The Nehru Report and Muslim Rights — Page 146
[ 146 ] are likely, according to the same principle, to follow his opinion on another occasion. So far as it concerns the individuals, the above reason ing is quite effective, specially in matters relating to poli tics. But when questions of nationality and religion in tervene, the reasoning fails to hold good, for no body is prepared to sacrifice his nationality, or his religion. He is prepared to surrender his individual opinion for the sake of the majority, because, he hopes, that in some other matters the majority would follow his opinion ; but what consideration would induce him to sacrifice his nationality, or his religion? Can he hope that others would likewise be prepared for his sake to sacrifice their nationality, or their religion? And even supposing that some one be so prepared, can any honest man sacrifice his religion, because some one else is prepared to do so? Certainly not. Of sure, in such a situation he would demand that provision should be made for safeguarding his nationality or his religion, and only then, would he be prepared to surrender his birth right of freedorn in favour of the community as a whole. It is this question which is now before the people of India. The question before the Muslims is one of nationality and religion. Had it been merely a question of politics, they might have known that political views are always liable to change. But here are two different communities, and powerful communities living side by side who differ from each other in their religion and cul ture. How can the Muslims accept to live as a permanent minority in the presence of a permanent majority, so long as provision has not been made for the protection of their rights? Here is no question of political op1n1on, and therefore, no possibility of a minority changing place with a majority. The question here is one of national