Muslims have played a very significant role in the national struggle for freedom. They have been in the forefront of it. After all it was Muslims from whose hands the British had wrested power in India.
Contents
Arrival of British in India
In 1601, an East India company trade delegation under the leadership of Vasco da Gama anchored at Bombay Harbour. They requested the government of that time for assistance. They promised to improve trade links with India by exporting Indian goods back to the British market and to then reinvest the profits back to India.
The Mogul king of that time, Ahmad Shah Abdali was very short-sighted and failed to understand the policies of the English. He provided this trade delegation with a number of concessions. By 1701, a hundred years later, a number of territories were already under British rule.
Great Islamic Scholar Shah Waliyullah-The First Man against British
The British came to India in 1601 and Shah Waliyullah, was born in 1702. By 1740, Shah Waliyullah realized that the British had already seized control of four main territories.
When Shah Waliyullah witnessed the British seizing authority from all four sides, he, for the very first time translated the Quran into Persian. He realized that if Islamic knowledge was not propagated, the British government will continue consolidating its rule over India.
In 1762, after the demise of Shah Waliyullah, Shah Abdul Aziz succeeded his father and for the first time in history planted the seeds of antagonism against the British.
Shah Abdul Aziz was the first person to pass a fatwa on the validity of jihad against the British and their supporters in India. Due to the fatwa, Tipu Sultan accompanied by his army eventually fought four battles in Mysore.
The lion-hearted Tipu Sultan realised the gravity of the danger of British Imperialism which was spreading its tentacles over the country and devouring one province after the other.
Tipu Sultan clearly saw that unless determined efforts were made in time to thwart the nefarious designs of the greedy Britishers, the whole of India would ultimately be swallowed up by them.
With this resolve, he unsheathed his sword and jumped into a fierce life-and-death struggle against the British exploiters.
Tipu Sultan’s Crusade
Tipu Sultan made a valiant bid to unite the Indian princes against the British usurpers. He even wrote to Sultan Salim III of Turkey to join hands with him for the expulsion of the British. His whole life was spent in the struggle.
Ultimately he came on the verge of success and the English were about to be swept out of the land, but they managed to achieve through diplomacy what they could not gain by arms.
Britishers cleverly obtained the support of some rulers of the South, and by the use of other methods of treachery and deceit brought to nought the patriotic ambitions of that gallant son of Mysore.
Tipu Sultan was martyred on on May 4, 1799 while fighting alone right up to the very end. This warrior of India was martyred at the fort of Mysore whilst his chief general, Mir Sadiq betrayed him for 22000 acres of land by the British. He preferred death to a life of servitude under the British.
End of of Tipu Sultan-Beginning of India’s Slavery
His famous historic words spoken a little before he met his death were:
“To live for a day like a tiger is far more precious than to live for a hundred years like a jackal.”
It is reported that when the British Commander General Harris received the news of the Sultan’s death and went to inspect his corpse, he cried out in exultation: “From today India is ours.”
The history of India does not tell of a braver patriot and a more uncompromising enemy of foreign rule than him. In his life-time he was the most hated man among the English.
To vent their spite against Tipu Sultan, Englishmen in India even went to the extent of giving to their dogs the name of Tipu . It continued to be like this with them for a long time.
Mahatma Gandhi wrote in ‘Young India’ that Tipu Sultan had no peer among those who attained martyrdom in the cause of country and nation.
War of India’s Independence
Muslim Ulema’s Decision to Fight British and Battle of Independence in 1857
After 1831 when the Ulema (Muslim religious scholars) realized that the British government was getting more and more fortified in the country, they called up a number of meetings first.
Many warriors gathered from all parts of the country and many decisive battles were fought against the British. This continued for some time.
In 1856, a meeting of all the senior Ulema of India was called up in Delhi. This meeting was attended amongst others, by Maulana Jafar Thaneseri, Maulana Wilayat Ali, Haji Imdadullah, Maulana Qasim Nanotwi, Maulana Rashid Ahmad Gangohi and Hafidh Dhamin Shahid.
In this meeting, Maulana Qasim Nanotwi is reported to have said:
“Aren’t you aware that the British are sitting right on our heads? They have laid a snare of their rule throughout the country.
Be prepared for some rather decisive battles against them. We will either be cut up into pieces or fight against them right up to the end. We will not allow the British to live in this country“.
The Sepoy Mutiny
In May 1857 the Indian sepoys rose in open revolt against the oppressive misdeeds of the British masters, the contemptuous treatment meted out by them to their Indian subordinates and their insatiable lust for money and persistent violation of the religious sentiments of Hindus and Muslims.
The sepoy uprising quickly developed into a national war with Hindus and Muslims fighting shoulder to shoulder for the emancipation of the motherland.
The rebels marched towards Delhi, the seat of the last of the Mughal Emperors, Bahadur Shah Zafar, and proclaimed him to be the spearhead of their struggle and symbol of national resistance.
Battles were fought all over India under his flag. He was the unanimous choice of the people and their rightful leader and ruler and Delhi was the nerve-centre of patriotic India.
As a result of this meeting of the Ulemas, the battle of Independence in 1857 was fought on two fronts, one in Ambala under the leadership of Maulana Jafar Thaneseri and the other in Shamli under Haji Imdadullah Makki.
Unfortunately the Sikhs and some of the rulers did not join the popular upsurge. On the other hand, they allowed themselves to be used by the English to crush the movement.
However due to their limited resources and betrayal of a few people, the Ulema failed to win this battle. The spirit of freedom however still remained alive.
Muslims were the Leaders of War of India’s Independence
At the termination of this battle of 1857, the British viceroy to India requested his own ministers and counselors of India to submit a report on how they can firmly secure the British government’s hold over India in the post-war period.
One of the leading politicians of India, Doctor William Yur submitted a report to the viceroy. He wrote:
“Of the entire population of India, the Muslims are the most spirited and vigilant.
The battle of independence was fought mainly by the Muslims.
As long as the Muslims cherish the spirit of jihad, we will not be able to impose our rule upon them.
Hence, first and foremost, the snuffing out of this spirit is imperative.
The only way this can be achieved is by weeding out the ulema and by eradicating the Quran.”
Acting on this advice, in 1861 the government launched a campaign against the Quran. 300 000 copies of the Noble Quran were set alight by the government. Thereafter, they made a resolution to eradicate the Ulema.
Though the War of Independence was truly a national war in which Hindus and Muslims had participated freely and equally and India had not yet seen a more stirring spectacle of popular enthusiasm, unity and patriotism, the leadership of War of Independence was predominantly in the hands of Muslims.
More often than not, the leaders of the movement at various levels belonged to the Muslim Community.
Consider the following leaders of the war of Independence.
Azimullah Khan, General Bakht Khan, Maulana Ahmadullah, Maulana Liaquat Ali and Begum Hazrat Mahal were among the front-rank leaders of the revolt, Maulana Ahmadullah being the most outstanding.
Holmes in his ‘History of the Indian Mutiny‘ has spoken of Maulana Ahmadullah in these words:
“The most formidable enemy of the British in Northern India.” (p. 539).
In another book of his ‘The Sepoy War‘ he has paid him the following tribute:
“A man fitted both by his spirit and his capacity to support a great cause and to command a great army. This was Ahmadullah, the Moulvi of Faizabad.”
Similarly, Malleson has said of him that:
“The Moulvi was a true patriot. He had not stained his sword with assassination.
He had connived at no murders: he had fought manfully, honourably and stubbornly in the battlefield against the strangers who had seized his country, and his memory is entitled to the respect of the brave and the true-hearted of all nations.” (Vol. IV, P. 381)
Vengeance of British
After the failure of the movement of 1857, for reasons that are well known, the British took a savage revenge from the Indians and let loose a spate of fury which revived the memories of Chengiz Khan and Halaku.
It has to be admitted that the Indians too had been guilty of gross excesses during the war like the slaughter of English women and children, but what the Englishmen did by way of retaliation could only be described as savage madness and bestiality. It certainly exposed the people laying claim to culture and civilization.
The rebels were ruthlessly pursued, caught and punished. There was ruin and desolation everywhere.
The three young sons of the Emperor Bahadur Shah Zafar whom the British themselves had given asylum, were killed by them so ruthlessly that it made even the Englishmen shudder.
Thirty-three other members of the imperial family including the old and the sick were also slain along with them.1
The aging Emperor himself was put to severest indignity.
He was tried for treason in excessively humiliating circumstances and would have certainly been put to death had a high English army officer not guaranteed the security of his life.
He was exiled to Burma to spend the rest of his days in utter poverty.
Genocide of Islamic Scholars by British
An English historian, Mr. Thompson writes in his memoirs:
“From 1864 to 1867, the British government firmly resolved to eradicate all the Ulema of India. These three years are one of the most heart-wrenching periods of Indian history.
The British hanged 14000 Ulema to death. From Chandi Chowk of Delhi up to Khaibar, not a single tree was spared the neck of the ulema.
The ulema were wrapped in pig-skin and hurled alive into blazing furnaces. Their bodies were branded with hot copper rods.
They used to be made to stand on the backs of elephants and tied to high trees. The elephants would then be driven away and they would be left hanging by their necks.
A makeshift gallow was set up in the courtyard of the Shahi Mosque of Lahore and each day up to eighty ulema were hanged.
The ulema were at times wrapped up in sacks and dumped into the Rawi river of Lahore after which a hail of bullets would be pumped into each sack.”
Thompson writes further:
“As I got into my camp at Delhi, I perceived a stench of putrefied flesh. As I stepped out and went behind my camp, I saw a blazing fire of live coals. I saw a group of forty naked ulema being led into the fire.
As I was witnessing this scene, another group of forty ulema were brought onto the field. Right before my eyes, their clothes were taken off their bodies.
The English commander addressed them thus:
O Molvies! Just as these ulema are being roasted over this fire, you will also be roasted. To save yourselves, just one of you must proclaim that you were not part of the 1857 uprising of freedom. I will release all of you the moment I hear just one of you affirming this.”
Thompson writes;
“By the Lord who has created me! Not one of the ulema said any such thing.
All of them were roasted over the fire and another group was also brought and roasted over the blazing fire.
Not a single alim(Islamic Scholar) surrendered to the demands of the British.”
By 1867 not a single Islamic institute remained. One would be quite astonished to realize that in 1601 when the British arrived in India for trade, there were a thousand Islamic institutes in Delhi alone.
Extreme Cruelty and Destruction by Britishers in Delhi
As the victorious British army entered the city of Delhi the terrible havoc it wrought there provided eloquent commentary to the Quaranic verse:
In fact when the kings enter a town, they put it to disorder, and put its honorable citizens to disgrace, and this is how they normally do. (27:34)
The troops were given a free hand to plunder the city for three days and they made use of the opportunity with such enthusiasm that an English officer Lord Lawrence, felt compelled to write to General Penny, who was the General-in-Command, in such strong words about the whole affair:
“I believe we shall lastingly and indeed justly be abused for the way in which we have despoiled all classes without distinction.”2
For three days death and destruction reigned supreme in Delhi. People were slain indiscriminately, shops were looted, and houses were burnt. Men, women and children fled the town in thousands.
In the end, Delhi the city which till yesterday was the seat of Muslim splendour was reduced to shambles.
A graphic account of the general ruin and spoliation is furnished in his memoirs by Lord Roberts who had led the English army from Kanpur to Delhi. This entry bears the date, September 24, 1857, which means that it was made soon after the Red Fort of Delhi had fallen to the British. Lord Roberts writes:
“That march through Delhi in the early morning light was a gruesome proceeding.
Our way by the Lahore Gate from the Chandni Chowk led through a veritable city of the dead; not a sound was to he heard but the falling of our own footsteps; not a living creature was to be seen.
Dead bodies were strewn about in all directions, in every attitude that the death-struggle had caused them to assume, and in every stage of decomposition.
We marched in silence or involuntarily spoke in whispers, as though fearing to disturb those ghastly remains of humanity.
The sights we encountered were horrible and sickening to the last degree. Here a dog gnawed at an uncovered limb, there a vulture disturbed by our approach from its loathsome meal, but too completely gorged to fly, fluttered away to a safer distance.
In many instances, the positions of the dead bodies were appallingly life-like. Some with their arms uplifted as if beckoning and indeed, the whole scene weird and terrible beyond description.
Our horses seemed to feel the horror of it as much as we did, for they shook and snorted in evident terror.
The atmosphere was unimaginably disgusting, laden as it was with the most noxious and sickening odours.”3
Indian War Of Independence was an Islamic Rebellion
It was indeed a general massacre but the wrath seemed to be directed particularly against the Muslims, for many among the higher British authorities associated the uprising with an Islamic Jihad and believed that the moving spirit behind it were Muslims. To quote Henry Mead:
“This rebellion, in its present phase, cannot be called a sepoy Mutiny. It did begin with the sepoys, but soon its true nature was revealed. It was an Islamic revolt.”4
Another narrator of the dreadful drama says:
“An English officer had made it a principle to treat every Muslim as a rebel.
He would enquire from everyone he saw if he was a Hindu or a Muslim, and would shoot him dead right there if he turned out to be a Muslim.”5
Mass Execution of Muslims
After Delhi had been subdued and the British control was firmly established over it, there began the public executions.
Scaffolds were built on the thoroughfares and such places were treated as centres of entertainment by the Englishmen. They would collect there in groups to ‘enjoy’ the executions. Several localities of Muslims were totally wiped out.
“Twenty-seven thousand Muslims were executed, to speak nothing of those killed in the general massacre.
It seemed that the British were determined to blot out of existence the entire Muslim race.
They killed the children and the way they treated the women simply belies description. It rends the heart to think of it.”6
Lord Roberts writing to his mother on June 21, 1857 remarked:
“The death that seems to have the greatest effect is being blown from a gun. It is rather a horrible sight but in these times we cannot be particular.”
The purpose of this “business” was to show “these rascally Musalmans that, with God’s help, Englishmen will still be the masters of India.”7
Muslims Pay Price for the Freedom Struggle
The Muslims thus had to pay most heavily for waging the struggle for freedom. The British held them to be the major offenders and decided that their future generations should also be made to bear the burden of their guilt.
The attitude of the British bureaucracy can well be gauged from the following quotation from Henry Harrington Thomas of the Bengal Civil Service in his pamphlet, ‘Late Rebellion in India and Our Future Policy’ written in 1858, i.e. only a year after the rebellion:
“I have stated that the Hindus were not the contrivers or the primary movers of the 1857 rebellion and I now shall attempt to show that it was the result of a Mohammadan conspiracy.
Left to their resources, the Hindus never would or could have compassed such an undertaking.
They (the Mohammadans) have been uniformly the same from the times of the first Caliphs to the present day, proud, intolerant, and cruel, ever aiming at Mohammadan supremacy by whatever means, and ever fostering a deep hatred of Christians.
They cannot be good subjects of any government which professes another religion; the precepts of the Quran will not suffer it.”8
Brazen Exclusion of Muslims from Public Services
This attitude towards the Muslims continued to be the cornerstone of British policy in India for a long time.
The Muslims were debarred from lucrative government jobs and were ejected from all other gainful occupations, their trade was ruined and the endowments from which their schools used to be maintained were confiscated.
A system of education which ran counter to their cultural and intellectual ideals and aspirations was introduced deliberately in the country.9
It was sometimes openly stated in official notifications for government vacancies that only Hindus would be considered for appointment.
Thus Sir William Hunter has reproduced the following extract from a Calcutta Persian paper (Durbin), dated July 14, 1869.
“Recently, when several vacancies occurred in the office of the Sunderbans Commissioner, that official in advertising them in the Government Gazette, stated that the appointments would be given to none but Hindus.10
Commenting on the above complaint, the author goes on to say:
“The Muslims have now sunk so low that, even when qualified for Government employment, they are studiously kept out of it by government notifications.
Nobody takes any notice of their helpless condition, and the higher authorities do not deign even to acknowledge their existence.”11
Open Revenge of British from Muslims
The British made no attempt to conceal their ill-will against the Muslims. They caught hold of them at the slightest excuse and showed no mercy.
They waged a fierce war against the small band of Mujahids (Crusaders) beleaguered in the tribal belt of the North-West.
Whoever was suspected by them to be in league with the Mujahids or with the party of Syed Ahmed Shaheed was arrested and legal proceedings were started against him.
Innumerable religious leaders, merchants and noblemen were tried on these grounds at Patna, Thanesar and Lahore, and sentenced to heavy terms of imprisonment. Some of them were branded as Wahabis16 and punished on that account.
Symptomatic of the boundless British hatred towards the Muslims was the judgement delivered by an English judge while condemning the three alleged Wahabi leaders, Maulana Yahya Ali, Mohammad Jafar Thanesari and Mohammad Shafi Lahori to death. The learned Judge, in the course of his judgement remarked:
“You will be hanged till death, your properties will be confiscated and your corpses will not be handed over to your relatives. Instead, you will be buried contemptuously in the jail compound.”12
After the sentence of death had been passed, parties of English men and women visited the jail to see condemned prisoners in their cells and take delight in their sighs and groans.
But when they found that these prisoners instead of being sad and dejected, were actually exulting in their state and looking forward expectantly to the martyrdom that had so blissfully fallen to their lot, they felt cheated and urged upon the government for the revision of their sentence to one of life-imprisonment.
Ultimately, it was announced by the Deputy Commissioner of Ambala to the unfortunate men that the Chief Court had altered the death penalty passed against them to transportation for life. He said:
“You rejoice over the sentence of death and look upon it as martyrdom. The Government therefore, have decided not to award you the punishment you like so much.
The death-sentence passed against you has been changed to that of transportation or life.”13
The three prisoners along with two others, Maulana Ahmadullah Azimahadi and Molvi Abdul Rahim Sadiqui were then deported to the Andamans in 1865 where Maulana Yahya Ali and Maulana Ahmadullah died.
The entire property of the family of Sadiqpur in Patna was seized by the Government, their houses were ploughed down and official buildings were constructed on their sites.
The tombs of their ancestors were demolished. All this was done to quench the mad thirst for vengeance.
Several other noted Ulema were sent to the Andaman Islands to serve life-sentences in banishment. These included Maulana Fazl-i-Huq Khairabadi, Mufti Inayat Ahmad Kakorwi and Mufti Mazhar Karim Daryabadi, of whom Maulana Fazl-i-Huq met his death in exile while the other two returned home on completing their sentences.
This polity of unmitigated spite and revengefulness was responsible for the political and educational backwardness that came over the Muslims during the earlier stages of British rule and from which they have not yet been able to recover.
The Formation of the Indian National Congress
The first session of the Indian National Congress was held in 1884. It was attended by some prominent Muslim representatives.
The fourth session at Madras in 1887, was presided over by a Muslim, Mr. Badruddin Tayyabji, and Muslim delegates drawn from different walks of life participated in it in sufficient strength. A donation of Rs. 5,000/- was announced in that session to the Congress by Mr. Humayun Jah.
Sir Syed Ahmad Khan’s Disagreement
Initially Sir Syed Ahmad Khan was a supporter of a common political platform, but he later changed his mind.
His contention was that the political and educational backwardness of Muslims demanded that they should dissociate themselves from the national movement and avoid incurring the displeasure of the British Government by joining hands with the extremists of Bengal and other Hindu agitators.
He felt that a separate non-political organization would serve the interests of Muslims better and the other course that of political collaboration with the Hindus in opposition to the British was fraught with the danger of reviving old wounds and creating fresh difficulties for them.
This viewpoint was decidedly wrong. It was actually sponsored by Beck and his successor, Mr. Morrison, who for a long time exercised a powerful influence on Muslim politics.
The abstention of Muslims from politics during those days proved extremely harmful for them.
The Support of the Ulema to the Congress
Notwithstanding Sir Syed Ahmad Khan’s opposition, a large number of independent Muslims, under the leadership of the Ulema, extended full support and cooperation to the nationalist activities and the Congress. They did not consider politics to be the ‘forbidden fruit’ for Muslims.
In 1888, a whole set of religious decrees was published by Maulana Mohammad Saheb of Ludhiana urging upon Muslims to ally themselves with the Congress.
These decrees were signed not only by prominent religious leaders of India like Maulana Rasheed Ahmad Gangohi and Maulana Lutfullah of Aligarh but of Medina and Baghdad as well.
The Balkan War and its Repercussions in India
A wave of repugnance and anger arose among Muslims against the European Powers and particularly Britain which was their spearhead, with the outbreak of the Balkan War in 1912.
The Islamic political consciousness as it had been steadily gaining in strength reached its climax and burst in the East like a boil that had been suppurating for a long time.
It was during these days that Maulana Abul Kalam Azad started publishing his fiery weekly paper, El-Hilal. It became popular immediately and acquired a readership among Muslims running into lakhs. Its trenchant criticism of Britain and the West was followed eagerly throughout the country.
In addition to it, Maulana Mohammad Ali’s English weekly, Comrade (which made its appearance originally from Calcutta and was, later, shifted to Delhi) and Maulana Zafar Ali Khan’s Zamindar (Lahore) and a host of other Muslim newspapers and periodicals helped to produce a vigorous anti-British feeling among the educated sections of the community.
In the upshot, Maulana Mohammad Ali, Maulana Shaukat Ali, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad and Maulana Hasrat Mohani were arrested and put behind the bars.
Maulana Mahmud Hasan of Deoband
The Principal of the Muslim religious institution of Deoband, Maulana Mahmud Hasan (who later came to be known as Sheikhul Hind) was a sworn enemy of British Imperialism.
In fact no greater antagonist of the British had been seen in India since the time of Tipu Sultan.
Maulana Mehmudul Hasan was a staunch ally of the Ottoman Empire since it symbolised the power of Islam in the world and also held the Muslim Caliphate and was an indefatigable fighter in the path of India’s freedom, he had dedicated his whole life to the liquidation of the British Empire.
He did not stop even at establishing secret contacts with Afghan Government and with the revolutionary leaders of Turkey like Anwar Pasha.
During his tour abroad the Maulana had succeeded in obtaining letters from the Turkish leaders, Anwar Pasha and Jamal Pasha, promising support to India in its struggle against the British.
He managed to send those letters to India concealed in a wooden chest which was packed with silk. This incident is known in history as the incident of Silken Letters(Reshmi RumalTehreek) and has been mentioned as such also in the Rowlatt Report.
He was taken into custody in 1916 by Sharif Husain at Medina in Arabia who handed him over to the British.
The Maulana and his associates Maulana Husain Ahmad Madani, Maulana Uzair Gul, Hakim Nusrat Husain and Molvi Waheed Ahmad, were deported to the Mediterranean island of Malta in 1917 where they remained till 1920.
Maulana Abdul Bari of Firangi Mahal
Maulana Abdul Bari of Firangi Mahal was a tireless champion of India’s freedom. He organised the Jamiat-i-Ulama-i-Hind to bring the religious leaders of Muslims on a united platform in the struggle for national independence and took a leading part in Khilafat agitation.
During his lifetime the Firangi Mahal in Lucknow functioned as the key-centre of Muslim politics.
Rowlatt Report
The Rowlatt Report came in 1918 which made the Muslims the main target of its attack and laid the blame for anti-British activities largely at Muslims. It further brought matters to a head.
Khilafat Agitation and Hindu-Muslim Unity
The Ali Brothers—Mohammad Ali and Shaukat Ali were released a year later. A wonderful spectacle of Hindu-Muslim unity was seen thereafter everywhere in India.
The two communities gloriously forgot their dissensions and linking their destinies with each other marched forward like a single body to do or die for the attainment of national freedom and the preservation of the Ottoman Empire. The country’s atmosphere was, electrified with rare revolutionary feeling.
India had witnessed a stupendous political awakening. It was ablaze from end to end with resentment against the British masters.
Such was the setting in which Gandhiji made his debut on the political stage of the nation. He undertook a countrywide tour in the company of Maulana Mohammad Ali and Maulana Shaukat Ali, addressing mammoth public gatherings from place to place and arousing the masses for the national struggle. Such a tremendous popular upsurge had never been seen in India before.
Non Cooperation Movement by Gandhi and Maulana Azad
In 1920 Ganhiji and Maulana Abul Kalam Azad presented before the people the two-pronged programme of non-cooperation with the British Government at all levels and boycott of foreign goods.
The proposals found ready acceptance with the masses as the major weapons of their movement and they proved to be so effective that the Government was compelled to take full note of them.
The British were threatened in India with a complete breakdown of the administrative machinery and a general insurrection. The inherent weakness of foreign rule was thoroughly exposed.
Inhuman Face of British Empire-Atrocities on Mopla Muslims
During the struggle for freedom, the severest loss in terms of life and property was suffered by the Mopla Muslims of Malabar.
Provoked by unmitigated tyranny and coercion, the Mopals rose in armed revolt against the British Government on August 21, 1921.
The rebellion which lasted for a little over six months, assumed such massive proportions that the Government had to call in even a warship to deal with it and fifty-one lakhs of rupees were spent by them on its suppression from August to December alone. Thousands of Moplas were killed.
As an instance of the ghastly atrocities perpetrated by the British, Mopla prisoners were herded together like cattle in the compartments of a railway train which three doctors had unanimously declared unfit for human transport, with the result that a great many of them perished in the way.
The British paid no heed to their loud cries of anguish and pathetic requests for water.
The detained people were kept under strict vigilance and subjected to all kinds of humiliation after the rebellion had been quelled and for a long time the Moplas in general, were denied the enjoyment of ordinary civil liberties.
The Committee of Inquiry appointed in 1922 by the Special Commissioner of Malabar reported that:
“There are at least 35,000 Mopla women and children whose condition is extremely miserable and unless proper measures are taken for their relief, many of them are likely to die of disease and starvation.”
The Last Resort of British-Divide and Rule
The British Government in their desperation took resort to the most favorite strategy of imperialists everywhere—that of ‘Divide and Rule’. They sowed seeds of communal discord in the land.
The then Viceroy took a prominent Hindu leader into confidence and impressed upon him the need for starting a powerful missionary movement to bring back into the fold of Hinduism those who had embraced Islam.
The Viceroy also advised him how essential it was to organise his community on a militant basis after the Khilafat agitation had demonstrated beyond doubt the strength, religious fervour and organisational capacity of the Muslims and that the Hindus have foolishly allowed the initiative to pass into the hands of Muslims by making common cause with them on the issue of Khilafat which was wholly a Muslim affair.
Shuddhi, Sanghatan and Tablighi Movements
This was the starting point of Hindu revivalist activities which under the twin names of Shuddhi and Sanghatan spread all over India.
As a reaction to them the Muslims also came forward with the Tabiigh movement. An unending series of religious polemics, debates and conferences ensued, culminating in as anyone can expect, in violent communal disturbances. The country was caught in the grip of terrible Hindu-Muslim riots.
The Congress manfully stuck to its task in the midst of that fearsome madness. It continued to hold its annual sessions regularly.
A special session to take stock of the tragic turn of events was summoned in 1922 under the Presidentship of Maulana Abul Kalam Azad while the regular annual session in the same year was held at Cocanada and presided over by Maulana Mohammad Ali.
Countrywide Communal Conflagration
The communal frenzy remained unchecked till the peak was reached in 1927, when as many as twenty five riots were recorded within the space of a few months.
The nationalist sections of both the communities were profoundly distressed at this state of things but there seemed to be nothing they could do to restore communal peace and harmony.
The gulf between Hindus and Muslims grew wider and wider. Ultimately the malady began to cast its sinister shadow on the minds of the leaders of the two communities also, till the parting of ways between Hindus and Muslims came up before the world as a reality from which there was no escape.
Parting of Ways of Hindus and Muslims
A general impression was created among the thinking classes of both Hindus and Muslims that the patriotic fervour of the leaders of the nationalist movement was cooling down quickly and they were getting divided more and more openly into separate communal camps.
The basic impulsions of their thought and ambitions being communal in essence, they could not be looked up to standing fast by the ideals of Indian nationalism in the hour of trial and opportunity.
The Muslims felt in their hearts that the Hindu leaders whose guiding spirit now was Gandhiji had failed lamentably to take adequate steps for combating the communal menace.
They had not brought forward that open-mindedness, impartiality and determination which was expected of them.
By virtue of belonging to the majority community they wielded greater power and influence in the country and therefore could have succeeded in putting down the riots if had they shown greater courage and objectivity of outlook and denounced the communalists whoever they were, openly and without fear or favour.
Maybe this view was wrong or exaggerated but it did alienate the sympathies of many Muslim leaders who had been in the vanguard of the nationalist movement from the Congress.
The Muslims in general, were persuaded to believe that in order to safeguard effectively their rights and interests they would better rely on their own strength.
Separate Muslim Front and the Demand for Partition
In consequence Maulana Mohammad Ali resigned from the Congress along with his friends and associates and joined the Muslim political camp. The separatist instincts among Muslims became sharper and stronger with the passage of time.
Mr. Mohammad Ali Jinnah revived the Muslim League in 1937, and in a few years it rose to be the most powerful representative organisation of Indian Muslims. After the League had consolidated its position, it raised the demand for Pakistan.
Thanks to the anomalies of Indian social existence and the bitter experience of communal discrimination in official circles, political immaturity of the people and inter-communal fears and suspicions, the country was eventually partitioned in 1947.
Maulana Husain Ahmad Madani and Jamiat-ul-Ulema
Muslim religious leaders connected with the Jamiat-ul-Ulema stayed firm in their loyalty to the Congress till the end. They did not waver, in the least, from their traditional nationalist stand.
Notable among them were Mufti Kifayatullah, Maulana Ahmad Saeed, Maulana Sajjad Behari, Maulana Hifzur Rahman, Maulana Ataullah Shall Bukhari and Maulana Habibur Rahman Ludhianwi.
In the forefront of them was Maulana Husain Ahmad Madani who by his uncompromising hostility towards the British and extraordinary patriotic zeal and sincerity of purpose proved himself to be a worthy successor of his teacher and mentor, Maulana Mahmud Hasan Dedbandi.
These Ulema (Muslim scholars) cheerfully bore the concentrated opposition and disfavour of their co-religionists, a large majority of who had come to share the views of the Muslim League.
Maulana Madani strove to the best of his ability, during the fateful years, to make the Muslims realise the folly of the Pakistan demand.
He undertook extensive tours of the country, preaching the gospel of unity from town to town and village to village.
Morally and religiously his conduct remained absolutely stainless and above suspicion throughout that period of trial and crisis and friends and foes are unanimous in their praise of his integrity and sincerity.
After the independence too, when unlimited opportunities had opened up for personal gain, he sought no favours for himself.
So much so that he politely declined to accept the title of Padma Vibhushan, which was conferred upon him by the President of India in 1954, saying that it was against the traditions of his precursors to receive honours from the Government.
It is tragically true that the high hopes he had entertained from freedom remained largely unfulfilled and he felt frustrated and heart-broken, but during the struggle he remained firm like a rock, and even after the independence had been won there occurred no change in his political views and conviction.
Another leader of the Jamiat-ul-Ulema whose services cannot be overlooked in the course of the present narrative was Congress’s General Secretary, Maulana Hifzur Rahman.
The courage, resoluteness and enthusiasm with which he strove for the freedom of the motherland before 1947, and has since then been displaying in the safeguarding of the rights and interests of Muslims will not easily be matched by other contemporary Muslim leaders.
His heroic services during the post-independence communal riots will always be remembered with gratitude and admiration.
He never hesitated to expose the bitter truth in connection with these outbreaks, in the Parliament and elsewhere, and in criticising the local administration where it was found to have conducted itself unjustly towards the Muslims during a communal distrurbance. The Maulana died in August 1962.
Maulana Azad’s Contribution to Indian Freedom
Maulana Abul Kalam Azad had the distinction of serving as the President of Congress for the largest number of years and at the most critical junctures of the nation’s history.
Two important British official missions viz. the Cripps’ Mission and the Cabinet Mission, visited India during his ultimate term of office to negotiate with the Indian leaders.
The Maulana as the President of the Congress took an active part in the negotiations. The delegates including Sir Strafford Cripps, were deeply impressed by his keen political foresight and acumen.
It was during the Maulana Abul Kalam Azad’s Presidentship of the Congress that India attained freedom.
His memoirs (India Wins Freedom, 1958) published shortly after his death; show that his was the role of a luminous mind in the machinery of the Congress.
He commanded universal respect for his sagacity and political insight. His contribution to the cause of freedom has been as profound as that of anyone anywhere.
References
- Munshi Zakaullah: Urooj-i-Sultanat-i-Englishia, Vol . 2, p.708
- Bosworth Smith: Life of Lawrence (1883), Vol. 2, p.258
- Field Marshall Lord Roberts: Forty One Years in India (1898) p.142
- Reproduced from Ghulam Rasool Mehr, 1857
- Urooj-i-Sultanat-i-Englishia, Vol. 2, p.712
- Kamaluddin Hyder: Qaiser-ul-Tawareekh, Vol. 2, p.454
- Edward Thompson: The other Side of the Medal (1926) p.40
- Adopted from Tufail Ahmad: Responsible Government and the Solution of the Hindu Muslim Problem (1928), p. 56
- Details can be obtained from W.W. Hunter: The Indian Muslamans (1876) p. 176
- Ibid, p. 175
- Ibid, p.176
- Muhammad Jafar Thaneswari: Kala Pani
- Ibid