Religion, Perhaps, Will Always Play A Decisive Role In Indian Politics And Hence The Importance Of The Ulema (With Special Reference To Prof. Mushirul Haq’s Thought)

By Dr. Javed Akhatar, New Age Islam 24 July 2023 Introduction Prof. Mushirul Haq, a highly esteemed figure in Indian academia, emerged as a profoundly influential Islamic scholar, embodying the essence of modern Islamic thought in India. Through his tireless efforts, he championed an inclusive and comprehensive comprehension of Islamic modernity, earning the devotion of many Indian Muslims who regarded him as their guiding mentor. Prof. Haq exemplified how a devout Muslim could harmoniously embrace both religious and secular facets of life, setting a remarkable example for others to emulate. As a visionary and erudite educationist, his profound contributions are poised to fortify the secular foundation of our nation, a crucial requirement in the present era. Notably, he skilfully integrated the knowledge acquired from both traditional Islamic (Nadwa) and Western (McGill) training, making him an exceptionally versatile and well-rounded scholar. In an earnest academic endeavour, this article delves into the intricate relationship between religion and politics among Indian Muslims. The primary focus lies in understanding the essence and traits of Muslim leadership in India. To achieve this, a thorough examination of the leadership during the freedom struggle becomes imperative. The article represents Professor Mushirul Haq's sincere attempt to evaluate the impact of Islam on Indian Muslim politics in the contemporary era. Moreover, it seeks to explore the unsuccessful initial endeavours aimed at fostering a more secular political outlook among Indian Muslims. Throughout this scholarly investigation, emotions of curiosity, seriousness, and dedication resonate, signifying the author's genuine interest in comprehending this complex aspect of Indian history. In an emotionally invested manner, I have structured this scholarly article into three distinct phases. Initially, I delve into the historical context, exploring the stance of Ulema both prior to and following the mutiny, while also examining Sir Syed's significant involvement during that period. Moving on to the second phase, I explore the emergence of Ulema in Indian active politics, with a particular focus on the influential role played by Maulana Abul Kalam Azad and the profound impact of the Non-cooperation Movement on the Muslim community. Finally, in the third and concluding phase, I shed light on the essence and attributes of Muslim leadership in a secular India, alongside the consequential outcomes stemming from their actions and decisions. Throughout the article, my passion for this subject is evident as I present these phases with an emotionally engaged approach. Phase I The Position Of The Ulema Before The Upheaval Of 1857 There are pieces of evidence to show that before 1857 the Muslims of Delhi like the Muslims of those areas which had come under the British influence, political or cultural, were showing willingness towards a new life. In Delhi, there was the Delhi College which had on its rolls Muslims, both as teachers and students. Some had started reproducing in Urdu the western arts and sciences. The Ulema who are now quite often accused of standing between the Muslims and the modern way of life were in fact, friendly to the British and to what they had brought to India. Maintaining a balance between the two, they allowed the Muslims to learn the English language, have social intercourse with the Christians, and even wear western dress, if necessary. But this whole move came to an abrupt and complete end with the Mutiny, and the individuals who had taken part in it were in considerable danger of doing likewise. Prof Mushirul Haq mentioned the position of the Ulema before the upheaval of 1857 in his book “Muslim Politics in Modern India” where he writes: “Their main function was to teach, to guide the people in religious affairs and to provide the Shari’a (religio-legal) opinion about matters relating to their daily practices. As a rule they were loyal to the throne so long as the ruler professed to be a Muslim, irrespective of the quality of his administration. In the long history of Muslim India there had been several rebellions against the rulers on different grounds but there is hardly any example available of the uprising of the Ulema against the ruler on the ground of his irreligious activities. Up to 1857 the East India Company was considered on1y as the agent of the Mughal ruler, and any rebellion against the administration was theoretically against the Muslim ruler. Even during the time of the Mutiny, in many places public announcements were made in the name of the Mughal king, saying in the traditional Way ‘The people were God’s; the country the King’s and the order was of Kampani Bahadur (the Company)’. In some rebel centres this pattern of announcement was changed. For example, in Moradabad, where one Mujju Khan, a rebel leader, had estab1ished his power, the announcement was made in his name saying: ‘The people were God's; the country the King of Delhi’s and Mujju Khan was Viceroy of Moradabad’. Both of these announcements show that at least in theory the Mughal king was accepted as the real ruler of India. Since the Ulema of the 19th century were not different from their ancestors, they could not take part in the struggle unless it was proved by the Shari’ah that it had become incumbent upon them to do so. The activities of Maulana Qasim and others so described by their early biographers are in harmony with this tendency. But the difficulty arises when we read the same account edited by our contemporary writers.” Consequently, the Ulema of the 19th century maintained a steadfast continuity with their forebears, showcasing a consistent approach in their involvement. Their engagement in any struggle was contingent upon satisfying the requirements of Shari'ah, necessitating a clear mandate for action. This inclination is well-reflected in the historical accounts detailing the activities of figures like Maulana Qasim Nanotwi and others, as recorded by early biographers. However, the situation becomes more intricate when examining these same narratives as edited and presented by contemporary writers. Emotionally, one cannot help but sense a perplexing contrast between the original depiction of their actions and the altered versions crafted by present-day authors. The Position Of Ulema After The Mutiny The Mutiny had a profound impact, deeply dividing both Muslims and the British, leading to a climate of apprehension and reluctance to consider reconciliation. This created disparate circumstances for Muslims in India. For instance, in Calcutta, Nawab Abdul Latif established the Muhammadan Literary Society, primarily comprising affluent and educated Muslims, along with the support of respected religious scholars. The society aimed to address political, social, and religious concerns in light of the changing times. The religious scholars endeavoured to dispel the misconception that the English sought to undermine their faith, emphasizing the importance of English education and Western knowledge. However, the situation in Delhi was starkly different, as it became a focal point for rebellious activities. The Muslim community and its leaders were grappling with the repercussions of the Mutiny, resulting in mutual animosity and scorn between the Muslims and the British. In this tense environment, it became essential for someone to bridge the divide, and Sir Syed stepped forward to embrace the challenge. He initiated a comprehensive program to revitalize the Muslim community across various aspects of life, encompassing social, political, and religious dimensions. Nevertheless, his efforts encountered resistance among the religious scholars who feared that Christian missionaries, backed by the British government, aimed to undermine their faith. Consequently, these scholars sought solace in religious education, establishing independent religious seminaries, or Madaris, to preserve their way of life. Up to the end of the 19th century there was no political party exclusively of the Muslims: Through an academic lens, it has become evident that until the late 19th century, there did not exist a political party exclusively representing the Muslim community in India. This, however, does not imply that Indian Muslims were entirely disinterested in political matters. Some Muslims were associated with the Indian National Congress, while others adhered to the political ideology of Sir Syed. Nevertheless, there was no formal Muslim Party during that period. At the Turn of the 20th century: It was during the early 20th century that a faction of the Muslim elite, sharing similar political views with Sir Syed, took the initiative to establish the “All India Muslim League” in 1906. One of its founding members, Maulana Muhammad Ali, provided an explanation for its formation. In his Urdu journal, Hamdard, he once delved into the topic of the political awakening of Indian Muslims: “I have said very often and again I repeat it that it is not an accident that the Congress was established thirty years after the foundation of the universities of Calcutta, Madras and Bombay. Likewise the Muslim League came into existence just thirty years after the foundation of the Aligarh College. Almost all the founders of the Muslim League were the products of that College. It was a new chapter in the political life of the Indian Muslims.” The Ulema had, on the whole, kept themselves aloof from politics: Following the emergence of the Muslim League, the Indian Muslim community faced a momentous decision between two political entities. On one side stood the Indian National Congress, proclaiming its commitment to representing all Indians irrespective of their religious affiliations. On the other side, the Muslim League arose with a distinct purpose of advocating for the unique interests of the Muslim population. Notably, both parties were led predominantly by individuals educated in Western ways. Concurrently, the Ulema, religious scholars and authorities, generally remained distant from the political sphere, exhibiting a sense of detachment from these political movements. The decision-making process regarding political alignment evoked profound emotions among the Muslims of India as they navigated the complexities of representation and identity. Phase II The Debut Of The Ulema Into The Modern Indian Politics During this pivotal moment, a young man emerged on the horizon of Calcutta and influenced the Ulema to engage in the realm of politics, an act that stirred deep emotions. This individual was none other than Abul Kalam Azad, who, according to Shaikh ul Hind Maulana Mahmud Hasan, the renowned scholar of the Deoband School, was the catalyst for awakening the Ulema from their slumber. He once said: “We (the Ulema) were sleeping, Azad roused us from our slumber”. The Ulema's entrance into Indian politics marked a significant shift, introducing a new emotional dimension to Muslim politics in the country. Previously, religion and politics operated in distinct spheres, but the Ulema's intervention established a connection where politics became subordinate to religious convictions, evoking strong sentiments among the populace. The two perspectives presented in this context evoke a range of human emotions. Firstly, we encounter Sir Syed's stance, which, at the turn of the century, urged Muslims to refrain from active involvement in politics on non-religious grounds. His reasoning cantered on the notion that due to their educational backwardness, Muslims might not secure a fair share in government administration without the support of the British government. Though his argument lacked a religious dimension, it sparked various feelings of uncertainty and contemplation among the Muslim community. In stark contrast, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad's call for Muslims to participate in Indian politics resonated deeply on religious grounds. The Ulema, who carried the political banner, intensified religious sentiments among Muslims, instilling a belief that religious freedom held greater significance than political emancipation. This religious indoctrination resulted in Muslims becoming hesitant to oppose anything that appeared to align with the Shari’ah. Throughout the struggle for freedom, the Ulema, positioned at the forefront, consistently framed their discourse in religious terms. Decisions were sought to be made based on the Shari’ah, and Muslims felt a religious obligation to support the Khilafat cause, boycott foreign goods, and work towards the country's liberation. These religiously charged directives stirred a mixture of devotion, passion, and a sense of duty among the Muslim population. Prof. Mushirul Haq aptly describes this complex interplay of emotions and ideas within the historical context: “Abul Kalam Azad, in my opinion, the key figure in this whole religio-political drama. He is the person who, through his journal, Al-Hilal, influenced the Muslims of India in favour of national politics. Before Azad, politics had been taboo for the Indian Muslims. Of the two groups of Indian Muslims, one, under the influence of Syed Ahmad Khan, avoided by every possible means a clash with the British government; the other under the spell of the Ulema, was satisfied with the existing situation so long as they had religious freedom. It was Abul Kalam who launched a campaign with his pen saying that religious freedom was meaningless without political emancipation. Azad had also realized that the Muslim masses would not participate wholeheartedly in the struggle unless the Ulema would come out of their seclusion. He was successful in his move; the Ulema broke their tradition and threw themselves into politics. Now the political struggle had become a religious duty for every Muslim. Hence the leadership of the Ulema. The Ulema, who probably did not know themselves what they were doing, brought the seed of religion with them and sowed it on the earth of politics praying to see a united India emerge out of it. Something did emerge, but it was Pakistan, a natural outcome of what the nationalist Ulema had unwittingly done”. The victory of ‘religious’ politics but a defeat of the ‘nationalist’ Ulema: Emotionally driven, the Muslims, having been indoctrinated to assess each political decision through the lens of their religious beliefs, became impervious to any perspective that did not align with their own religious convictions. Dismissing any opposing notions as incompatible with Islam, they closed themselves off to rational discussions. Consequently, the establishment of Pakistan stemmed from this deeply entrenched religious-political perspective, signifying a triumph for 'religious' politics but a setback for the 'nationalist' religious scholars. Non-Cooperation As A Religious Dictum The nationalist Ulema consistently urged the Muslims of India to wholeheartedly devote themselves to the religious cause, evoking deep emotional appeals. An illustrative instance of this was in 1920, when countless Muslims migrated from the land, leaving behind their cherished shrines and mosques for the non-Muslims, motivated by their belief in the religious obligation propagated by the Ulema. Throughout the Non-Cooperation movement, Muslim lawyers and businessmen willingly embraced poverty, forsaking their legal practices and abstaining from foreign goods, primarily because the theory of Non-Cooperation was presented to them as a profound religious edict, resonating with their deepest emotions and convictions. Phase III Nature & Characteristics Of The Muslim Leadership In Secular India The nation found itself torn apart, evoking a myriad of emotions among its inhabitants, particularly the Muslims who chose to reside in India. In the supposedly secular environment of India, the Muslim community faced an unforeseen predicament. The All India Muslim League, which once claimed to be the sole representative of Indian Muslims, had vanished from the political landscape. Those who identified as secular-minded Muslim leaders either migrated to Pakistan, urging Indian Muslims to remain "loyal" to their government, or busied themselves absolving their past actions, attempting to prove their loyalty beyond measure. In the aftermath of the country's partition, bloodshed, merciless killings, and mass migrations ensued, further exacerbating the paralysis of Muslim politics. Amidst the turmoil, the path forward remained uncertain, and decisions regarding their future course of action became an arduous task for the Muslim community. Today the Muslim leadership is busy in exploring the possibilities of an electoral alliance with parties willing to champion the Muslim cause: The current state of Muslim politics significantly diverges from what was initially envisioned after gaining independence. Presently, Muslim leaders and organizations, whether politically affiliated or not, are resolute in demanding proportional representation in governmental services and decision-making bodies. In pursuit of their objectives, Muslim leadership is actively exploring potential electoral alliances with parties that advocate for Muslim interests. Emotions of determination, hope, and apprehension fuel their endeavours to secure a stronger voice and position for the Muslim community in the complex political landscape of the nation. Conclusion The profound engagement of Indian Muslim politics, regardless of their party alignments, in earnestly seeking the favour of the Ulema to secure Muslim votes is an observation deserving thoughtful consideration. This phenomenon, even if it signifies nothing else, unmistakably underscores a fundamental truth: the enduring influence of religion within Indian politics and thus the significance of the Ulema's role. This intriguing interplay of human emotions, where ambition and political strategy intertwine with the profound sentiments associated with faith and identity, unveils a compelling aspect of the intricate dynamics shaping the country's political landscape. To conclude, if nothing else, it at least proved one point: Religion, perhaps, will always play a decisive role in Indian politics and hence the importance of the Ulema. ------ Notes & References Guest Faculty, Department of Islamic Studies, Jamia Millia Islamia, Jamia Nagar, New Delhi-110025; Mob: +91 9891059708; E-mail: javed.akhatar1985@gmail.com To study more go through some of his works in this field such as “Muslim Politics in Moder India”, “Islam in Secular India”, “Mazhab aur Jadid Zahan” and the like. W.C. Smith, Modern Islam in India, London, 1946, p.14. Mushirul Haq, Muslim Politics in Modern India: 1857-1947, Meenakshi Prakashan, Meerut, 1970, p. 9. Mushirul Haq, “The Ulema and the Indian Politics”, in Islam and the Modern Age, Vol. X, No. 4 November 1979, Delhi, pp. 70-71. Ziyaul Hasan Faruqi, The Deoband School and the Demand for Pakistan, Bombay, 1963. For full discussion see S. Maqbul Ahmad, “Madrasah System of Education and Indian Muslim Society” in S.T. Lokhandwalla (ed), Indian and Contemporary Islam, Shimla, 1971, pp. 25-38. Hamdard (June 10, 1927) reproduced in Mazzmin Muhammad Ali (2 vols.) ed. Muhamamd Sarwar, Delhi, 1938, vol. I, pp. 291-2. Mirza Fazluddin Ahmad in his preface to Abul-Kalam Azad’s Tazkirah (1st pb. 1919, reprint Lahore, n.d., p. 13) ascribes this sentence to Maulana Mahmud Hasan on the authority of Maulana Azad. Mushirul Haq, “The Ulema and the Indian Politics”, in Islam and the Modern Age, Vol. X, No. 4 November 1979, Delhi, p. 87. Mushirul Haq, “The Ulema and the Indian Politics”, in Islam and the Modern Age, Vol. X, No. 4 November 1979, Delhi, p. 87. Also see Maulana Muhammad Miyan, Jam’iyat Kya Hai?, vol. II, Delhi, 1946,p. 15. Abul Kalam Azad, Khutubat-e Azad, Delhi, 1959, pp. 55. Also Maulana Abdul Majid Badayuni, Dars-I Khilafat (1st ed. 1920) 5th reprint, Meerut, New Delhi, p. 44. Maulana Mahmud Hasan, Tark-e Mawalat, Bijnore, 1919, p. 36. Azad, Al-Hilal, vol. I, No. 3, July 27, 1912. Mushirul Haq, Muslim Politics in Modern India: 1857-1947, see preface, Meenakshi Prakashan, Meerut, 1970. Maulana Shabbir Ahmad Usmani, Paygham banam Mu’tamar kul Hind Jam’iyat-e ‘Ulema-e Islam, Lahore, 1945, p. 43. For detail see Mushirul Haq, Muslim Politics in Modern India: 1857-1947, see preface, Meenakshi Prakashan, Meerut, 1970. URL: https://newageislam.com/islam-politics/religion-indian-politics-ulema-mushirul/d/130285 New Age Islam, Islam Online, Islamic Website, African Muslim News, Arab World News, South Asia News, Indian Muslim News, World Muslim News, Women in Islam, Islamic Feminism, Arab Women, Women In Arab, Islamophobia in America, Muslim Women in West, Islam Women and Feminism