82 SOCIAL SCIENTIST the mid-twenties, the leading Bihar Congressmen, quoting the events in Malabar and Multan as justification, had briefly experimented with mobilizing for swaraj in tandem with shuddhi and sangathan9 Meanwhile the stereotypes deployed to justify the shuddhi campaigns of the Hindu Mahasabha and the Arya Samaj had become visible in the vernacular press. Thus the Darbhanga Gazette, the Mithila Mihir and the Dharmbir, routinely made 'reckless and venomous* generalizations. Muslims were accused of slaughtering Hindu children, kidnapping and raping Hindu women, murdering Hindu preachers and breaking idols with the complicity of Muslim officials. 'Week after week* the same charges were repeated and the Hindus were exhorted to organise and ready themselves to resist attacks. On one occasion the Kayastha Patrika, published from Gaya, reminded Hindus that they had 'annoyed a daring and organised community', which nonetheless had to be taught not to 'dare' raise its head again.10 A pamphlet in circulation in the mid-twenties wished that Muslims would regain the valour they possessed in the 'days of Mohammed', for their legendary 'bravery' now seemed confined to breaking temples, abducting women, enticing children away, making cowardly attacks on the unarmed, and escaping after assaulting women, old men and children.11 By comparison, the Urdu papers in Bihar where Muslims comprised just about 10.1% of the population, were no less strident. The Imarat summed up the 1920's scenario as follows. Ever since the shuddhi and sangathan movements had been launched the Hindus had been preoccupied with converting all Muslims and driving out those of 'Arabian origin' from India. When, however, they encountered 'defeat' on both fronts they manifested 'their natural immodesty and shamelessness' and made it their 'principle' to seduce women and children and began particularly to coerce Muslim converts.12 The specific targeting of Muslim women as well as the shuddhi and sangathan campaigns in general were interpreted as an attack on Islam that was meant to force the community out of the country.13 The core of the discursivity of the Hindu Mahasabha regarding the Congress was that 'Hinduism' and its perceived repositories were to be prioritized in the agenda of nation making. Swaraj could not possibly be achieved by 'always getting beaten,' by always having to witness the insult of their mothers and sisters and by taking beef after getting their chutia cut, that is, by converting.14 More conclusively, the very assumption that swaraj was unattainable without Hindu-Muslim unity was itself incorrect. If the Hindus united they would be strong enough to attain it alone.15 II In the demarcation of definitive boundaries between the putative religious communities then, the woman was perceived as a potential point