qwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwe

rtyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyui
opasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopa
sdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfg
Roll Number A-1544014

hjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklz
Genesis of Pakistan
Movement (538)
xcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcv
3/25/2011
bnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnm
Asmat Zahra
qwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwe
rtyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyui
opasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopa
sdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfg
hjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklz
xcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcv
bnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnm
qwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwe
rtyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmrtyuiopa
sdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfg
hjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklz
xcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcv
ALLAMA IQBAL OPEN UNIVERSITY, ISLAMABAD
Faculty of Social Sciences
Department of Pakistan Studies

Course: Genesis of Pakistan Movement (538) Semester: Autumn, 2010

Level: M. Sc
ASSIGNMENT No. 1

Q. 1 Explain Sir Syed Ahmad Khan’s views about Indian National Congress and
critically analyse his views about the potential threat of Hindu majoritarian rule
and depoliticizing Muslims in sub-continent.

Sir Syed’s (1817-98) views about Indian National Congress:-

The greatest Muslim reformer and statesman of the 19th Century, Sir Syed Ahmad Khan was
born in Delhi on October 17, 1817. His family on the maternal and paternal side had close
contacts with the Mughal court. His maternal grandfather, Khwajah Farid was a Wazir in the
court of Akbar Shah II. His paternal grandfather Syed Hadi held a mansab and the title of Jawwad
Ali Khan in the court of Alamgir II. His father, Mir Muttaqi, had been close to Akbar Shah since
the days of his prince-hood. Syed Ahmad's mother, Aziz-un-Nisa, took a great deal of interest in
the education and upbringing of her son. She imposed a rigid discipline on him and Sir Syed
himself admitted that her supervision counted for much in the formation of his character.
The early years of Sir Syed's life were spent in the atmosphere of the family of a Mughal noble.
There was nothing in young Syed's habits or behavior to suggest that he was different from other
boys, though he was distinguished on account of his extraordinary physique. As a boy he learnt
swimming and archery, which were favorite sports of the well-to-do class in those days.
Sir Syed received his education under the old system. He learnt to read the Quran under a female
teacher at his home. After this, he was put in the charge of Maulvi Hamid-ud-Din, the first of his
private tutors. Having completed a course in Persian and Arabic, he took to the study of
mathematics, which was a favorite subject of the maternal side of his family. He later became
interested in medicine and studied some well-known books on the subject. However, he soon
gave it up without completing the full course. At the age of 18 or 19 his formal education came to

2
an end but he continued his studies privately. He started taking a keen interest in the literary
gatherings and cultural activities of the city.
The death of his father in 1838 left the family in difficulties. Thus young Syed was compelled at
the early age of 21 to look for a career. He decided to enter the service of the East India
Company. He started his career as Sarishtedar in a court of law. He became Naib Munshi in 1839
and Munshi in 1841. In 1858 he was promoted and appointed as Sadar-us-Sadur at Muradabad. In
1867 he was promoted and posted as the judge of the Small Causes Court. He retired in 1876. He
spent the rest of his life for Aligarh College and the Muslims of South Asia.
Sir Syed's greatest achievement was his Aligarh Movement, which was primarily an educational
venture. He established Gulshan School at Muradabad in 1859, Victoria School at Ghazipur in
1863, and a scientific society in 1864. When Sir Syed was posted at Aligarh in 1867, he started
the Muhammadan Anglo-Oriental School in the city. Sir Syed got the opportunity to visit
England in 1869-70. During his stay, he studied the British educational system and appreciated it.
On his return home he decided to make M. A. O. High School on the pattern of British boarding
schools. The School later became a college in 1875. The status of University was given to the
college after the death of Sir Syed in 1920. M. A. O. High School, College and University played
a big role in the awareness of the Muslims of South Asia.
Unlike other Muslim leaders of his time, Sir Syed was of the view that Muslims should have
friendship with the British if they want to take their due rights. To achieve this he did a lot to
convince the British that Muslims were not against them. On the other hand, he tried his best to
convince the Muslims that if they did not befriend the British, they could not achieve their goals.
Sir Syed wrote many books and journals to remove the misunderstandings between Muslims and
the British. The most significant of his literary works were his pamphlets "Loyal Muhammadans
of India" and "Cause of Indian Revolt". He also wrote a commentary on the Bible, in which he
attempted to prove that Islam is the closest religion to Christianity.
Sir Syed asked the Muslims of his time not to participate in politics unless and until they got
modern education. He was of the view that Muslims could not succeed in the field of western
politics without knowing the system. He was invited to attend the first session of the Indian
National Congress and to join the organization but he refused to accept the offer. He also asked
the Muslims to keep themselves away from the Congress and predicted that the party would
prove to be a pure Hindu party in the times to come. By establishing the Muhammadan

3
Educational Conference, he provided Muslims with a platform on which he could discuss their
political problems. Sir Syed is known as the founder of Two-Nation Theory in the modern era.
In the beginning of 1898 he started keeping abnormally quiet. For hours he would not utter a
word to friends who visited him. Medical aid proved ineffective. His condition became critical on
24th of March. On the morning of March 27, a severe headache further worsened it. He expired
the same evening in the house of Haji Ismail Khan, where he had been shifted 10 or 12 days
earlier. He was buried the following afternoon in the compound of the Mosque of Aligarh
College. He was mourned by a large number of friends and admirers both within and outside
South Asia.
Syed Ahmed Khan Views about Potential threat of Hindu majoritarian rule:-

By reading Syed Ahmed Khan’s view on Quran and Shariah one can easily conclude that
he did not receive proper education in Shariah and he based his views mainly on his
personal opinions and surrounding political environment in Indian subcontinent and his
own personal political objectives. He openly rejected hadith (‫ )حديث‬and Tafsir (
‫)تفسير‬. Instead he made Taweel (‫ )تعويل‬and created his own interpretation of various
Nus as he sees fit, often to please the British Masters. But as Allah (swt) says in Quran
that if book written by Human you will find contradictions in it, hence, we find many
huge contradictions in writing of Syed Ahmed Khan.
Ironically, while he blamed Ulema to make mockery of Hadith and Tafsir by mentioning
mysterious things, but Syed Ahmed himself is biggest guilty of this act. His opinions are
perhaps worst than any other, and his taweelat is a reminder of Batania sect (‫فرقة‬
‫)باطنية‬.
He openly made Taweel (create hidden meaning) to prove his wild opinions. In matters
related to Iman and Ghaib (‫ )غيب‬he denied most of it on pretext that it can’t be proven.
He defined Angels as Quwat-Malakuti (‫ )قوى ملكوتي‬and Devils as Quwat-Bahimi (
‫ )قوى بهيمي‬and denied their physical existence. He stated that true religion has
nothing to do with Worldly affairs. Strangely, this unique Ilham (‫ )ااـهام‬was only given
to Syed Ahmed, and Allah (swt) forgot to mention all this wisdom to Prophet
Mohammad (pbuh). He denied miracles, and hence denied all miracles associated to
4
various Prophets, like Ibrahim was never put inside fire, and he termed Musa’s stick
turning into snake as illusion. He denied that Isa (Jesus) was born without a father.
It was very typical of Syed Ahmed Khan that when he couldn’t explain Quran based on
his own presumed Usool (rules), then he will declare that this is ‫( رويا‬dream) and if it
doesn’t fit into dream, then he make Taweel and change the meaning of original word to
anything else to make his point. He denied that Jesus was given healing powers and when
he gave live to death then death here means Kufr (‫ )كفر‬and live here mean Iman (
‫)ايمان‬, so Jesus brought them from Kufr to Iman. Or when Allah (swt) showed Ibrahim
how he brings dead birds back to live, it was Ibrahim’s dream, and Mohammad (pbuh)
was taken to Mairaj (‫ )معراج‬during his dream etc. He denied that army of Abraha (
‫ )ابراهه‬died after being attacked by birds, rather they died due to smallpox disease. He
denied that in Badr Battle Allah swt sent angles to help the Prophet (pbuh). He also
denied returning of Jesus.
One would like to ask Syed Ahmed that if for the sake of argument we take his opinion,
then we have right to ask that what was stopping Allah (swt) to explain these historical
events in same light as Syed Ahmed explains? If Syed Ahmed can explain it then so as
Allah (swt). If Jesus was born with father, why would Allah (swt) not say it so in Quran,
If Ibrahim was day dreaming, why would Allah (swt) not say so?, if Army of Abraha
died of smallpox why would Allah mention that birds (‫ )أبابيل‬stroked them with stone
of hard clay.
Syed Ahmed Khan’s allegiance to British is no hidden secret. He openly declared them
his master and often counted their Ahsan (‫ )احسانات‬on betterment of Muslim society.
He stated that it’s the will of Allah that British became masters over us, and since they
give us religious freedom and rule with justice, we must action their rule and become
loyal and obedient to them. He stated that British rule in India is mercy of Allah on
Muslims for which they must thank Allah. It is our religious obligation that we accept
obedience of Hon Queen with our heart and lives, and pray for their longevity their
government and wealth (1897). He stated that British rule is in our best interest, and
British government can keep as much military in India as it needs to sustain its rule. And
5
 it is my wish that British rule in India is not temporary but eternal. He declared that is its
haram to make fight (jihad) with British rule. When he establish Aligarh University he
added as main goal and objective of university is to “prepare Muslims of India for good
services of British Empire and sincere citizen by creating such sincerity in their nature
that is achieved by being grateful of excellent services provided by government rather
than being obedient of Occupied State by external empire.”
Syed Ahmed eventually created a new religious philosophy and called it Naturalist, and
rejected anything that goes against his definition of Human Nature, and he used god’s
will to propagate obedience and sincerity for invading masters. For his loyalty and
services for British Empire, Syed Ahmed Khan was knighted in 1888.

GOLDEN SAYINGS
Sons (of MAO college later AMU)) shall go forth throughout the length and breath of
the land to preach the message of free inquiry, of large-hearted toleration and of pure
morality.

 Acquisition of knowledge of science and technology is the only solution for the problems
of Muslims.
 Call me by whatever names you like. I will not ask you for my salvation. But please take
pity of your children. Do something for them (send them to the school), lest you should
have to repent (by not sending them)
 We will remain humiliated and rejected if we do not make progress’’ (in scientific fields
 Get rid of old and useless rituals. These rituals hinder human progress.
 Superstition cannot be the part of Iman (faith).
 The first requisite for the progress of a nation is the brotherhood and unity amongst
sections of the society.
 Yes the main purpose of this college (MAO) is to impart modern education to Muslims
who are suffering because of lack of it but this institution is for all, Hindus and Muslims
alike. Both of them need education.
6
 We (Hindus and Muslims) eat the same crop, drink water from the same rivers and
breathe the same air. As a matter of fact Hindus and Muslims are the two eyes of the
beautiful bride that is Hindustan. Weakness of any one of them will spoil the beauty of
the bride (dulhan)
 We (Hindus and Muslim) have evolved a new language Urdu
 I wish that youth of India should follow the example of young men and women of
England who are religiously engaged in the hard work of industrial development of their
country” (During the stay of Sir Syed in England).
 Look forward, learn modern knowledge, and do not waste time in studies of old subjects
of no value.
 Ijtihad (innovation, re-interpretation with the changing times) is the need of the hour.
Give up taqlid (copying and following old values).
 Do not show the face of Islam to others; instead show your face as the follower of true
Islam representing character, knowledge, tolerance and piety.
 We should not (by remaining ignorant and illiterate) tarnish the image of our able elders.
 All human beings are our brother and sisters. Working for their welfare is obligatory for
Muslims.
 Remember that the words Hindu and Muslim are only meant for religious distinction:
otherwise all persons who reside in this country belong to one and the same nation.

Evolution and growth of Muslim Society in the Sub-continent.

Ideology of Pakistan-Definition and Elucidation. Historical aspects Muslim rule in the
sub-continent, its downfall and efforts of Renaissance. Movements for reforms-Sheikh
Ahmed Sarhindi, Shah Waliullah, Aligarh, Deoband, Na&wah, Anjarnun Hamiat-e-Islam
and other Educational Institutions- Sind Madressah and Islamia College Peshawar.
Ideology of Pakistan in the lights of speeches and sayings of Allama Iqhal and Quaid-i-
Azam.

7
Q. 2 Discuss socio-cultural and economic factors that brought Indian people in a state of
war in 1857 against British imperialists.

Socio-cultural and economic factors:-

By 1845, the British Empire had expanded from Bengal to Sindh, and all that remained free
was Punjab. The Sikhs were ruling over Punjab and after the Second Sikh War in 1848, the
British gained control over the Indus. The Koh-I-Noor diamond that Ranjit Singh had worn in
his headdress now became a part of the crown jewels at Westminster.

The War of Independence broke out in January and March 1857. The British army had
recruited local Indians in their forces. These soldiers were issued cartridges greased with fat
from tabooed animals. The soldiers refused to use these cartridges. In 1857, starting with an
uprising in Meerut, soldiers in the British Army in Bengal launched a full-scale mutiny
against the British. This mutiny spread swiftly across the Sub-continent. Initially, the Indian
soldiers were able to push back the British forces. The British army was driven out of Delhi
and the Indian soldiers took control of the city. Bahadur Shah Zafar, the last Mughal King,
was compelled to lead the freedom fighters. In Bahadur Shah Zafar, the rebels found a
symbol of freedom, but a mere symbol was all he was. Wanting to spend his days writing
poetry, the man was in no way even a remnant of the glory of his forefathers. He proclaimed
himself the Emperor of the whole of India. The civilians, citizens and other dignitaries took
oath of allegiance to the Emperor. The Emperor issued his own coin and appointed his sons to
key posts.

The initial success of the freedom fighters gave a

boost to the War of Independence. The Indian army
captured the important towns of Haryana, Bihar and
Madhya Pradesh. However, the British forces at
Meerut and Ambala put up a resolute resistance to the

8
royal army and held them back for several months. The British proved to be a formidable foe
with their superior weapons and better strategy. The freedom fighters badly lacked in
adequate resources and their planning proved to be extremely brittle. The royal forces were
finally defeated. The British army entered Delhi and the Mughal emperor Bahadur Shah Zafar
went into hiding.

The British quickly regained control of Delhi. They ransacked and destroyed the city. They
took revenge in the most gruesome manner by killing innocent people indiscriminately. A
wide scale massacre of the inhabitants of Delhi was carried out to avenge the killings of the
British soldiers. The Mughal emperor was captured from his sanctuary, the tomb of Emperor
Humayun. The emperor's sons were slaughtered in cold blood. Their bodies were beheaded
and their heads were presented to the aging emperor in prison. Bahadur Shah was imprisoned
in Rangoon, Myanmar, where he breathed his last.

After the War of Independence in 1857, the British government assumed sovereignty over the
lands of the British East India Company. The British control over the Sub-continent grew in
the next 50 years and culminated in the British Raj. Queen Victoria's Indian realm continued
to expand, until Hunza, the remote kingdom bordering China, fell into British hands in 1891,
bringing the expansion to its zenith.

The British delineated the frontier separating British India from Afghanistan in 1893. The
resulting Durand Line cut straight through the tribal area of the Pathans. The British left the
tribal areas to govern themselves under the supervision of British political agents.

The British thus became masters of India, where for nearly 800 years Muslims had ruled.
However, their attitude towards the Muslims was that of antipathy. According to Hunter, a
prominent historian, "The Muslims of India are, and have been for many years, a source of
chronic danger to the British power in India". The British attributed the war of 1857 to the
Muslims alone. As a result, property belonging to Muslims was confiscated and they were
denied employment opportunities everywhere in the army, revenue department, and judiciary.

Condition of Indian Peoples after the War:-

9
The war of Independence of 1857 was conducted mainly by the Muslims. Its failure started a
new era of alien rule in the Sub-Continent. Although the war was ill planned and short lived yet
it shocks the British Imperialism to its foundations. The concern of the British Government can
be judged from the fact that immediately after the war the crown took over the control of the
country from the English East India Company. The British Government took stock of the entire
situation and held the Muslims of the Country responsible for the 1857 catastrophe. This
attitude turned all the British wrath and anger against the Muslims. Thus the Muslims were
subjected to all sorts of oppression and repression. Leading Muslims were hanged or sentenced
to jails. The properties of the Muslims were confiscated. They were denied important jobs
under the crown. Sir William Hunter’s book “The Indian Mussalmans” published in 1871 gives
a lot of information about the pitiable conditions of the Muslims of India after the 1857
upheaval. Although the observations of William Hunter are confined only to the Muslims of
Bengal yet the condition of the Muslims of rest of India was not different. The following
extracts from his book illustrate the conditions of the Muslims.

About the landowning classes of Eastern Bengal he writes, At Murshidabad a Mohammadan

Court still plays its force of mimic state and in every district the descendent of some line of
princes suddenly and proudly eats his heart out among roofless palaces and weed chocked
tanks……. if any statesman wishes to make a sensation in the House of Commons he has only to
truly narrate the history of these Mohammadan families of Bengal.

Then W. Hunter gives the position of the Muslims in the public services in these words,

“In the three grades of Assistant Government Engineers there were fourteen Hindus and not
one Muslim; among die apprentices there were four Hindus and two Englishmen and not one
Muslim. Among me Sub-Engineers there were 24 Hindus to one Muslim and in the upper
Subordinate Department there were 22 Hindus and again not one Muslim.” About the causes
of the whole state of affairs Hunter writes. “The truth is that when the country passed under
our rule the Muslims were the superior race and superior not only in the stoutness of me
heart and strength of arm but in power of political organization and the science of political
government.” Later on W. Hunter writes, “All sorts of employments great and small are
10
 being gradually snatched away from me Muhammadans and bestowed on men of other races
particularly the Hindus.”

According to another survey in 1871 out of a total of 2141 persons employed by the Bengal
Government there were only 92 Muslims, 711 Hindus and 1338 Europeans. Moreover it is
stated that between 1852 and 1862 out of 240 natives admitted as the pleaders of the High
Court there was only one Muslim.

An Indian socialist leader Asoka-Mehta in his book “The Communal Triangle” throws light
on the status enjoyed by Muslims in public offices.

“Not only were the Muslims economically crushed, educationally and socially also their
position was deliberately depressed by the government. In 1870 the Mohammadan pleaders
presented two memorials to the High Court pointing out that while closed holidays allowed to
the Christians were sixty two and those to Hindus fifty two, only eleven were granted to the
Muhammadans…… In the government offices, no Muhammadan holiday was sanctioned at
all.”

These details clearly demonstrate the awe-fully pitiable condition of the Muslims of India
after the war. The British were hostile to Muslims and took all steps to ensure that they could
not rise in future. In addition to these misfortunes the Muslims refused to learn Western
education and sciences. They were not prepared to part with their age old customs and
manners. The Muslims considered the acquisition of modern education as a step contrary to
their religion. They hated English language and decided to continue with Persian. But
unconsciously, in this manner they were slowly but surely leaving the field open for the
Hindus. This gradual decline in the status of the Muslims as a community was first diagnosed
and checked by Sir Syed Ahmed Khan.

Reasons behind the failure of the war:-

There were two major reasons behind the failure of the war. Lack of unity between the various
classes of people in the Indian subcontinent and the enormous strength of the British force. There
is no single reason why the war failed to fulfill its goals. The elaborated reasons are as follows.

11
Lack of unity:-
The landed aristocracy and some even fed information to the British regarding the Sepoy's
movement. In addition to that, some Landed aristocracy helped the British by providing carts,
horses and elephants. The British acknowledged this and presented titles such as Khan Sahib to
the Landed aristocracy. Seeing this middle class also sided the British. Moreover the lower class
and the peasantry remained apathetic, because, they were the ones who were affected the most
by the ongoing war, so they did not want any more trouble.
Strength of the British:-
Despite all other problems the Sepoy s did give all their effort, however, the British were just too
strong for them. Britain was one of the wealthiest nations at that time and its troops were highly
trained for skilled warfare. Moreover the availability of better armaments was another benefit for
the British over the Sepoy. The British also implemented its scheme of divide and conquer, by
daunting the landed aristocracy; it claimed that the uprising would spell a major threat to the
social hierarchy.
Both the reasons stated above contribute equally to the, to the massive failure of the Sepoys.
However. If there would be some unity between the different classes, it can be assumed that the
British could possibly be defeated
Q. 3 Do you think that separate electoral system paved the way towards separate home
land for Muslim in sub-continent. Evaluate your arguments in the light of Muslim demand
for separate electoral system in India.

Separate Electorate System was introduced by the morley-minto reforms of 1909, recognized
by the montagu-chelmsford report of 1919 and further extended by the Government of India Act
of 1935. All the elections to local bodies and Legislative Council from 1909 to 1946 were held
on the basis of the separate electorate system. The elections of 1954 in East Bengal were also
held under the separate electorate system. The constitution of Pakistan (1956) abolished this
system and introduced, instead, universal joint electorate system maintaining some minority
safeguards for the Hindus.

12
The system of separate electorate gained ground from a specific socio-political situation created
by the relations between the two largest communities of India, Hindus and Muslims. The
development of the two communities had been moving very unequally ever since the British
conquest. Since the Hindus received modern education and this had access to the opportunities
created by the colonial state, they established an absolute dominance over the political, social
and economic fields.
Since the mid-nineteenth century, the Hindu middle class had been developing political
aspirations including sharing power with the colonial government. Politically, this aspiration was
reflected in the formation of the All India National Congress in 1885 and other associations. It
had a deep political significance. The Congress, which was led by the Hindus by and large, tried
to bring all Indians under its nationalist banner. Sir Syed Ahmed Khan, the north Indian Muslim
leader, was of the opinion that joining the Congress, on the part of the Muslims, was no solution
to the backwardness of the Indian Muslims. He maintained that the Indian Muslims should take
to English education, become loyal to the British and stay away from the nationalist politics of
the Congress. This is what his followers called the Aligarh Movement.
While the Viceroy Lord Minto announced his eagerness to introduce responsible government in
India, a deputation of Muslim leaders headed by Aga Khan met him at Simla and ventilated their
demand for safeguarding the Muslim interests by arranging community representation based on
separate electorate until the Muslims were sufficiently advanced for participating in politics with
the Hindus on equal footing. To the viceroy, the demand sounded reasonable and thus he assured
them his support to the proposal. Eventually, the Morley-Minto Reforms (1909) provided for the
separate electorate system for the Muslims.
The introduction of separate electorate system was interpreted by the Congress as a colonial
device to constrict the normal growth of Indian nationalism. The Congress agitation to revoke
this system did not yield any positive result. In the mean time, the political scenario began to
take a new shift from 1912. The annulment of the partition of Bengal (1912) alienated the
Muslims and forced them to join the agitation politics of the Congress. To bring the Muslims to
the nationalist fold, the Congress changed its strategy and finally recognized the separate
electorate system by signing a covenant with the Muslim League at Luck now in 1916. The

13
incorporation of the separate electorate into the India Act of 1919 was thus not opposed by the
Congress though it rejected the constitution on some other grounds.
The Simon commission (1927), which was appointed to inquire into the working of the
constitution of 1919 and suggest ways and means for further constitutional reforms,
recommended not only to preserve the separate electorate system but also to extend it to other
depressed communities and castes. The constitution of 1935 thus introduced separate electorate
for the Muslims and scheduled castes. Of the total 250 seats of Bengal Legislative Assembly,
117 seats were kept reserved for the Muslims, and 20% of the rest of the seats were reserved for
the Scheduled Castes. Accordingly, the general elections of 1937 were held on the basis of the
extended separate electorates. The Muslim league and the krishak praja party could form the
coalition government in 1937 because of the separate electorate system. This system
undoubtedly further widened the process of separatism between the two communities, and
outcome was the Lahore resolution (1940) which enunciated a separate homeland for the
Muslims on the basis of two-nation theory, a doctrine which paved the way to Pakistan in 1947.
The separate electorate system was abolished under the Pakistan Constitution of 1956.

Why did the Muslims of Indo-Pak subcontinent demand a separate homeland for
themselves:-

Introduction:-

Hindus and Muslims had lived peacefully together in India for centuries, but after the British
invasion in South Asia and their undue support to Hindus, life became very difficult for Indian
Muslims. In fact, the Muslims were a separate nation who always adhered to their religious
identity. The British and the Hindus in spite of their great efforts could not put a wedge into the
Muslim unity and their love for the national character. The creation of Pakistan owes much to
this feeling of adherence to their national image and religious identity.

14
The Muslims of Indo Pak Sub Continent demanded a separate homeland on the following
grounds.

1. Desire to establish an Islamic State

Islam is a complete code of life for the Muslims and they are eager to implement it in their
personal and collective life. Islamic code of Life or Islamic Ideology cannot be implemented
until a pure Islamic Society free from all other unIslamic influences is established. The desire to
establish an Islamic State was also one of the factors to demand a separate homeland.

2. Two Nation Theory

The Two Nation Theory played an important role for demanding a separate homeland according
to which Hindus and Muslims are the two nations and therefore they cannot live together. Quaid-
e-Azam once said,
Hindus and Muslims though living in the same towns and villages had never been blended into
one nation. They were always two separate entities.
So the Muslims should have a separate State where they could lead their individual and
collective life in accordance with the Islamic principles.
3. Historical Collusion

Hindu and Muslim historical collusion started when Muhammad Bin Qasim, defeating Raja
Dahir, founded Islamic government in the subcontinent. Many battles were fought between
Hindus and Muslims under Muslim Rule. The historical collusion continued also during the
British Regime. Hindus, cooperating with British, tried to diminish Muslim culture and their way
of life but they remained futile. The future of Muslims was obvious in such condition; therefore
they decided to demand for the separate homeland.

15
4. Hindus and British

Since the British snatched power from Muslims, they were doubtful about the faithfulness of
Muslims. So, Hindus and British joined hands to destroy the Muslims morally, socially,
economically and politically. They reserved all higher civil, judicial and military appointments
for British only while Muslims were debarred from all official positions. The Islamic educational
system was replaced by British one. Then Muslims were forced to change their religion to
Christianity and were compelled to send their children to co educational institutes and abandon
purdha. This was the reason that Muslims became fed up with both British and Hindus and
decided to have a separate homeland.

5. British Parliamentary System

Indian National Congress demanded the British Parliamentary system of government in India
which meant majority rule. The implementation of this simply meant the Hindus slavery of
Muslims since they were in majority. This was the reason that Muslims stressed on separate
electorates and got it accepted. Separate electorate was the first brick in the foundation of
demand for separate homeland.

6. Shuddi and Sangathan Movement

Hindu Muslim Unity evaporated in the year after the Khilafat Movement and Hindu Muslim
Riots began. The poison of differences between the two nations aggravated with the passage of
time. The differences reached to the peak when Shuddhi and Sangathan movements began. The
Shuddhi Movement aimed at the mass conversion of certain backward groups of Muslims into
Hindus by force whereas the Sangathan Programme sought to organize the Hindus into a
Militant force to flight with the Muslims.

16
7. Activities of Maha Sabha

Maha Sabha was established in 1900. It was a non political party until the Shuddhi and
Sangathan Movement started. These movements motivated Maha Sabha to be involved in
politics. It proved to be the worst enemy of Muslims. The party declared Muslims as outsiders
and said that Muslims have no relation with India. If they want to leave it then they could leave it
happily but if they want to leave it then they could leave it happily but if they want to live in
India, they will have to accept Hindu Mut. So it was impossible for Hindus and Muslims to live
in a country together.

8. Protection of Urdu Language

Urdu was considered to be the language of Muslims in the subcontinent. In 1867, the Hindu-
Urdu controversy began with some outstanding Hindus of Banaras demanding replacements of
Urdu by Hindi as the court language. The supporters of Hindi claimed for it a national status
whereas the Muslims hotly denied it. As the controversy spread, the two languages became more
and more exclusive. Muslims got very disappointed when in April 1900 UP Governor Sir
Antony Mac Donnell gave Hindi the status of National language with Urdu. That’s why Muslims
felt the need to set a political party. Then after a detailed discussion at last All India Muslim
League was established in 1906. Maulvi Abdul Haque (1870-1961) has rightly said, Urdu
Language placed the first brick in the foundation of Pakistan. It is a reality that it was one of the
major reasons for demanding a separate country.

9. Protection of Muslim Culture

Hindus, with the consent of British during the Congress Ministries, burnt and looted the
properties and houses of Muslims, Moreover, the signs of Muslims, past glory were damaged.
Educational Syllabus was changed. Urdu was replaced by Hindi and the Muslim students were

17
forced to worship statues of Gandhi in their schools. The Muslims of India, therefore, decided
that the Muslim culture could be protected in a free and separate Muslim State.

10. Narrow mindedness of Hindus

Hindu is a narrow-minded nation who does not believe the philosophy of equality. They
considers themselves superior and used to call Muslims ‘Maleech’ (impure). There was no
concept of eating and drinding together. Furthermore Muslims were not allowed to touch the
food items of Hindus. There was only way out for the Muslims to demand a separate homeland.

11. Economic Hardships

During the period of British Government, Hindus practically threw out Muslims from the fields
of trade and industry. All the business, industrial, and services opportunities were occupied by
Hindus and some degraded jobs were left for the Muslims. Muslims of India became the political
slave of British and economic slave of Hindus. To come out from this vicious circle, at last,
Muslims decided to demand for a separate homeland.

12. Congress Ministries

During the period of Congress Ministries (1937-1939). Hindus did worst possible injustice with
Muslims. The Hindu-Muslim riots were usual during the Congress rule. Band-e-Mataram, three
coloured flag and statue of Gandhi were introduced at national level. Urdu was replaced by
Hindi and slaughtering cow was banned. Muslim leaders showed their resentment before Gandhi
and Jawahar lal Nehru. Gandhi showed his helpless while Nehru plainly and openly said that
there were only two nations in India, Congress and British and the rest should follow them. After
this statement, nothing for left for Muslims but to present Pakistan Resolution in 1940.

18
Conclusion
On the basis of above mentioned factors and bitter attitude of British and Congress the Muslims
apprehended that they would lose their identity if they remained a part of Hindu society.
Therefore they quitted Congress and demanded separate land on the ground that they were
different nation from Hindus. According to Quaid-e-Azam
The Muslims demanded Pakistan were they can rule in accordance with their own system of life,
their cultural development, their traditions and Islamic law.

Q. 4 Discuss the impacts of Khilafat Movement on Hindu-Muslims relations in India.

The Lucknow pact showed that it was possible for middle-class, English-educated Muslims and
Hindus to arrive at an amicable settlement on Hindu-Muslim constitutional and political
problems. This unity reached its climax during the Khilafat and the Non-Cooperation
Movements.

After World War I, the Ottoman Empire faced dismemberment. Under the leadership of the Ali
Brothers, Maulana Muhammad Ali and Maulana Shaukat Ali, the Muslims of South Asia
19
launched the historic Khilafat Movement to try and save it. Mohandas Karam Chand Gandhi
linked the issue of Swaraj with the Khilafat issue to associate Hindus with the movement. The
ensuing movement was the first countrywide popular movement.

The Muslims of India had a strong feeling of identity with the world community of Islam. They
had seen the decline in the political fortunes of Islam as the European powers conquered the
Muslim lands one after the other. The Anglo-Russian convention of 1908 had reduced their next-
door neighbor Iran to a mere dependency. Afghanistan also suffered as it was a bone of
contention between Russia and Britain, and was now under the latter's sphere of influence.

The general impression among the Muslims of India was that the western powers were waging a
war against Islam throughout the world in order to rob it of all its power and influence. The
Ottoman Empire was the only Muslim power that had maintained a semblance of authority and
the Muslims of India wanted to save the Islamic political power from extinction.

As an institution, the Khilafat had a checkered past. It had originally migrated from Medina to
Damascus and from Damascus to Baghdad. For sometime it was located in Egypt, then it fell to
the lot of Turkey, very much as a prize.

The Turkish Sultans had claimed to be the caliphs of the Muslim world. As long as the Mughal
Empire had been in existence, the Muslims of India had not recognized their claim. At this
critical juncture, when the Muslims of the Sub-continent had no sovereign ruler of their own,
they began to see the necessity of recognizing the Sultan of Turkey as their caliph. Tipu Sultan
was the first Indian Muslim who, having been frustrated in his attempts to gain recognition from
the Mughal had turned to the Sultan of Turkey to establish a legal right to his throne.

The European powers had played a leading role in reducing the might of Turkey in Europe to
Eastern Thrace, Constantinople and the straits in the Balkan Wars (1912-13). To seek revenge,
the Turks decided to side with the Germans against the Allied Forces. The Indian Muslims
supported this decision.

20
Muhammad Ali argued that for Muslims to accept mandates over Iraq, Syria and Palestine would
amount to a total disregard of the wishes of the Holy Prophet (S. A. W.). Thus the Muslims of

India launched the Tehrik-i-Khilafat. The objectives were as follows:

• To maintain the Turkish Caliphate.

• To protect the holy places of the Muslims.
• To maintain the unity of the Ottoman Empire.

There was absolute unanimity among the Indian Muslims. Though separated from Turkey by
thousands of miles, they were determined to fight Turkey's battle from India.

Rioting started in Amritsar on April 10, 1919. On April 13, 1919, a crowd assembled at the
Jalianwala Bagh. These protestors were unaware of a ban that had just been imposed by the
martial law administrators on public meetings. Sir Michael O'Duiyer opened fire on the crowd,
resulting in 379 dead and 1,200 wounded. This incident is known as the Jalianwala Bagh
Tragedy.

When the terms of the Treaty of Serves were announced in 1920, it caused deep resentment
among the Muslims. They felt betrayed. In June 1920, 90 influential Muslims wrote to Lord
Chelmsford, the Viceroy, informing him of their intent to start a non-cooperation movement
against the government from August, until the terms of the treaty with Turkey were revised.

But this was to no avail as the British Prime Minister Lloyd George was an implacable enemy of
Turkey and by association, of the Indian Khilafat Movement. When the Indian Khilafat
deputation visited England in 1920 to put their views before the British Government, he
ignored them and the deputation met with failure.

A tragic offshoot of the Khilafat Movement was the Hijrat Movement proposed by Jamiyat-al-
Ulema-i-Hind. When a land is not safe for Islam, a Muslim has two options; Jihad or Hijrat.

21
Around 925 eminent Muslims signed this fatwa. According to one version, the idea of Hijrat was
originated from Maulana Abul Kalam Azad.

In the North West Frontier Province and Sindh, hundreds of families sold their land and property
and departed in the direction of the Khyber Pass, to migrate to Afghanistan, a brotherly
independent Muslim state. In the month of August alone, some 18,000 Indian Muslims migrated
to Afghanistan. Afghanistan, a poor country, was unable to absorb so large an influx of
population and sealed its borders. It is difficult to establish who was responsible for misleading
such a large number of Muslims.

Another tragic event was the Moplah Uprising. In mid of August 1921, agrarian riots broke out
in Nilambur. The Moplah peasants revolted against the Hindu landlord's oppressive policies,
which are in alliance with the British. The Hindu landlords redistributed their lands and the
Moplahs, who had been suffering, rose in revolt. A pitched battle between the British regiment
and the Moplahs killed several Europeans. Four thousand Moplahs were killed in action and tens
of thousands were injured.

Then there was the notorious Moplah Train Tragedy. Around a hundred prisoners, confined in a
closed and almost airtight goods van, were transported by rail. When the door was opened, 66
Moplahs were found suffocated to death and the remaining 34 were on the verge of collapse.

All this was followed by Hindu-Muslim communal clashes, particularly in Multan and Bengal in
September 1922. The Sanghattan and Shuddi movements were offshoots of these communal
rioting, which were anti-Muslim and aimed at Hindu revivalism.

Besides other events, the arrest of the Ali brothers in September 1921 gave a severe blow to the
Khilafat Movement. Gandhi, who was using this movement to accelerate India's advance
towards Swaraj, also withdrew his support for the Muslim cause in the aftermath of the Chauri
Chaura incident in February 1922. Using the excuse that the national volunteers were responsible
for the murder of 21 policemen, thus leading to violence, he called off the whole movement.

22
In 1924, Turks under Mustafa Kamal were consolidating their position in Turkey. They
announced an end to the Khilafat. It was a great blow to Indian Khilafatists who had been
campaigning on behalf of Turkey and Khilafat. Gradually the enthusiasm of the people died
down and the Khilafat Conference and Committee developed new interests and in a short time
nothing but their name remained.

Although the Khilafat Movement failed to achieve its declared objectives, it carried political
awakening to large masses of Muslims. It was during the Khilafat days that representatives of
Indian Muslims came into contact with eminent personages from other Muslims countries to
save the semblance of unity in the world of Islam.

The Khilafat Movement was an asset for the struggle of Pakistan. It made clear to the Indian
Muslims to trust neither the British nor the Hindus, but to look to their own strengths for self-
preservation.

Q. 5 Discuss and analyze the recommendations made by Simon Commission. Explain

Congress and Muslims League’s reaction on it.

The Commission was effectively boycotted by all important elements of Indian political opinion.
Nevertheless, the members worked hard on its two volume report. As noted above, the first
volume was a masterly review of the situation in India and retains its value, as a historical
document, to this day.

The Commission’s recommendations were:-

Future Advance - The first principle which we would lay down is that the new constitution
should, as far as possible, contain within itself provision for its own development. It should not
lay down too rigid and uniform a plan, but should allow for natural growth and diversity.
23
Constitutional progress should be the outcome of practical experience. Where further legislation
is required, it should result from the needs of the time, not from the arbitrary demands of a fixed
time-table. The constitution,while contemplating and conforming to an ultimate objective,
should not attempt to lay down the length or the number of the stages of the journey…. It has
been a characteristic of the evolution of responsible government in other parts of the British
Empire that the details of the constitution have not been exhaustively defined in statutory
language. On the contrary, the constitutions of the self-governing parts of the British Empire
have developed as the result of natural growth, and progress has depended not so much on
changes made at intervals in the language of an Act of Parliament, as on the development of
conventions, and on the terms of instructions issued from time to time to the Crown's
representative. The Preamble to the Government of India Act declares that progress in giving
effect to the policy of the progressive realisation of responsible government in British India can
only be achieved by successive stages; but there is no reason why the length of these successive
stages should be defined in advance, or why every stage should be marked by a commission of
enquiry." (Simon Report vol. 2 p.5)

Almost Responsible Government at the Provincial Level –

Dyarchy should be scrapped and Ministers responsible to the Legislature would be entrusted
with all provincial areas of responsibility. However, safeguards were considered necessary in
areas such as the maintenance of peace and tranquility and the protection of the legitimate
interest of the minorities. These safeguards would be provided, mainly, by the grant of special
powers to the Governor.

Federation

The Report considered that a formally federal union, including both British India and the
Princely States, was the only long-term solution for a united, autonomous India.

Immediate Recommendations at the Centre

24
to help the growth of political consciousness in the people, the franchise should be extended; and
the Legislature enlarged. Otherwise, no substantial change was recommended in the Centre. The
Report strongly opposed the introduction of Dyarchy at the Centre. It should be noted that Simon
set great store on having a unanimous report. This could only be done if he recommended no
change at the centre as: the diehards were opposed to any Indian responsibility at the Centre: the
Conservative leadership would oppose any responsibility at the Centre which did not build in
conservative-pro-British control (as they tried to do in the Government of India Act 1935; and,
Labour would oppose the type of gerrymandering at the Centre necessary to meet the
requirements of the Conservative leadership.

Impact of the Simon Commission

The appointment of the “all-white” Simon Commission reinvigorated Indian Nationalism to a

high pith of activity which would have a major impact throughout the remaining years of the
British Raj. This led, in short order, to the boycott of the Commission the development of the all-
party Nehru Report

1. The Indian Round Table Conferences 1931-1933 were an attempt to undo the damage caused
by the mishandling of the appointment of the Commission;

When the Simon recommendations are compared to the Government of India Act 1935 the
following may be noted.

2. At the provincial level Simon’s recommendations were taken over by the Act but with even
more stringent safeguards – i.e. even less true responsible government.

3. At the Centre, contrary to Simon’s recommendations, the Act authorized the formation of an
utterly unworkable federation (see Government) that never came into being. Thus the Centre
remained governed by Government of India Act 1919.

4. Clement Attlee got his education on India on the Commission and both he and Simon were involved
in developing Indian policy during the Second World War and Attlee header the labour Government
that Granted India independence in 1947.

25
26