The Wahabi Movement is associated with the name of Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab who was born about 1700 C.E. in Arabian peninsula (modern day Saudi Arabia), who stood to purify Islam from unfounded practices in his own region. By the 18th century Indian Muslims had also acquired some un-Islamic practices and needed reforms. Realizing the urgency of the reforming the Muslims, Shah Waliullah (1703-1762) of Delhi in the 18th century took upon himself this arduous task. He was a great theologian; translated the Noble Qur’aan from Arabic to Persian (the spoken language of the time) and delivered bi-weekly lectures in his Madrassa.

READ PREVIOUS ARTICLE: From Tipu Sultan to Barasat Risings: Muslims in India’s Freedom Struggle

Shah Abdul Aziz (1746-1824) succeeded his father, Shah Waliullah, and carried his mission with great zeal. Syed Ahmad Shaheed (1786-1831) of Rai Bareli who led a movement named by Britishers the Wahabi Movement.

The Faraizi Movement led by Pir Shariatullah and his successors in Bengal and the Wahabi Movement led by Syed Ahmad Shaheed and his followers in northern India, had the same ideology, i.e. the emancipation of India from the British. It would not be wrong to say that they had anti-British plans in their minds when they met at Makkah a decade ago during hajj. [Ref: Dr. Muinuddin Ahmad Khan, Muslim Struggle for Freedom in Bengal (Dacca, 1982, Second ed.) pp.20-23]

Aware of the British expansion, as early as in 1803, Shah Abdul Aziz of Delhi issued a fatwa declaring India as Dar-ul-Harb. The fatwa is a remarkable document in the history of the freedom movement in India against a foreign power.

After the fall of Syed Ahmad and Shah Ismail Shaheed in 1831, the Wahabi Movement waned and most of the Mujahids, retired to the frontier. Andaman islands or Kala Pani as they were then called were barren with a very rough climate. The harshest punishment given to a man was to send him to Andaman  where the Wahabi patriots were the first Indians to set foot.

The Wahabi were patriots and made matchless sacrifices for their motherland is undisputed. But the irony of Indian history is that their aims and missions have not been properly represented. With result that their achievements and sacrifices are still obscure.

History records that during the period from 1850-58 the British Government despatched 16 expeditions totaling 33,000 regular troops and finally decided to send a strong force consisting of 219 artillery, 551 cavalry and 4017 infantry under Genral Sir Sidney Cotton who defeated the Wahabis. [Ref: The History of Freedom Movement in Bihar, Vol.I , p.86]

The Revolt of 1857 was Non-Communal and First War of Independence

The Revolt of 1857 was not Hindu or Muslim in character. It was non-communal. Both Hindus and Muslims assiduously organized the fronts against the foreign power.

Nana Saheb had a Muslim advisor, Azimullah. The Rani of Jhansi employed Muslim gunners. Moulvi Ahmadullah Shah addressed the joint meetings of Hindus and Musliims. Bahdur Shah had entrusted his mint and police departments to Hindus. Thus the Revolt scarcely had any tinge of communalism. In their struggle for freedom both Hindus and Muslims stood shoulder to shoulder with the single object of liberating themselves from the British Yoke.

The Revolt of 1857 is to be taken as our first war of independence in a simple sense of driving the British from India, the whole ideology of Wahabi Movement is definitely the same.

According to Hirendranath Mukerjee, “The most strident challenge that the British administrators  had to encounter those days was the Wahabi Movement which was not …anti-Hindu…. Indeed, Indian Islam in the nineteenth century had proclaimed a sort of war against Britain and though ‘They’ were defeated, but in the history of Indian National Movement, the spectacle of Muslims in those early days courageously trying to break the British fetters needs to be gratefully recorded.” [Ref: Hirendranath Mukherjee, India’s Struggle for Freedom (Bombay, 1948), p.41-45]

Prof. Santimay Ray says: “If independence means achieving freedom from British rule the phase of the Wahabi Moevement must be regarded as the prologue of Indian freedom struggle…Since 1830 onward the Wahabi Moevement spread far and wide, from Chittagong to Peshawar and from Madras to Kashmir. Whatever little evidence of organizational skill can be detected in the great revolt of 1857, was mainly contributed by the Wahabi fighters. ” [Ref: Santimay Ray, ‘The Army in Indian Freedom Struggle’ in Challenge-A Saga of India’s Struggle for Freedom, op.cit., pp.537-38]

After the Revolt – The Sufferings of Muslims started

Aftermath of the Revolt was very chaotic for the Muslims. They were mainly held responsible for the Revolt because they were generally hostile (and) the Hindus much less so. [Ref: Dr. R.C. Majumdar, History of Freedom Movement (Calcutta 1962), Vol.I, p.247]

The sufferings and privations of the Muslims knew no bounds. The Government offices were closed to them and the remnant of their property which had already been looted, was confiscated. Army services were strictly prohibited and the judiciary was also purged with them. Whenever any vacancy occurred in the Government Offices, only non-Muslims were allowed to apply for them. This had badly told upon their economy which reduced the them to extreme poverty. A community which a few years ago was economically sound was now at the lowest ebb of its degradation. [Ref: Durbin, July 14, 1869 a Persian Daily of Calcutta quoted by Mohammad Nouman, Muslim India (Allahbad, 1942), pp.22-23; See also W.W. Hunter, op.cit p.159 and Syed Ahmad Khan, Loyal Mahomedans of India, (Meerut, 1860), pp.2-5]

Muslims had been on forefront of the Revolt and they were rightly to suffer. Finding the British unsympathetic and harsh, they also resisted the new regime. Persian, the official language of the Mughals, was replaced by English to wipe out Musalmans from the administration, and therefore they hated the new system of education. They did not embrace western education and were stuck to their traditional system. [Ref: The Hindustan Review, July 1907.]

Thus a wide gap had existed between the rulers and the Musalamans. Till India won independence scores of Muslims have played their role so strongly which didn’t get the right due in the books of history and Muslim community themselves were unaware how much sacrifices their forefathers have done for this country in terms of their wealth, lives etc.,

Likewise present generation of students do not know about Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan, a great nationalist who passed 45 years of his 95 years of life in jail for the freedom of India; Barkatullah of Bhopal, one of the founders of the Ghadar party who created a network of anti-British Oganizations and who died penniless in Germany in 1927; Syed Rahmath Shah of Ghadar party who worked as an underground revolutionary in France and was hanged for his part in unsuccessful Ghadar uprising in 1915; Ali Ahmad Siddiqui of Fyzabad (U.P.) who planned the Indian Mutiny in Malaya & Burma along with Syed Mujtaba Husain of Jaunpur and who was hanged in 1917; Umar Sobhani, an industrialist and a millionaire of Bombay who presented a blank cheque to Gandhiji for Congress expenses and who ultimately gave his life for the cause of independence, Mohammad Basheer, Khuda Bux, A.Zakaria, Zafar Hasan, Allah Nawaz, Abdul Aziz and tens of thousands of revolutionaries have been ignored.

Qaiser-ul-Tawarikh mentioned that the number of Muslims executed only in Delhi  during 1857-58 was 27,000, not to speak of those killed in the general massacre. This shows the great sacrifices they made for the emancipation of their country from British.

In all the national uprisings from Sanyasi Movement to independence, the files of the Home Department are replete  with their immense sacrifices that finally led to the withdrawal of British from India in 1947. What surprises one is the thing that even during the celebration of 50 years of independence, their role was not properly taken care of by the Press which led the All-India Milli Council, a body of Muslims to launch a Karavan-e-Azadi Rally, one from Srirangapatnam where the mausoleum of Tipu Sultan is located and other from Silchar (Assam) to educate people about the role of Muslims in the country’s freedom struggle.

What further pains one is the fate of Sultan Tipu’s epitaph, put on the memorable place where he fell fighting with the British in defense of his metropolis-his country-which he had been made a cricket wicket by the youngsters for their cricket practice during the World Cup 1999. No one, not even the local administration prevented this. This shows the ignorance of Indians of their greatest patriots who laid their lives for India’s freedom.

Featured Image credits: National Army Museum

This article is a part of series to highlight the sacrifices of Muslims in liberating India from the British-raj.

Imtiaz Ahmed is a founding member and CEO of Illume Academy. The Academy is a youth centric learning forum, deploying all possible innovative teaching techniques in molding youth to be decisive thinkers with sound character, and effective leaders.

Opinions are frequently expressed by historians on the role of Indian Muslims in the national movement which tend to prove that there was a general tendency among the Muslim leaders to preach the gospel of separation right from revolt of 1857 to the achievement of freedom in 1947.

It is said that Muslim antagonism to the Freedom Movement of India dates back to its beginning itself and that ‘Islam can never allow a true Muslim to adopt India as his motherland. It is also presumed that this tendency was ultimately responsible for the partition of the country in 1947 and this ‘ideology of separatism’ has influenced the Muslim masses so intensely that they were not satisfied by the concessions granted to them by the majority community and these concessions only created a superficial contentment resulting into fresh demands till they were successful in achieving the goal – a separate homeland.

READ NEXT ARTICLE: From Wahabi Movement to 1857 Revolt: Muslims in India’s Freedom Struggle

The result of all this has been the campaign of hatred and the press propaganda against the Muslims. But the reality is totally different, for example Allah Baksh – a great Muslim leader who opposed two nation theory. It is true that the Muslim League’s juggernaut was successful in achieving its objective of dividing India on communal lines but it is also true that all Muslims did not subscribe to its philosophy (majority of Muslims chose to remain in India on the eve of partition).

After the attainment of independence it was hoped that our intellectuals would say good-bye to the British historiography of infusing communal politics and sowing the seeds of dissension between the two communities in India and usher in the golden age of freedom. But it was a vain hope.

Contrary to the expectations, the role of Indian Muslims in the national movement has not been given adequate coverage in the press or books. It has either been sidetracked or referred to here and there by scholars. Instead of factual and secular historiography it has been communalized. The contribution of Muslim revolutionaries, poets and prose writers is not known today.

Similarly scarcely is known about the contribution of Muhammad Ashfaq Ullah Khan of Shahjehanpur who conspired and looted the British treasury at Kakori (Lucknow) to cripple the administration and who, when asked for his last will, before execution, desired: “No desire is left except one that someone may put a little soil of my motherland in my winding sheet”.

Rewind

In this series we will explore important freedom struggle movements and key personalities who led them. This nation belongs to Muslims as it belongs to other religious denominations. Muslims sacrifice cannot be undermined and it cannot be hidden in darkness from the pages of history.

The Beginning of the struggle in the 18^th century

India succumbed to anarchy towards the close of the 18^th century. Taking advantage of the chaos and the vaccum caused by the fall of the central authority the British carved out a place for themselves, which they retained for more than a century. But the sons of India were not altogether lacking in patriotic sentiments.

Nawab Sirajjuddaula of Bengal had the foresight to clearly realize the menace latent in British expansion and tried to check it. He marched to Calcutta and captured Fort William on June 20, 1756. But he was betrayed by the unfaithful General and got defeated in the battle of Plassey. [Ref: K.M. Yusuf; Muslims and the Freedom Struggle in the Illustrated Weekly of India. January 28, 1973, p.44]

In the South Sultan Haider Ali, the ruler of Mysore, was not easily to yield to any foreign power. The impression that Haider Ali has left on history is that of a great fighter against the British.

Tipu Sultan who succeeded his father (Haider Ali) proved a much harder nut to crack. At a time when most of the Indian rulers were incapable of understanding the consequences. He adopted western techniques in his army, sent envoys to Turkey in 1784-85 and to France in 1787-88, to Zaman Shah of Afghanistan in 1876 and in 1799 which was intercepted by the British. Instead of looking backward, he lavishly borrowed both from the contemporary revolutionary ideas of the French Revolution of 1789 and from the military sciences of Napolean. His ‘Ahmadi’ contingent of Muslim neo-converts was modeled on the most modern European pattern and resembled the Janisearies of the Ottoman Turks rather than the army  of the Moghul nobles. [Ref: K.M. Ashraf, ‘Muslim Revivalists and Revolt of 1857 in Rebellion of 1857-A Symposium ed. P.C. Joshi, p.73]

A man of limited resources cannot face a well-equipped army for long. Had Tipu Sultan agreed to become a vassal of the English East India Company, he would have saved his kingdom. But he was a patriot and defied the British even with his handful of army and fell fighting among the hundreds of dead in defence of his motherland.

Paying tribute to Hyder Ali and Tipu Sultan, Dr. R.C. Majumdar rightly says, “of all the Indian ruling princes of this period, Hyder Ali and his son Tipu Sultan were the most uncompromising opponents of the growth of British Political Power in India, and they realized more than others the great peril which it meant to India. Their sturdy love of independence, and particularly the scornful rejection of Subsidiary Alliance by Tipu Sultan, distinguished them from contemporary ruling family.”

Resistance by Muslim Fakhirs Against The British

The British were resisted not only by the rulers and princes, they were also opposed by Sanyasis and Fakirs. Dr. Tara Chand says that, “A somewhat usual source of trouble for the British rulers was the movement of Muslim Faquirs.” [Ref: History of the Freedom Movement in India vol.II (New Delhi, 1967), p.10]

Their leader was Majnun Shah who appeared in Bengal with his son Chiragh Ali Shah as early as 1772 with about two thousand followers. Majnun Shah played a vital role in the initial stages of freedom struggle. He, as a man of immense potential and in spite of his adverse circumstances, fought bravely against the British and many a times General Mackenzie had to suffer at his hands. The armed activities of Majnun Shah continued and in December 1786 he assaulted an army led by Lt. Brenan in which Majnun Shah got injuries and died a few months after.

In 1783 there was a formidable rising in Rangpur. It assumed the character of an armed peasant rebellion in which both Hindus and Muslim peasants stood to face the British. [Ref: Narahari Kaviraj, ‘Peasant and Adivasi Uprisings (1765-1885) in Challenge: A Saga of India’s Struggle for Freedom, (New Delhi) p.115]

Faraizi Movement

Next came the Faraizi Movement founded by Pir Shariatullah (1781-1840) of Faridpur who preached a revolutionary doctrine against the British in 1804.  At the age of 18 he had gone to Makkah and settled their and he returned to India in 1802 he found it Dar-ul-Harb (a land of war). Hence, it was their farz (duty) to oust the British and thus it assumed the name Faraizi Movement.

His son, Moulvi Muhammad Muslim better known as Dadu Mian (1819-1859) who was more political minded, organized the movement by dividing Bengal strategically for the expulsion of the British. [Ref: Abdul Bari, ‘The Reform Movement in Bengal’ in A History of Freedom Movement, Vol.I (published by Pakistan Historical Society, Karachi, 1957), pp.542-666. See also Tara Chand, History of Freedom Movement in India, Vol.II (NewDelhi, 1967), p.10 ]

Meer Nisar Ali alias Titu Miyan of Chandpur (Barasat) who was in command of the Faraizi army, he was defeated by British forces and captured, tried and sent to Andamans. After the fall of Titu Miyan, Dadu Miyan, during 1840-47 raised an army of 80,000 soldiers and fought against the British at Baramat, Jaisoor, Patna, Dhaka,Malda but could not gain an upper hand. He was tried and imprisoned at the Alipur Jail. He died in 1859 a few days after his release.

Barasat Risings

Inspired by the efforts of Titu Miyan and Dadu Miyan thousands of oppressed peasants rose like a man against the British planters as passive resisters. This came to be known as Barasat Risings.

Satyamay Ray writes: “The revolts of Barasat and Faridpur under the leadership of Nisar Ali (Titu Miyan) and Muhammad Muslim (Dadu Miyan) respectively were the inaugural music, as it were, of the Indian liberation struggle.” [Ref: Santimay Ray, ‘The Army in Indian Freedom Struggle’ in Challenge: A Saga of India’s Struggle for Freedom, op. cit, p.538]

This article is a part of series to highlight the sacrifices of Muslims in liberating India from the British-raj.

Imtiaz Ahmed is a founding member and CEO of Illume Academy. The Academy is a youth centric learning forum, deploying all possible innovative teaching techniques in molding youth to be decisive thinkers with sound character, and effective leaders.