Home
Publications
Search
Register
Log inThank GOD for the caliph
2 posters
Page 1 of 1
Thank GOD for the caliph
by Rishi Wed May 21, 2014 12:48 pm
When the East India Company gained political power in the subcontinent and gradually seized most of the states, the rulers who wanted to retain their independence felt threatened. After losing all hope of any support coming from the Mughal state; Tipu Sultan of Mysore (d.1799) wrote a letter to the Ottoman caliph for help. Instead of extending help, the caliph betrayed Tipu Sultan by handing over the letter to the British government.
In 1857, after the revolt against the British rule, the caliph exhorted the Muslims of the subcontinent to support the British rule instead of fighting against them.
The leaders of the Muslim community in the subcontinent were not aware of the dismal and degenerated status of the caliph and the decline of the Ottoman Empire. Neither were they aware of the decadent situation of Afghanistan, Iran and other Muslim countries which were in no position to help them. Oblivious, the Muslims of the subcontinent launched a movement in favour of the caliph who was eventually defeated in World War 1. Ironically, the new political power under Mustafa Kamal threatened to abolish the institution which had lost both its utility and significance.
The Khilafat movement in the subcontinent was merely the outcome of the sense of insecurity and instability of the Muslims of the subcontinent who wanted to save and retain a religious symbol which they believed would provide them with a sense of identity. Interestingly, the British government was in favour of empowering the caliph to use him to obtain a favourable treaty. Therefore, the British government supported the Khilafat movement in the subcontinent.
When in 1924 the Khilafat was abolished by the new Turkish government, the whole movement collapsed. The Muslims of the subcontinent realised they had wasted their energy and resources for a lost cause and had only increased the influence of the ulema in politics.
The outcome of the Khilafat movement was a fatwa issued by Maulana Azad and Maulana Abdul Bari of Farangi Mahal; advising the Muslims that, as the subcontinent had become Dar-ul-Harb or the Abode of War, it was a religious duty of the Muslims to migrate from the subcontinent. Many Muslim families sold their properties and migrated to Afghanistan where they were not welcomed. After much insult and humiliation, they returned to the subcontinent to find that they had lost more than they had thought.
The question arising here is that why did the Muslims of the subcontinent look outside for help instead of relying on their own resources? Perhaps, the reason for this outlook was their peculiar historical understanding. Since they begin their history from 711AD, when Muhammad Bin Qasim conquered Sindh, they disconnect their relations with the Indian past and link their historical narrative with an Islamic past. The result of this historical consciousness is that they tend to look outside the subcontinent for their identity and involve themselves in all issues prevailing in the Muslim world.
This trend is followed to the present day. Religious extremists are imported and accepted; the result of which is sectarianism which has destroyed religious tolerance. The concept of Wahabism imported through foreign funding has created so many conflicts in our society, that it now threatens our stability as a country.
http://www.dawn.com/news/1106525/past-present-identity-cri-ses
In 1857, after the revolt against the British rule, the caliph exhorted the Muslims of the subcontinent to support the British rule instead of fighting against them.
The leaders of the Muslim community in the subcontinent were not aware of the dismal and degenerated status of the caliph and the decline of the Ottoman Empire. Neither were they aware of the decadent situation of Afghanistan, Iran and other Muslim countries which were in no position to help them. Oblivious, the Muslims of the subcontinent launched a movement in favour of the caliph who was eventually defeated in World War 1. Ironically, the new political power under Mustafa Kamal threatened to abolish the institution which had lost both its utility and significance.
The Khilafat movement in the subcontinent was merely the outcome of the sense of insecurity and instability of the Muslims of the subcontinent who wanted to save and retain a religious symbol which they believed would provide them with a sense of identity. Interestingly, the British government was in favour of empowering the caliph to use him to obtain a favourable treaty. Therefore, the British government supported the Khilafat movement in the subcontinent.
When in 1924 the Khilafat was abolished by the new Turkish government, the whole movement collapsed. The Muslims of the subcontinent realised they had wasted their energy and resources for a lost cause and had only increased the influence of the ulema in politics.
The outcome of the Khilafat movement was a fatwa issued by Maulana Azad and Maulana Abdul Bari of Farangi Mahal; advising the Muslims that, as the subcontinent had become Dar-ul-Harb or the Abode of War, it was a religious duty of the Muslims to migrate from the subcontinent. Many Muslim families sold their properties and migrated to Afghanistan where they were not welcomed. After much insult and humiliation, they returned to the subcontinent to find that they had lost more than they had thought.
The question arising here is that why did the Muslims of the subcontinent look outside for help instead of relying on their own resources? Perhaps, the reason for this outlook was their peculiar historical understanding. Since they begin their history from 711AD, when Muhammad Bin Qasim conquered Sindh, they disconnect their relations with the Indian past and link their historical narrative with an Islamic past. The result of this historical consciousness is that they tend to look outside the subcontinent for their identity and involve themselves in all issues prevailing in the Muslim world.
This trend is followed to the present day. Religious extremists are imported and accepted; the result of which is sectarianism which has destroyed religious tolerance. The concept of Wahabism imported through foreign funding has created so many conflicts in our society, that it now threatens our stability as a country.
http://www.dawn.com/news/1106525/past-present-identity-cri-ses
Rishi- Posts : 5129
Join date : 2011-09-02
Re: Thank GOD for the caliph
by Idéfix Wed May 21, 2014 1:29 pm
The caliph was allied with the British in the Crimean War that occurred before the War of 1857. It was the horrible British losses in Crimea, which were witnessed by the Muslim lawyer of Hindu leader Nana Saheb, that helped catalyze the revolt.Rishi wrote:In 1857, after the revolt against the British rule, the caliph exhorted the Muslims of the subcontinent to support the British rule instead of fighting against them.
Idéfix- Posts : 8808
Join date : 2012-04-26
Location : Berkeley, CA
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum