence and rioting and attack poor and rich Hindus both - including dismembering the old and children and raping women. Forcible conversions too are done (but that is the least actually). And NOT A SINGLE MUSLIM LEADER condemns those actions despite even the British Govt requesting them to do so. The Leftist historians have twisted this to no end as usual - all reasons - economic, falaana, dhimkana are acceptable - except the elephant in the room - (radical) religion. As in the riots in France.
And this was not one riot. Every riot will have the same template. Often the reason is blasphemy and then they feel free to massacre "non-believers" and punish them as a group.
PS:- I have no hope at all from Indian "intellectuals", but I think centrist intellectuals from the West should undertake a deep study of India's history which may offer a lot of lessons for them too.
PPS:- This book was lucid and readable. Wonder if J.Sai Deepak should consider re-writing book 1 (or getting it re-written) ?

[Aditya Kulkarni · Rating 5 out of 5]

Really well written and I would say that it is even better than the author’s first book in the Bharat trilogy. A seminal treatise on what the author has termed “Middle Eastern” coloniality, I believe this is a must read.

[Gaurav Lele · Rating 4 out of 5]

It took me 3 weeks to complete the first section of the book. I completed the rest of the book in 2 days. This itself is a review in a nutshell. If I had to give a one phrase review for book 1 it would be “Overstated yet immensely Consequential“, if I have to do the same for book 2 it would be “About time or Oh My Gods“. This is not to say I don’t have disagreements with the book – especially some of author’s conclusions, but the overwhelming thrust of the book is something I strongly agree with.

Firstly, the book busts all the popular notions of two-nation theory and it being solely a creation of the British. The author effectively traces the modern origins of the two-nation theory to Syed Ahmad Khan and the Aligarh movement at the very least. The book also covers some of the lesser-known events from the 19th century – the Wahhabi movement and the conflict in the Northwestern frontier province. The book makes it abundantly clear that Islamic revivalism was less a reaction to Colonialism and more a reaction to Hindu and Sikh resurgence. The fact that both the British and Muslims saw each other as closer religiously and hence more acceptable/worthy instead of the “Hindu” is driven through via a vast number of primary sources.

The common trope among the secular (even Hindutva discourse) about the Syncretic nature of Sufis is addressed (though I felt the author didn’t fully go into this question).
Secondly, the book also goes into origins and progress of “Moderate Nationalism” under Indian National Congress right up to the ascendency of the “Mahatma”. I had expected the author to be slightly unfair to the Indian National congress and especially the role of Gandhiji but to my surprise he hasn’t. Though some conclusions may seem a tad unfair at times but because the author relies heavily on primary references the “judgement” is moderated. Most importantly the support of Khilafat which is put firmly on the shoulders of Gandhiji in Hindutva circles, is clearly shown to be a mainstream view of Indian National Congress years before ascendency of Gandhiji, absolving Gandhiji of some of the blame.
The book becomes unputdownable after the Lucknow Pact, as the Hindu-Muslim unity discussed here which didn’t even last a decade remains as relevant today as ever. The riots covered in the end of the book – especially the Mopla carnage is almost unbearable to read reminding the reader of Kashmir. The letter by Annie Beasant to Gandhiji stands out. The book also brings into focus some of the lesser-known riots like Kohat. Incidentally the trigger for the Kohat ethnic cleansing was blasphemy, a topic which continues to remain as relevant as ever.

As I write this review a century after Mopla Riots, raids are conducted on Popular Front of India members while the PFI supporters can call for Hartals with partial success in Malabar coast.

Full review ;
https://www.brownpundits.com/2022/09/...

[Nick906 · Rating 5 out of 5]

Coloniality in action and its repercussions

First things first, although you can read this book on its own, to properly comprehend what the author wants to convey you should read the first book of the trilogy, “India, that is Bharat”. The reason is, the first books set the concepts or templates (sort of like a formula or theory) of colonialism and this book explains the effects of those templates.

Now coming to the book itself. Once in a while, you read a book that opens up your mind and bring about a mass awakening. This book, or shall I say both the books of the trilogy, is doing just that. Have you observed something through the events around you and in history which resulted in questions in your mind? The questions of whose answers you had a vague inkling but lacked proper understanding of proper concepts and words. Well, this book fills that void for you through logical arguments based on proof from original sources. Building upon the concepts from the first book, the book goes deep into explaining what implications coloniality can have on the fortunes of a country like Bharat. In this book, the author has mainly focused on earlier coloniality than the British, i.e. Middle Eastern coloniality, and the coloniality propagated by the British helped in reviving this earlier form of coloniality. Starting from the period of decline of the Mughal Empire and the advent of the British, up until the 1924 period the author presents the case for the continuous effect of Middle Eastern coloniality including its role in the partition of Bengal. The book proves what how the reason for those events was two types of coloniality working in tandem to the detriment of India.

The last section is where it gets really interesting. For all the buildup that was happening throughout the book, the last section is the climax which proves what dangerous effects coloniality can have on the lives of people. Up until that point, you really start to wonder whether it’s all an intellectual and how it affects us if a community is suffering from coloniality. The accounts of the Malabar riots/Moplah riots are gut-wrenching and eye-opening.

As I mentioned in the review of the first book itself, the author is a Supreme Court lawyer and it reflects in his writing in how he presents his arguments by marshaling authentic proofs in support. My one gripe with the first book was that the language of the book was let’s say, very academic. The author has improved upon that. The language is lucid and easy to read for a layman.

Don’t make the mistake of thinking of what this book explains as history. If you are even a little aware, you will see the implications and similarities with what is happening all around you today too. I'll end this review with last line of the book:

...those who do not learn from history are doomed, and dare I say, cursed and condemned to repeat it.

[Karuna · Rating 5 out of 5]

Last autumn I was privileged to listen to J. Sai Deepak at the Bengaluru Litfest and could hardly hide my excitement while heading home with a signed copy of India, Bharat and Pakistan. It took me a while to sit down to carefully read through this voluminous research work. I briefly outline my key takeaways from this second book, even though those might have been known to many of you, but were new or appeared in new light to me:
- Reform for Islam means return to purity and not progression: Middle Eastern Consciousness has an ability to produce countless revivalist organisations/movements
- Muslim community vehemently protected their religious education at the expense of being left behind upon advancement of English education. Hindus, on the contrary, have embarked on the journey of dharmic estrangement.
- Most eloquent Muslim leaders have never thought it possible that Hindus and Muslims can coexist peacefully, onus being on British for protecting 'minority'
- INC was founded by an Englishman - Mr. Hume - with a purpose of 'letting out steam' by English-educated Indians
- Conflict of moderates and extremists within Congress ensured the real patriots' voices were not heard. Elitist club for brown sahibs has had a solid history of crown worship through years of Congress sessions
- Partition of Bengal along with communal electorates ensured two-nation theory had become a reality
- The pact of Gandhi and Ali brothers: support of Khilafat against so called support for non-violent non-cooperation, which never materialized ensured the position of domination and leadership for Gandhi.
- Gandhi could not have become as popular a leader without dancing to the tune of islamists who were ready to invite Afghans to invade Bharat to achieve their goals.
- Indian muslims were demanding Khilafat as it was before WWI, whereas Mustafa Kemal Atatürk proclaimed republic and abolished Caliphate
- And the last, but most traumatic portion of the book: it deals with Moplah and other riots in greater detail, eliminating the last traces of trust in our Marxist historians who tried to project it as a class conflict between landlords and peasants instead of greedy islamic fanatics killing, raping and stealing of and from the Hindus.

But the biggest takeaway is surely that Mr. Gandhi should never be addressed as Mahatma.

[Parth Agrawal · Rating 5 out of 5]

There are very few books which make you feel as if 5 stars are not enough to determine how great their content is and this one surely sits at the top of the pile. When I read the first book written by J Sai Deepak, I remained dazed for weeks. Now that I have completed this one, I can say with certainty that I will never be able to look at the history of freedom struggle of our nation with the same perspective. I will try to simplify the story and help us all to get his message but none of it can act as a substitute for reading this book. I always suggest and implore people to read the book at the end of my reviews but this one is so special that I am doing it right away. J Sai Deepak's "Bharat series" is perhaps the most essential read for any Indian to understand where we stand, how we got here & where we are headed.

The first book was about European/Christian coloniality & how it still manages to capture our imagination, 77 years after independence. However, in this book, he has highlighted something which has never been seen as a coloniality through any historical perspective. He has talked about Middle Eastern/Islamic coloniality which ruled India for more than 700 years starting from Mir Qasim's invasion in 712 AD till last Mughal emperor Bahadur Shah 2 who at least remained a titular head of Indian subcontinent till 1862. According to Mr. Sai Deepak, Indian mindset, especially Indic civic consciousness has experienced 2 subsequent waves of colonialities from both the Abrahamic faiths and it is still recovering from that outlook. 1200 years of civilizational subjugation takes time to get washed away and 77 years are definitely not enough to offset the same, however, he has made an attempt for us to be at least be in a position which enables us to at least acknowledge what has happened and what is happening around us

The story starts as Aurangzeb dies and Mughal empire starts to crumble with East India Company slowly exerting its political ambitions now that it had firmly established itself as a commercial superpower. It has been highlighted that 2 of the largest and most powerful Islamic empires, one of which was the Mughal empire and the other one was the Ottoman empire, saw themselves losing to the Britishers and Habsburg empires respectively. Muslims were worried about the losing influence of Islam in the world and that is when 2 thinkers were born which redefined or rather recontextualized Islam in the 18th century. One was Muhammad ibn abd al-Wahab in Central Arabia and Shah Waliulah Dehlawi in Indian subcontinent. Both of these thinkers, independently concluded that the influence of Islam in the temporal world is at its nadir because the followers of Islam are not adhering to the puritanical interpretation of Islam due to which they have lost their way and as a result, their power as well. Both of them gave a clarion call to go back to the puritanical and conservative interpretation in order to ensure that Islam is seen as a force to be reckoned with. This movement later turned out to be Wahabism but I want to emphasize on the same fact which the author has tried, seeds of partition and Pakistan were not sown by the creation of Muslim league in 1906, they already existed since 18th century because a substantial section of Muslims in India didn't see themselves as Indians back then, they only considered themselves as residents of India with middle eastern ancestry and Wahabism was the ideology from which they derived inspiration

The author has beautifully weaved the story of how seeds of Pakistan came into existence with the spread of Wahabism and how Shah Waliulah Dehlawi was the one who independently propagated the idea of Islamic community being a separate nation which had conquered India hundreds of years ago and could no longer see their former subjects as an equal. I am not getting into the details regarding the spread of this sentiment across 19th century, however, I can assure you that the story shall fill you with horror. I want to directly come to the Bengal partition of 1905 under Lord Curzon and the backdrop in which it was done. Before reading this book, I was under the impression that the partition of Bengal was done break the Hindu-Muslim solidarity which was proving to be troublesome for the Britishers. However, my viewpoint has changed. In my opinion, this is the first event which proved to me that in order to secure personal gains, Muslims of Bengal deserted the Indian cause and created a precedent of problems which is still causing headaches for India in the aftermath of fall of Hasina Begam's government in Bangladesh. Britishers had recognized that Bengal was the hub of all the revolutionary activity and majority of freedom fighters in the Congress hailed from Bengal and were educated Hindus. So, they induced the Muslims that the eastern Bengal area which had Muslim majority districts, will be given to them in exchange of withdrawing their support to Congress in opposition of Bengal partition and that is exactly what happened. It created a precedent amongst Muslim masses that loyalty to Britishers pays and anyways they were unable to imagine themselves sharing the same nation with Hindus. It is evident from the fact that they vehemently opposed its reunification when it was attempted back in 1911. The excruciating detail in which J Sai has shown this whole story play out is unbelievable and I suggest anyone having any interest in national freedom struggle should definitely read it to understand that the story of our freedom struggle isn't as rosy as has been shown in our NCERT books. It is much more than Britishers yielding to the force of morality and non-violence which is readily associated with Mr. Gandhi as well as showcased as the real reason for our independence

There are many other incidents which will fill shock the reader but I want to end it with Khilafat and Non-cooperation movement of 1919 which spread across the country in the aftermath of world war 1 and the steps Britishers took in the aftermath of that. Out of all the incidents, this was the most shocking one for me personally because the whole idea of freedom struggle and loyalties of Muslims as well as Mahatama Gandhi got exposed. Honestly, it is extremely hard for me to write this but Mahatama Gandhi, at the very least, doesn't deserve the god like stature that he enjoys amongst us Indians. We need to look past the hagiography and realize that at the end of it all, he was also a politician who was doing and saying things to attain certain objectives. During world war 1, there were 2 sides fighting the war, central powers and allied powers. Allied powers consisted of Britain, Italy, France, Japan, USA etc while Central powers consisted of Germany, Hungary, Ottoman empire through turkey. Muslims believe in the concept of global brotherhood and at the time, Ottoman empire was the center of their power and authority with the sultan acting as the Khalifa of all the Muslims on the planet (primarily Sunni Muslims). In the war, allied powers defeated the central powers which created a difficult situation for the Britishers back in India. Allied powers had already decided to dismember the whole Ottoman empire into its constituent Muslim nations while the Muslims back in India were trying to push to prevent that. Their request to the British government in India was that the Ottoman empire must be left untouched such that its temporal power and influence doesn't decrease. The movement that they started in India for this objective was called Khilafat movement. The stated objective of the movement was that they want to put pressure on the British government in India to ensure that the Ottoman empire shouldn't be dismembered by the allied powers or else Britishers will face the wrath of Indian Muslims. Since all of this was happening in 1919, Britishers had anticipated backlash from the Indian Muslims due to which they brought in the Rowlatt Act, 1919 which gave sweeping powers to the government to arrest without warrant and speedy trials. Opposition of this act in Punjab led to the bloody massacre of Jallianwala Bagh in the aftermath of which Non-cooperation movement was launched. However, both Non-cooperation movement and Khilafat movement leaders came to an arrangement which was supposed to be a quid pro quo. Non-cooperation movement was led by Mr. Gandhi while Khilafat was being led by Muhammad Ali and Shaukat Ali. In exchange of support to their cause, Mr. Gandhi asked for a ban on cow slaughter. The khilafat movement exploited all the support it could get to give boost to their cause but never gave anything in return to the Hindu community as they always prevaricated on the question of cow slaughter. Eventually, allied powers won the war and the ottoman empire was dismembered. Khilafat movement back in India gained more prominence and traction with the members of the movement asking for "swaraj" which meant complete independence from the Britishers but not for self rule under Hindu majority. When they said "swaraj" they mean return of Islamic rule and in their bid to ensure just that, they even contacted the Amir of Afghanistan to invade India and liberate it from British rule. As expected, Hindus and Congress were not at all comfortable with this but their hands were tied because of Mr. Gandhi who believed that in order to secure independence for India, Hindu-Muslim unity was must and in order to achieve this unity, Hindus must sacrifice whatever the Muslims ask for as long as the Muslim community doesn't acknowledge and appreciate these sacrifices on their own. When Hindus started taking their support away from the Khilafat agitation, they were punished by the Muslims all across the country. The detailed description of riots that took place in Kohat (present day Pakistan), Malegaon (Maharashtra), Gulbarga (Hyderabad) & Malapurram (Mopla riots in Malabar) will send chills down your spine. Not only were Hindus punished for not supporting their cause, they were slaughtered and their leaders along with the British overlords, were busy justifying or brushing these incidents under the carpet while there was hardly any vocal opposition from the Congress or Mr. Gandhi.

Ironically, between 1919-1924, Turkey not only lost part of its kingdom, their own homegrown Young Turk movement under the leadership of Kemal Ataturk, first reduced the Khalifa to a titular head holding sway only over spiritual aspects of life and then disbanded the position completely. The cause for which Indian Muslims killed their fellow citizens was done and dusted in no time. Even the Non-cooperation movement and its call for Swaraj was highjacked by the khilafat members which is bizarre because Non-cooperation was a call for independence from British rule and establishment of a new nation while Khilafat movement was a cause which showed solidarity by the Indian Muslims towards an extraterritorial identity of global Islamic brotherhood for which they were willing to compromise anyone. I distinctly remember that these movements were highlighted for their secular character in our textbooks. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Unfortunately, Mr. Gandhi will have to shoulder the burden of the fact that he was the one who started gaining traction as an influential leader since 1915 when he came back to India but he truly became a national leader by putting his weight behind the Khilafat movement which mainstreamed the idea of having an extraterritorial identity and furthering its cause at the cost of domestic affairs

I can go on and on about the various aspects which were brought to the fore by this book. I request everyone to go through it as it will change you worldview about a lot of things

[Somnath Sarkar · Rating 5 out of 5]

A much needed book. Must read for anyone interested in Indian History.

[परीक्षित चंद्रशेखर गोगटे · Rating 5 out of 5]

Must read because those who do not learn from history are doomed, crushed and condemned to repeat it.

[shishir singh · Rating 5 out of 5]

The book is the next step in understanding the question of impact of coloniality on the Bharatvarsha. It moves from the broad historical periods of Book One, which covered the broad contours of the European expansion and the inherent OET of Christianity which drove the noble project of civilising nations, to that of India specifically the post 1857 period till 1921. It very succinctly captures the inherent strain of the Middle Eastern and British Coloniality on one side and the Indic consciousness on the other. This effectively plays out in the working of the INC which time and again suffers under a dual consciousness and the ill effects of the same are made evident as covered in the book especially vis-a-vis the partition of Bengal, Communal Electorates and the various religious riots which were washed over by the Marxist historian brush as a class struggle. Also, the book has also traced the roots of the Middle Eastern Colonialist which resulted in the Two Nation Theory which was a fact recognised by likes of Syed Ahmed Khan as early as the days of the Congress foundation i.e 1880s.
Also the fact that the author has kept personal inferences to a minimum and relied heavily on the reader’s understanding by presenting facts and citing sources sets this work apart from the typical school history textbooks both in terms of accuracy of events and the clinical nuance with which history should treated
PS: It’s a request to author that since the book builds on Decoloniality it would be fair to afford the Indic languages translations a hardcover edition.

[ShiVam MisHra · Rating 5 out of 5]

India Bharat and Pakistan: The Constitutional Journey of a Sandwiched Civilization by J Sai Deepak

The traditional narrative of India’s freedom struggle often suggests that the Muslim League raised the demand for Pakistan with the Lahore Declaration in March 1940, thus advancing the Two-Nation theory. Over the following years, this idea gained enough traction to eventually be accepted by even Gandhi, leading to the partition of India in 1947. According to this view, the Two-Nation theory was primarily a political creation of the Muslim League. However, this book challenges such a simplistic interpretation, arguing that the theory was actually religious in nature, rooted in the minds of a few zealots after the disintegration of the Mughal Empire in the mid-eighteenth century. Islam’s principles, the book contends, require Muslims to live under Sharia law. When this isn't possible, the religion offers two options: wage a holy war to establish Islamic rule or, if the rulers are too powerful, migrate to a land where Sharia is enforced. During the height of Mughal rule, India was governed under Sharia law, but as the empire declined and regional powers like the Marathas, Jats, Sikhs, and Rajputs rose, revivalist Islamic movements emerged to reclaim lost political influence. These movements would shape the political landscape in the centuries to follow.

Though pacified under British rule after 1857, Muslims began to fear Hindu dominance once democratic reforms were introduced, given the numerical superiority of Hindus. While the British, being “People of the Book,” were somewhat acceptable to religious Muslims, Hindus were viewed as polytheists. Thus, the Two-Nation theory emerged as a religious response to the idea of living under Hindu rule, developing long before it was formalized by the Muslim League in the twentieth century. This book, the second in J. Sai Deepak’s trilogy on India’s constitutional history, argues that the theory influenced various key events, such as the partition of Bengal, the establishment of separate electorates for Muslims, and the Khilafat Movement.

What sets Deepak’s work apart from other scholars is his fresh perspective, tracing the origins of the Two-Nation theory to the collapse of the Mughal Empire. After this collapse, Islamic scholars sought a return to the fundamentals of their faith, leading to the rise of figures like Shah Waliullah Dehlawi. Waliullah, influenced by Wahhabism during his time in Arabia, advocated for a strict separation between Muslims and Hindus, fearing that interaction with non-Muslims would corrupt Islamic purity. He encouraged Muslims to view themselves as part of a global religious community, or Ummah, and to follow the practices of the Prophet. His disdain for India was so intense that he invited the Afghan ruler Ahmed Shah Durrani to invade the country to subjugate the non-Muslims, marking the early seeds of the Two-Nation theory.

Deepak then outlines how various religious movements spread across India, particularly the Faraizi Movement in Bengal, founded by Haji Shariatullah in the 1820s. This movement, marked by violent uprisings and attacks on Hindus, laid the groundwork for future Islamic radicalism in the region. Under the leadership of Syed Ahmed Barelwi, Muslims from Bengal aligned with broader jihadist networks across India, such as those in Punjab. These revivalist movements, including Wahhabism and other Islamic schools of thought like Ahl-i-Hadith, Deobandi, Barelwi, and the Aligarh Movement, all contributed to the growth of Muslim separatism.

Some readers may be surprised by Deepak’s inclusion of the Aligarh Movement in this list, given its reputation for promoting modern Western education alongside Islamic teachings. However, Deepak argues that despite its seemingly progressive goals, the Aligarh Movement’s religious underpinnings were aligned with the same ideology that fueled separatism. Figures like Syed Ahmed Khan, influenced by both Muslim nationalism and pan-Islamism, declared that Muslims in India were a separate nation, laying the foundation for later communal tensions. While many scholars attribute India’s religious conflicts to the British “Divide-and-Rule” policy, Deepak makes a critical point: this policy merely exploited pre-existing religious, cultural, and civilizational divides between Hindus and Muslims.

One of the pivotal moments in the assertion of Muslim nationalism, according to Deepak, was the partition of Bengal in 1905. Though officially carried out for administrative reasons, the partition created a Muslim-majority province in East Bengal, which became a center for Muslim political consolidation. While Congress and other Hindu organizations opposed the partition, Bengali Muslims largely supported it, celebrating its declaration as a victory. The partition was eventually undone in 1911, but the damage had been done—Muslim separatism had already taken root, foreshadowing the events of 1947.

The 1909 Morley-Minto reforms, which introduced separate electorates for Muslims, further institutionalized Muslim separatism in India. Unlike other minorities, Muslims were given their own electorate and more seats than their population warranted. This move entrenched the idea of Muslim political superiority, even as Congress sought to present a united front to the British in their push for self-governance. Deepak argues that Congress’ appeasement of the Muslim League predated Gandhi’s rise to leadership, with figures like Jinnah already playing both sides by holding memberships in both Congress and the League.

A significant contribution of the book is its examination of Gandhi’s role in Muslim appeasement. While Gandhi is often blamed for the Congress’ concessions to the Muslim League, Deepak argues that this tendency began with the party’s formation in 1885 and accelerated after the creation of the League in 1906. Gandhi’s involvement in the Khilafat Movement, which aimed to restore the Turkish Caliphate after World War I, marked a turning point in Hindu-Muslim relations. While the movement initially united Muslims and Hindus against British rule, it soon devolved into forced conversions and communal violence, particularly in Malabar in 1921.

Deepak’s work also highlights the enduring presence of Indic consciousness in Indian society, which resisted both Middle Eastern and European colonialism. However, he argues that this consciousness has been eroded by the post-colonial establishment, which refuses to acknowledge the damage caused by centuries of Islamic rule.

Though the book covers only the period from 1905 to 1924, it is a dense and exhaustive read, filled with lengthy excerpts from speeches, books, and political debates. While this level of detail lends the work academic rigor, it can be tedious for readers unfamiliar with the political jargon of the time. Nevertheless, Deepak’s use of “Bharat” and “Bharatiya” instead of “India” and “Indian” underscores the book’s strong nationalist perspective. His discussion of the Hindu roots of Sikhism and the animosity Muslim extremists harbored towards both Hindus and Sikhs offers important insights into India’s communal history, especially in light of contemporary alliances between Khalistani and Wahhabi elements.

[Prerna Munshi · Rating 3 out of 5]

The book has already been highly written about and it certainly adds an understated element of 'Middle Eastern consciousness' that has contributed hugely to the formation of Pakistan. I certainly agree that the separatist sentiments based on Hindu Muslim divide had long been brewing and Pakistan did not happen overnight. The idea was in the undercurrent for centuries.

The book is huge and it's mostly an appendix of letters, speeches, press releases, books, research articles on the period i.e. 1901-1925 that it covers. I am definitely impressed with the labour this has taken to collect evidences from but in many instances, this reads very unidirectional. If the author is reading my review, I know what counter argument, he is going to offer 'Oh yes, there's a colonial 'tolerant' and 'secular' mindset that writes'.
I request not to reduce my perspective to that.
What I mean is, the author makes his point, and quotes from 10 'favorable' sources to corroborate how he is factually correct. It sounds too repetitive, jarring and in a way, appears to be drilling some information (as if hitherto known) into your head.
As if, the author is on a mission, to eradicate an 'ignorance', Hindus, especially, are supposedly doomed in.

I would request prospective readers to try to read this with a neutral point of view, despite the book's language which, at times, is extremely harsh, unavoidable and cantankerous.

[Abhishek · Rating 5 out of 5]

J. Sai Deepak has grown in leaps and bounds as a lawyer, a public speaker, and an inspiration for the youth of India, who are increasingly becoming civilizational aware. Adding to that list is his rise as an author and his second book of the Bhārat trilogy (or is it 4 books now?) - India, Bhārat, and Pakistan is a testament to this.

Continuing from book one, JSD establishes the continuum of Middle Eastern Coloniality in Bhārat after the Mughal empire's decline. It traces events, personalities, and their impacts, ultimately leading to the Partition of India. The book covers the period starting from 1740 all the way until 1924. It gives a dive deep into history, which is often ignored/under-appreciated when we discuss the freedom movement of India. The seeds of what would eventually become Pakistan were not merely a product of the British divide and rule or the Partition of Bengal in 1905. Rather, they were sown as early as the late 18th century. The book also summarily dismisses the notion of "Ganga-Jamuni tehzeeb," or Hindu-Muslim unity and syncretic culture, and disillusions one completely.

The book is divided into 3 sections. In section 1, we are given an overview of the different Pan-Islamic movements which started in Bhārat post the decline of the Mughal empire. We are introduced to Shah Waliullah Dehlawi, who inspired various leaders to take up Islamic revivalism, most notably Syed Ahmed Barelvi (Wahhabi movement). While the Wahhabi movement is often portrayed as an Independence movement and a fight against the British, closer analysis reveals how it was a movement to re-establish the religious supremacy of Islam in Bhārat. This is evidenced most notably by their absence in the Mutiny of 1857.

After deeply analyzing the different movements, we are introduced to the architect of the two-nation theory Syed Ahmed Khan. Khan recognized the futility of armed jihad against the British, thus embracing "modernity" and combining it institutionally with Islamic education, and founded Aligarh Muslim University. This allowed Muslims to retain their consciousness while the Hindu elites became a core part of colonial infrastructure while sacrificing their indigenity on all fronts. Khan was also the first to forge a "national" Muslim identity, which had been elusive thus far.

The other important personality in this section is Syed Jamal al-Din al-Afghani. Afghani played a vital role in entrenching the idea of a global ummah and Khilafat, at least two decades before the birth of the Khilafat movement in 1919. This was to reaffirm the concept of a homeland/central authority to which Muslims worldwide would pay allegiance. Thus, Syed Ahmed Khan and Afghani combined to establish Muslim nationalism and pan-Islamism in Bhārat, which led to catastrophic consequences.

Section 2 explores the creation of the Indian National Congress, the events leading to the partition of Bengal in 1905, the "Safety-valve" theory of the British in creating the Indian National Congress, the rise of various revolutionaries and revolutionary movements, and the divisions within the Congress itself as Moderates and Extremists (though fluid in nature). We examine how the British took advantage of pre-existing religious, civilizational, and political divides during the Partition of Bengal.

The partition was a significant moment in India's history. The events leading to it saw the rise of several revolutionary movements. To keep these movements in check, under the leadership of A.O. Hume, the Indian National Congress was established. The primary goal was to relieve the angst of the populace and give a voice while remaining under British influence, to render the revolutionary movements moot. Soon, two factions emerged in the Congress, the revolutionaries (comprising Lal-Bal-Pal) and the moderates (with Gokhale, Banerjea, etc.). There couldn't have been a starker difference between the two groups. The Moderates adopted a British loyalist position and only aimed to secure western democracy under the Crown. The Extremists were nationalists in character and demanded complete independence or Purna Swaraj.

This section also details the Muslim league's formation due to Muslim leaders' fears regarding introducing elective components based on constituencies. We have a detailed analysis of the Minto-Morley reforms and later the Montagu-Chelmsford reforms with primary extracts of the various debates and discussions in the annual meetings of the INC, Muslim League, and the British parliament year after year.

There is also a retrospective of the moderates/extremists thought processes when gathering Muslim support and their respective end goals. However, the need to collaborate with the Muslims only backfired as it kept increasing their demand for concessions, thus compromising Hindu interests at every level.

Finally, section 3 elaborates on the reunification of Bengal, the contribution of Bhārat in the First World War, and the rise of the Khilafat Movement and Gandhi as an influential leader. In particular, the gory details of the Moplah riots make for a spine-chilling read. The book details the riots post the Rowlatt act in Jallianwalla Bagh and the massive destruction caused by Muslims due to the Khilafat stand taken by the British.

We also learn about Gandhi as a staunch British loyalist like the Moderates. He opposed the Home Rule Movement and encouraged passive resistance and Hindus to actively participate and contribute to the Khilafat movement. While the Khilafatists were ready to embrace jihad to secure their goals and use Swaraj to hurt the British, Gandhi did not call for complete independence and even limited means of non-violent methods. His decisions and actions lay waste to his being a "Mahatma." Ironically, Jinnah was proved right when he openly challenged Gandhi's idea of non-violent means of resistance, claiming that no independence can be achieved without bloodshed.

In conclusion, the author makes it abundantly clear that this period witnessed the rise of Middle Eastern Coloniality combined with European Coloniality. Bhārat was severely limited in dealing with it due to its dual consciousness. Thus, any reading or interpretation of the independent Bhārat's constitution must consider this history.

[H · Rating 5 out of 5]

2nd of the trilogy. Humble request to all my friends to read this voluminous book. Thanks to Sai Deepak ji for this enormous effort to collect information from the hoary past and place it before us.

My humble request with folded hands, pls read this book, to understand the truth of what really happened in the long decades of freedom fight/struggle or the war for Independence. And the role of all the ppl and their real contributions. The Congress party and the Muslim Jamaat make lot of claims, but to know the reality, this book is MUST. A loong read as you can see from the time taken, but YES worth every second

[Sudhakar Kadiyala · Rating 5 out of 5]

An accidental listening of a podcast between Shashi Tharoor and J.Sai Deepak on decolonisation ,Moplah riots and historical events with contrasting views made me dig deeper into their writings and I followed picking up the book “India,Bharat and Pakistan”, by the later.Besides the above podcast, the frequent rhetoric with heightened political debates on Indian news channels vis-a-vis India-Pakistan relations,Partition ,Hindu,Muslim unity, Ganga, Jamuna tahzeeb, followed by the above authors verbatim elsewhere etc made me curious to choose the above book which happens to be the second book of the author’s comprehensive trilogy and the third of which is yet to come.The book ends with the famous quote of George Santayana which says”Those who do not learn from history are doomed and dare I say cursed and condemned to repeat it”(P-531).Sure enough the quote emphasises the fact that if we do not learn from the mistakes of our past ,we are forced to repeat the same in our future.The source of historical past that are presented in the book are referenced through the vast amount of notes or bibliography mentioned at the end I.e. from(P551 to 616).The interested readers may further enhance their knowledge perspective by going through the same referenced notes in detail.The time period of the book is mainly between (1905 - 1924) though follows with a few prefixed and suffixed overlapping mentions to maintain the sequence of historical events as well as for easier
understanding of the readers.The above period was considered to be the most tumultuous period in the Indian history.We learn how India I.e. Bharat accommodated foreigners and as a consequence bruised and bled itself multiple times in the form of riots, genocides, forced religious conversations ,hooliganism’s,vandalism’s, attacking of Temples and many many more deplorable incidents.The two most shocking incidents during the period are the Jallianwala bagh massacre and the Moplah riots.In the Jallianwala carnage gunshots were fired at innocent protesters who were unharmed and silently protesting against the Rowlatt Act in which several hundred people have lost their lives and many more number of people injured. The dead and the injured include women, children and infants. The Moplah riots ,which started as a resistance against the British colonialism turned into religious riots.The riots seems to have been triggered by the Khilafat movement which started by Pan-Islamists in support of Ottoman Caliphate and took turn towards Hindus(at Malabar) as they suspected Hindus allegiance on Khilafat towards British colonisation. The violence unleashed by Mopilas is brutal and unimaginable that may shake the very foundations of humanity.Though a few leaders of Indian National Congress and pro-Islamists termed the Moplah violence against feudal landlords , I however prefer leaving the matter to the discern of the readers.Even Mahatma Gandhi (who was supporting Khilafat movement)and a few Pan-Islamic and INC leaders didn’t condemn the Moplah riots as desired,.To quote Virgil , I say “ No Day shall erase you from the memory of time”, as regards to the above two maniacal acts.India I.e. Bharat accommodated everyone from outsiders, traders, settlers and let them live in peace. It even got adjusted to invaders like Moghal regime and British colonisations for hundreds of years embracing their culture ,language ,living style etc and as a consequence it got wounded and bled severely.Inspite of all the suffering the country didn’t whither away its cultural past ,multiple ethnic beliefs, its faith and religious past etc and is able to maintain its uniqueness . An example to the above may be drawn through the words of Syed Ali Imam-(P-226) who in his speech on 30th December 1908(who later became the prime minister of Nizam)said that the verdict of History is that in holding India under subjection for centuries the Mohammedan held only her body and not her soul.Neither the Moghul Emperor Akbar with his soft approach towards Hindus as regards to religious social or political views nor Aurangzeb with his desperate approach of religious intolerance and forcible conversions could bring about the desired change in Hindus and their religious practices.A few other important aspects of the period(1905-1924) are the formation of Muslim league,Indian National Congress, and the views of moderates and the extremists, the Pan Islamic Movement, opinions of leaders like Bal Gangadhar Tilak,Lala Laj Pat Rai,Maulana Abul Kalam Azad,MK Ghandhi,Motilal and Jawahar Lal Nehru ,Lady Annie Basant etc., the various bigotry reform’s ,the partition of Bengal on the basis of religion (majority Muslim population)and later its annulment after protests, which led a few league leaders flipping into congress to fight for Muslim rights through congress(P-299),,the two nation theory which started well before 1905(P-95) and many many more such events which are all self explanatory for the readers. The overall genre of the book is simple and at most of the places ,the references are drawn from the earlier speeches, talks,reforms ,acts etc which at times found to be repetitive as a reader(Different speakers talking about the same matter).Overall an extraordinary book for everyone, particularly for Indians to read which reflects the present day Indian consciousness that evolved having an influence of its historical past and a constitution framed seemingly involving all but echoes at the cost of Indic Civilisation

[Harsh Agrawal]

Thank you @bloomsburyindia for a media copy of the book.

After the tremendous success of the first book in the Bharat Trilogy, India, That is Bharat, Sai Deepak ji has brought the second book, India, Bharat and Pakistan. The first book talked about coloniality. Christian or European coloniality to be specific. This book majorly deals with Middle Eastern coloniality. The book also busts all the wide. lt help beliefs that the two-nation theory is only a British invention. The author successfully links Syed Ahmad Khan and the Aligarh movement, at the very least, to the modern beginnings of the two-nation thesis.

The book starts by going into several different schools-of-though in the middle eastern frameworks among these are the Barelvi SOT, The Wahabi SOT and the Dehlawi SOT. These people were basically Islam supremacists and fundamentalist who were very unhappy with the diluted Islam. They wanted the people of the faith to go back to their roots. The Aligarh Movement and Syed Ahmad Khan is also discussed, along with the popular narrative around his involvement in the Two-Nation Theory. Islamic revivalism was more of a response to the revival of the Hindu and Sikh religions than it was to Colonialism. Numerous primary sources are used to support the idea that the British and Muslims viewed each other as more compatible and deserving than the "Hindus" in terms of religion. All this is covered in the First Section of the book, which covers the time frame of 1740-1898.

The second and third sections of the book cover the events of 1899-1909 and 1910-1924 respectively. While these might seem as a small frame of time in retrospect, events of huge importance took place at these times. Moderate Nationalism is discussed here. It begins from discussing the rift in the Indian National Congress between the ‘Moderates’ and the ‘Extremists’. In a nutshell, while the latter wanted complete independence from the British, the former wanted self-governance, under the British Empire

Read the complete review here: https://www.keetabikeeda.in/post/unde...

[Jay Sharma · Rating 2 out of 5]

I read the first part of the trilogy, india that is bharat, and was motivated to read the second part of the trilogy (this book). While I did find the first book to be a bit dry, Sai Deepak put forward his main points in the book backed with hard facts that were easy to follow.

This book is kind of the opposite. It is ridden with an unlimited number of speeches throughout that he exhibits to the point that it becomes extremely difficult to follow the main arguments being stated in each chapter of the book.

As other reviews would mention, the author takes a vacation and essentially starts exhibiting speeches that go on for an endless number of pages that could have easily been inserted and referenced to in an appendix. Unfortunately more than half of the book consists of speeches which makes the book loose coherence as the chapters progress through the boom. I only got half way through the book and had to stop as the verbosity and general structure of the book was not anywhere similar to the first book of the trilogy.

Not to say that the author is with out a doubt an expert on the subject and Indian constitutional law, but he ought to have had this book peer reviewed by others who are perhaps not in fields related to jurisprudence, or those who are keen on reading legalese all the time in order to impart knowledge to other facets of society.

Truly a shame, I wish I could've learned more about India decolonizing itself, and the aspects of middle eastern colonization on the Indian subcontinent relative to European colonization that was discussed in the first part of the trilogy.

[Yajush · Rating 5 out of 5]

J Sai Deepak is metamorphosing into a brilliant writer and historian. This instalment has clearly established that. He will be looked upon by every Indian who ever felt that the history taught in our schools and universities doesn't have semblance with our societal experience.

In this book too the author unabashedly presents his argument and iroclads it with unfiltered facts which were conveniently glossed over by mainstream 'Historians'. The last chaper on Mopla outrage is bound to give sleepless nights. Through out the book reader witness the thinking and philosophy of our so called 'tall leaders' and the injustice done to a lot of great voices.

Having read the first book, the writing this time is lucid, seamless and arguments kept crisp. But most importantly writer takes a back seat and lets the facts do the talking, which is paramount in assessing historical events. Classic example of "Read, understand and draw your conclusions"

A MUST READ..!!!

[Arup Mittra · Rating 5 out of 5]

Sai Deepak’s writing is scholarly yet accessible, making use of historical documents, legal frameworks, and philosophical references. The book is for those who are interested in history, law, politics, and cultural studies. Those who are studying the Constitution of India must read this to know the historical background.
"India, Bharat and Pakistan" is an insightful read for those interested in understanding India’s historical identity.
The author has deep knowledge and have gone in details to justify the historical events.
The section 3 is the best part- which covers the period from 1910 to 1924.
It talks about the Home Rule Movement, Khilafat movement, Non Cooperation movement and the distressing events of that period. It also elaborate the role of Gandhi wrt all the movements.
What we have been taught in school history books are all distorted and does not give the real picture. This book has brought out the hidden facts.

[Rakesh Kalani · Rating 5 out of 5]

Second book of this series, this book wonderfully connects the dots of middle eastern coloniality in India right from the fall of Mughals after Aurangzeb. The book dares and presents a different account of the Indian independence movement (different from the narrative taught to us). The book clearly points to the coloniality and western consciousness with which the Congress worked during the independence movement. The height of coloniality being that till mid 1920s the Congress didn't even think of a complete independence and wanted to be under umbrella of British Empire. And of course this book has ruthlessly exposed the fake narrative of Hindu Muslim unity during pre independence and the so called 'Ganga Jamuna Tehzeeb'. A 'must read' book.

Eagerly waiting for the next book of this series.

[Aditya Saraff · Rating 5 out of 5]

In this second instalment in the Bharat trilogy, after having discussed the impact of Western colonialism on the constitutional journey and thought process of the civilisation-state, the conversation moves closer to analysing the Indian constitution with a discussion on Mid-Eastern Colonialism in India and its impact and entrenchment. The book looks at facts at face value, and at several places completed busts the modern attempts to secularise un-secular facts. It is a must read for anyone who loves reading about the colonial history and still suffers, as I did, from the NCERT syndrome, i.e. everyone was treated equally poorly under the British rule or that the British spoilt communal relations with divide and rule. One of the most interesting and knowledge-packed books I've read; definitely joins the ranks of Majumdar, Sarkar etc.

[Monastic Wanderer · Rating 5 out of 5]

One of the most finest book I have ever read on the history of India where the author have detailed about the creation and evolution of the Two-Nation theory, about how various players like Dehlawi, Syed Shahid Barelvi and Sir Syed have played a key role in creating a monster which later on devours millions of innocent people in the name of religion.

Highly recommended for anyone who wanted to read about the origin of the Two-Nation theory and initial days of India's freedom movement and how it got entangled with religio-supremacist ideologic movement.

[Pradeep Balasubramanian · Rating 4 out of 5]

The book was initially a little slow and boring. But facts reveal that the growth of Islam happened only after the death of Aurangzeb. This book presents the facts on how Pakistan as a nation evolved. I came to know a lot about Indian Freedom Struggle. The book is a must-read for every Bharatiya. The book emphasizes the importance of history for every person born in Bharat.
The only disadvantage of this book is that it is a little elaborate. The elaborate nature of this book can be helpful for litigators and people preparing for the Civil Services Examination.

[Mukesh Rai · Rating 4 out of 5]

3.5/5
This book, in my opinion, is a worthy followup to the first part of the Bharat Trilogy. The writing is excellent, and the author effectively conveys his points. The excerpts for reference constitute half or even more of the book, which is a lot and is my only criticism about the book. In certain instances, it mirrored the subject; in others, it seemed superfluous or excessive. Despite the fact that it could have been better, I still enjoyed it.

[Srinivas Kothuri · Rating 5 out of 5]

J Sai Deepak is a myth buster with appropriate citations to back his point of views in different aspects of Indian demography. Readers will get a clear picture of the happenings in India. I had a full revamp of my understanding of Bharat history before and after the independence. Though it lacks a bit of story telling style of historians, his deep research on rise-fall-rise of pro-islamic moments in Bharat will give reader a holistic view.

[Akshay · Rating 5 out of 5]

Well-written, extremely detailed book with a lot of exact quotations to bolster the argument made by the author. A must read for Sanatanis to delve deep into realm depicting the concepts of Middle-Eastern Coloniality, Two nation theory, Indian National Congress & its true ideologue (valid even in today’s era) and understanding the fundamental political ideology of Islam/Islamists.

[Ashwini Sharma · Rating 5 out of 5]

Review later.