1

According to Wikipedia:

He was a member of the moderate group in the Congress, favoring Hindu–Muslim unity in achieving self-government, and following such leaders as Mehta, Naoroji, and Gopal Krishna Gokhale.

Also, according to Wikipedia:

Unlike Jinnah and other leaders of the Congress, Gandhi did not wear western-style clothing, did his best to use an Indian language instead of English, and was deeply rooted in Indian culture. Gandhi's local style of leadership gained great popularity with the Indian people. Jinnah criticized Gandhi's Khalifate advocacy, which he saw as an endorsement of religious zealotry.[69] Jinnah regarded Gandhi's proposed satyagraha campaign as political anarchy, and believed that self-government should be secured through constitutional means. He opposed Gandhi, but the tide of Indian opinion was against him. At the 1920 session of the Congress in Nagpur, Jinnah was shouted down by the delegates, who passed Gandhi's proposal, pledging satyagraha until India was independent. Jinnah did not attend the subsequent League meeting, held in the same city, which passed a similar resolution. Because of the action of the Congress in endorsing Gandhi's campaign, Jinnah resigned from it, leaving all positions except in the Muslim League.

This is hard to believe that a man like Jinnah who wanted to unite Hindus and Muslims and worked in close association with other moderate Hindu leaders, will suddenly leave Congress just because he didn't like the way Gandhi wore clothes and didn't agree with his action plans.

I think there is something more to the story.

  • Why did Muhammad Ali Jinnah leave Congress?

Please, let me know with authentic reference.

6
  • 2
    This may be a case of doubting the existing narrative. Could you further develop why this is hard to believe? I am not a scholar of the period, but based entirely on the quotes you provide, it would appear to me that Jinnah realized that it was not possible to achieve his goals within the context of a parliament of zealots.
    – MCW
    Jun 21 at 10:10
  • That's an interesting question; at least to me, that is more interesting than the question asked above.
    – MCW
    Jun 21 at 10:22
  • @MCW, that was actually my main point. Probably, I couldn't take my point across.
    – user366312
    Jun 21 at 10:25
  • 7
    Wikipedia says, "By 1940, Jinnah had come to believe that the Muslims of the subcontinent should have their own state to avoid the possible marginalised status they may gain in an independent Hindu–Muslim state. "; that seems to align with the observation above that Jinnah lost hope that Muslims would ever flourish within the religious zealotry of the Indian Parliament. Jinnah may have seen self-determination as the only option.
    – MCW
    Jun 21 at 10:50
  • 1
    @MCW yes, that's always been my understanding of the Pakistan Movement, also as expressed in Choudhry Rahmat Ali's "Now or Never". It was the belief that Muslims could never survive and thrive in a Hindu-dominated state and needed their own where they could live according to their own principles and practices.
    – Robert Columbia
    Jun 30 at 10:34

0

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.