2 State personalities Among 50 great Indians

B D Sharma
Man quenches his thirst to know his past, by studying history because history is a great treat into the past and it lets him live in an era where he is not present. Interestingly, history repeats itself and historians repeat one another. History should not  be seen simply as a chain of historical facts woven together in some sort of chronological order but must be taken as an amalgmation of known facts in a coherent whole. Traditionally, history writing was limited to studying life histories of kings. However, efforts of common people in the play of the forces of historical events did also find a place gradually in history writing. Herbert Spencer rightly emphasised that the kings are relatively unimportant. When welfare of nation becomes dominant then shift to phenomenon of social progress takes place.
According to Thomas Carlyle “No great man lives in vain. The history of the world is but the biography of great men”. All great men, apart from the rulers were given due place in the drama of history of the world. With biographies of great 100 lives as the axis, an outline of the world history was woven by John Allen in the middle of last century. In India alsoH.D.Sharma made asimilar attempt in respect of 100 great lives of India. This method may not produce an exhaustive form of history but it does throw a lot of light on the period to which any of these personalities belonged .
Recently Prof. Sunil Khilnani,Avantha Professor and Director of the India Institute of Kings College Londonconceived  a series of presentations for BBC Radio Channel 4 of 50 remarkable individuals who performed prominent role at the Stage of Indian History . Prof.Khilnani has also brought out a book based on the framework of this Radio series. The book is entitled “Incarnations – India in 50 Lives”. Some of the Lives chosen by Khilnani spring us no surprise. Thus,GautamBudha who awakened India in the ancient times, Mahatma Gandhi, who  awakened us in recent times,Ashoka, the saintly King,  Mahavira, the apostle of non-violence, Panini, the great Sanskrit grammarian who caught the ocean in cow’s hoof print,Kautilya, who could  create or demolish the circle of power at ease. Aryabhat , the Boat of Intellect, Shankaracharya, the greatphilospher  , Amir Khusro  the  Parrot of India ,Guru Nanak Dev one of the great religious innovators of all time, Akbar the tolerant king Dara Shikoh the meeting place of the two oceans. Shivaji  who dreamt big,Lakshmibai,the brave Rani of Jhansi, Vivekananda who brought all together, Tagore the poet, ,thefirst Indian to win Nobel Prize, Ramanujan, a matchless genius,Subhash Bose who had a touch of the Abnormal. Jinnah who caused upheavels in 1947, B.R Ambedkar, messiah of the oppressed. Indira Gandhi,the centre of everything,are indisputably the great personalities of India who have shaped its histoy.
The choice of some other personalities such as  DeenDayal – a court photographer of Nizam of Hyderabad, Birsa Munda – Kol revolutionary from Chhotanagpur, Chidambram Pillai – the pioneer of Swadeshi Movement of Tuticorn, , Anne Besant, the Indian tomtom, , a theosophist, Manto – the unsentimentalist, Urdu author of partition stories. Raj Kapoor – a showman of Bollywood, V.K. Krishna Menon , linked to the debacle of 1962,Charan Singh, the Choudharyof Western U.P. , DhirubhaiAmbani – guru of growth but a bit crafty,may not find favour with many Indians for their inclusion in the august list.
On the other hand, the exclusion of Pt. Nehru – the builder of modern India, Patel, integrator of the states of India with iron in his soul and iron in his fist ,Bhagat Singh an embodiment of sacrifice, Lata, the voice of India, Mother Teresa a mission of service,Pt. Ravi Shanker, the Sultan of Strings,Kalidas, the Shakespeare of India, may cause anguish to many Indians. But it has to be remembered that in the ultimate analysis the selection of the personalities remains the prerogative of the presenter/author and greatness, in the end, is the creation of the beholder.
Our State has also produced a galaxy of great personalities who played a role in the evolution of Indian society. Kalhan, the historian whodeveloped sense of chronology in history, Zain-ul-Abdin (1420-1470),theBudshah whose halo in popular imagination  still casts a spell, Raja Ranjit Dev, the popular ruler of Jammu (1728-1780), whose kingdom was an abode of peace, General Zorawar Singh Kalhuria (1786-1841), whose bravery, steadfastness and dedication has left rich legacy, Maharaja Gulab Singh (1792-1857), the founder of the State of Jammu &Kashmir are worthy of a place in the galaxy of important Indians.
However, choice of Prof.Khilnani fell on Nainsukh, the doyen of Pahari Painting who is rated as one of the most original and brilliant Indian painters. Born at Gulehr in Himachal Pradesh, he blossomed into a painter of rare traits in our State. At the age of nineteen, he joined Jasrota principality as a court painter and afterwards came in contact with Balwant Singh who, according to famous Dogra historian S S Charak, was the youngest brother of Raja Ranjit Dev and had a jagir  at Saruinsar . But it seems that Nainsukh would often shift between Jasrota and Saruinsar.  After the death of Balwant Singh in 1863 Nainsukh shifted to Basohli principality and remained there till his death in 1780. In the words of Prof. B.N. Goswamy the famous art historian, Nainsukh is priceless gem of Indian Art. While eulogising Nainsukh,Goswamy says “One has to view it aesthetically, with patience for Nainsukh’s work does not grab you by throat. It grows on you and if you let him enter your consciousness, he will flow in you.”  In order to appreciate his acumen over his subject, one has to have a glimpse of one of his masterpieces wherein it is seen how vividly Nainsukh has captured his patron Balwant with musicians playing a Raga for Balwant Singh during the rainy season. The prince wearing a pink ‘achakan’ secured by a maroon and gold ‘patka’ and pearl jewellery, holding a ‘huqqa’ pipe and gesturing to woman facing him dressed in orange and holding ‘tanpura’ both shielded by umbrellas carried by attendants and accompanied by a group of men dressed in white’ jama’, to the left musicians wearing various instruments and to the right his attendants, including the artist at lower left.
According to Prof.Khilnani, greatness smiled on Nainsukh because of the reason that the preceding Mughal miniatures were merely press releases of royalty. The sense of subservience of the artist to those who commissioned it is obvious. In case of Nainsukh, the “paintings display a great compositional confidence and striking sense of ease.” Portraits like these were rare for that period of time mingled in hierarchical order. Balwant&Nainsukh were like self and shadow, Nainsukh being a shadow of Balwant or rather Balwant  a shadow of Nainsukh. The artist really immortalised Balwant Singh – lowly placed in the hierarchy of ruling elite  of Jammu . Secondly, it is habitual to speak of Indian paintings in terms of traditions, not individual talent or personality. But in case of Nainsukh, his mark is evident and as Goswamy puts it he has ability to keep on paying homage to the tradition and the classical but would then often break-free.
Thirdly, though nurtured in the school of his father Seu and elder brother Manaku in the traditional Pahari school, he incorporated various elements of Mughal style which came his way when Afghans unsettled a number of artists in Lahore and Delhi and these artists would find safe refuge in the kingdom of Ranjit Dev – the abode of peace.
What perhaps appealed the most to Prof. Khilnani  was Nainsukh’s forays in the lives of ordinary men – the minor characters in the form of musicians, the dancers, the retainers, the fire basking villagers. He finds them penetrating and sympathetic studies – it is humanity in Nainsukh’s work which is so extraordinarily engaging.
His closeness to his patron is evident from the fact that after the death of Balwant Singh (1763), he went to Haridwar to immerse his mortal remains  in the Ganga. Anentry and a painting in the ‘Bahi’ of the Pandits of Haridwar by Nainsukh were recently dug into by Goswamy which were a treat to his eyes. Nainsukh later found honours in the Basohli Durbar. There he returned to more conventional subjects. Ragamala scenes from religious stories and epics remained his main theme. Though connoisseurs rate these works lowly as compared to his earlier masterpieces yet he refinedthis  school of painting with his sons, nephew and others under his tutelage  – the Basohli School of painting or should it be termed the Nainsukh School of painting.
Khilnani’s second choice is none other than Sheikh Abdullah who played a crucial role during the critical years of Indian history. Born in a family of Shawl-makers of Shoura near Srinagar in 1905, he got his education at Srinagar, Lahore and Aligarh. After post-graduation in Chemistry and a short stint as teacher, he immersed himself in the movement of ameliorating the poor condition of his people and determined to free them from the yoke of autocracy. He along with his comrades formed the Muslim Conference which later on was transformed into National Conference.  After India attained independence, the state had the option of merging into one of the dominions i.e. India or Pakistan. In view of the peculiar factors like demography, religion of the ruler and location of the state, the ruler approached for stand-still agreement with both the dominions. Pakistan readily agreed.
But shortly afterwards she stabbed in the back of the ruler of State and sent tribals under the control and guidance of her army to occupy the State. Maharaja approached Govt. of India for help and thus the Indian Army came and repulsed the tribals& liberated almost whole of Kashmir valley though a big chunk of area of the state still remained under illegal occupation of Pakistan. Sheikh Abdullah became the Administrator and later Prime Minister of the state. Later on he developed differences with Govt. of India and was dismissed as Prime Minister of State and put behind the bars. Released in 1964 he paid a visit to Pakistan on the advice of Pt. Nehru to bridge the gap between India and Pakistan but while he was on tour Pt. Nehru breathed his last. After the emergence of Bangladesh in 1971, the geopolitical situation in the subcontinent did greatly change and the Sheikh thought it prudent to mend fence with the Central Govt. in 1975. He became Chief Minister of the State in February that year. He won elections in 1977 and formed Govt. in the state. He breathed his last in 1982 and his popularity was evident when a sea of humanity descended upon Srinagar to join his funeral procession. The presence of wide spectrum of national leadership in his last journey also showed that the Sheikh had acquired a great status at the national level.
Sheikh Abdullah played an important role in deciding the fate of the state in becoming part of India. In this way he helped in defining the northern boundaries of the country. Though the foundations of the boundaries of the state had been laid by Maharaja GulabSingh  in 1846  but these boundaries were under a lot of stress in the year 1947. Though it is too simplistic to ascribe credit to one individual for carving out boundaries of a nation, still individual contributions cannot be undermined. It is a fact that Sheikh had no direct role to play   when Maharaja signed the Instrument of Accession and it was in the exclusive domain of His Highness to decide the issue.  Still, the importance attached to the role of Sheikh has to be read in the lines enshrined in the Accession Offer accompanying the Instrument of Accession wherein the Maharaja informs the Governor General of India that “I may also inform Your Excellency that it is my intention at once to set up an interim Govt. and ask Sheikh Abdullah to carry the responsibilities in this emergency with my Prime Minister.” Since the Sheikh was a popular leader of masses and had tooth and nailopposed  the communal politics of Jinnah and his Muslim League so his consent hastened the process of Accession. His known views on the subject had given the moral impetus to it.
Secondly, the Sheikh had lent a helping hand to the Congress leaders in evolving the idea of India during the freedom struggle. A Muslim leader of mass following was talking in the language of Congress leadership during the tense years full of religious polarization. It was very crucial for the Congress Party. He along with Maulana  Azad , Frontier Gandhi and Kidwai stood like bulwark against the hatred filled two nation theory of Muslim League.
Thirdly, incorporation of the Muslim majority state in the frame of Indian nationhood strengthened the secular resolve of the country and enhanced its standing in the comity of nations. This helped India a lot in its relationship with a large number of Muslim countries.
Fourthly, the Sheikh carried out land reforms of far-reaching consequences in the State with a rare commitment. These reforms were pioneer in many ways in the whole country and brought a revolution in the rural economy of the state. The steadfastness with which The Big Landed Estates Abolition Act of 1950 and Agrarian Reforms Act of 1976 were enforced in the State has no parallel in the country except in Kerala perhaps. This speaks of the commitment of the Sheikh for the poor, the down-trodden and the deprived.
But the great men of history commit mistakes also. Gandhiji had his share of mistakes and Nehru too had also a fair share of them. The Sheikh had them in equal measure. The most damaging for him was allegedly his playing in the hands of protagonists of the Cold War who were eager to extend their influence to the sub-continent. The veracity of allegations against the Sheikh are mired in controversy but to many ears the words of Mirza Ghalib “still does the doubt remain” ring. In May 1953 he had three meetings with American Senator Adlai Stevenson during an American fact-finding mission to India.  Lack of acumen of political deal-making and negotiation experience compounded the problem  for him and he had to pay a heavy price for it. Authorities justified taking action against him and even his close friend Jawahar Lal could not save the situation for him.  Nehru’s earlier words in a light veinof ”putting golden chains” around the neck of his friend did happen. India had also to deal with a fluid situation in the valley for a long time due to absence of Sheikh from the scene. There is a great lesson from the life of the greatest Kashmiri to his people to not to think of playing in the hands of forces hostile to India. India would go to any extent to curb these designs