Colonial historians and scholars often claim that the Indian Freedom Movement was a disjointed movement with no nationalistic feeling among the people participating in it. This belief, that Indians fought against the British for local communal reasons without any coherence, has been further propagated by the Indian historians as well, after the independence. Often, we are made to believe that Muslims fought to secure their religion or Caliphate while Hindus to protect regressive social institutions. Similarly, urban elite, peasantry, tribal, and others have their own narrow interests in fighting against the British.The idea may be true and open to debate, but the fact that there was a coherence among different groups within India while fighting against the British is an undeniable fact.
During the early 19th century, the British decided to partition Bengal. Hindus and Muslims, together, rose up against the decision which based itself upon religious segregation. India in general, and Bengal in particular, adopted the Swadeshi campaign to oppose this decision. In 1905 Bengal got divided, agitating the youth. It must be noted that the present Bihar was part of Bengal at the time. The youth, led by people like Barin Ghosh, started adopting militant methods to oppose the British.
At the same time, in Champaran of Bengal (now, in Bihar) indigo planters led by Sheikh Gulab started a non-cooperation agitation against the British indigo planters. Gulab defied the tinkathia system, where indigo had to be planted on the best portions of land, on his 60 bigha land which was near Sathi factory in Champaran. It was 1907 & Champaran was part of Muzaffarpur commissionerate.
More and more peasants joined Gulab in his movement and another Sital Ray rose as another prominent leader. Planter’s Association had their own army called Bihar Light Horse, famous for its cruelties over peasants. In 1907, the government passed an order appointing Gulab and his comrades as the special constables in police. Gulab defied this appointment and did not join. Police arrested him under the Special Police Act, 1861.
Sentence of Gulab was reversed later by Kolkata Court in March, 1908.
Next month, in Muzaffarpur a judge, Kingsford, was transferred from Kolkata. Champaran lied under his jurisdiction. Indians were already angry with the judge for his anti Indian attitude and there was this apprehension that he had been brought to crush the anti British peasant movement. British reports were already pointing towards a collaboration between Kolkata based Bengali revolutionaries and the peasant movement of Champaran.
The arrest of Sheikh Gulab had stirred the local emotions and this transfer of Kingsford acted as a catalyst.
Within a few days, Khudiram Bose, a young boy of 17, and Prafulla Chaki, both of them Bengali tried to assassinate Kingsford with a bomb. Accidentally, they killed two English women.
Khudiram Bose was hanged till death in August, 1908.
Khudiram’s martyrdom instilled a new spirit in Sheikh Gulab. In September, 1908, he organized more peasants at Vijayadashami Mela in Bettiah, Champaran. Now, peasants were openly defying the planters and attacking them. On 16 October, 1908, peasants attacked the Parsa Indigo factory. Government reacted brutally. Sital Ray was arrested along with more than two hundred peasants.
In the Legislative Assembly of Calcutta, it was argued that Bengali and Bihari have worked in unison against the British in Champaran during 1907 – 1908. Further reports that a Burkha clad Muslim woman provided shelter and help to Khudiram Bose during his attempt on Kingsford’s life also point towards an association between Sheikh Gulab’s movement and Bengal revolutionaries. P.C Roy, implicitly, contends that the arrest and case against Sheikh Gulab may be one of the reasons that Khudiram Bose attacked Kingsford in Muzaffarpur.
(Writer is a well known historian)
source: http://www.heritagetimes.in / Heritage Times / Home> Bihar> Freedom Fighters / by Saquib Salim / July 17th, 2020
Allah Baksh Sumroo, a premier of Sindh province—equivalent to the current post of a chief minister—was a committed patriot, whom the Muslim League hated to the extreme. Sumroo’s story directly challenges the ongoing communal and divisive rhetoric where Muslims are projected as a comprador class that was wholeheartedly behind the Muslim League’s two-nation theory.
______________________________
The narrative that all Muslims got together to seek India’s partition on the basis of the two-nation theory is now a few decades old. It has acquired salience again, with some hyperventilating neo-nationalists reiterating that all Muslims are traitors as they joined Muhammad Ali Jinnah and his Muslim League to divide India. These people forget that a large number of Muslims, who consciously decided to stay back, had a choice—either to leave and be Pakistanis or stay back in India and choose their homeland. Many opted for the latter. A similar choice was made by many Hindus who decided to stay back in Pakistan. However, staying back in a democratic, secular and plural India was different from opting for a regressive and sectarian Islamist Pakistan. The future of both, who stayed behind, has proved that so tellingly.
Unfortunate political developments and the prevalent communal rhetoric in India has forced me to go back to the history afresh. There is a concerted campaign to malign all Indian Muslims as leftover Pakistanis, who are enemies within the country; the narrative is that these fifth columnists should be shunted out to Pakistan in the so-called national interest. But merely indicting all Muslims for the sake of petty majoritarian politics goes against the facts of history.
We are a nation obsessed with history, more often concerned with correcting the presumed historical wrongs than learning anything from the past. With this compulsive preoccupation, some of us live perpetually in the past. Even so, most people believe that Maulana Azad, an Independence-era leader, fought a lone battle for a united India, while a majority of Indian Muslims vouched for Muhammad Ali Jinnah, the founder of Pakistan, and his Muslim League. This has no factual basis and any extent of living in the past will help unravel actual facts.
To put the record straight, some unsung heroes from our recent history should be talked about. There are many historical characters that were crucial to countering the politics of hate and division of the country around the time of partition. Among them was Allah Baksh Sumroo, who served as a premier of the Sindh province—equivalent to the current post of a chief minister—for two terms between 1938 and 1942. Sumroo was a committed patriot, whom the Muslim League hated to the extreme. He belonged to a feudal Sindhi family but was known for a frugal living and commitment to democratic values. Sumroo wore khadi even as a young man of twenty. We hear about using flags as a power symbol so often these days, but he never used a flag on his official car even in those feudal and colonial times.
What is important to remember today is his commitment to undivided India. Sumroo emerged as a major challenge to the divisive politics of communalists of all hues, particularly the Muslim League. Azad was undoubtedly a national face, espousing composite nationalism, but he actually derived strength from such regional but powerful voices like Sumroo.
To go into the details of his massive anti-Muslim League politics would require a much longer discussion. Let me just refer to one of the most important episodes in the history of our sad partition of the country. The Muslim League passed a resolution recommending the creation of an independent state of Muslims on 23 March 1940 at Lahore. Soon, Sumroo organised a huge conference of patriotic Muslims between 27 and 30 April 1940 in Delhi, called the Azad Muslim Conference. According to some estimates, there were not less than seventy-five thousand people who gathered from all over India to condemn the Muslim League for its divisive politics.
Most of these people came from a large number of political and social organisations, largely representing the backward and artisanal sections of the Muslim society. This representation at the conference was an indicator that the Muslim League spoke for the ashraf, or the privileged sections of the Muslim society while the majority of Muslims—the ajlaf, or the backward sections—remained almost untouched by the League’s rhetoric. The British identified a collaborative section of the Muslim community, helped in forming the Muslim League but this section largely represented the affluent—the zamindars, and business and professional classes. The leadership that emerged in the League had little clue to the highly differentiated Muslim society they claimed to represent. Azad could see this early. Referring to Indian Muslims at the time, he wrote in his weekly Urdu language newspaper, Al Hilal, in 1912:
The most unfortunate part of their life is that they have a section of elite who are in the forefront and leading them. Those are the self-proclaimed leaders of the community. They have put the crown on their own head, with their own hands, instead of the masses doing the same. They indulged in all sorts of exhibitionism of power and the worst is show of their wealth. And by so doing they had converted the millat [class] of downtrodden men in their community as their slaves and camp followers. And now if anyone tries to question their validity as leaders or defy them, they are successfully suppressed and annihilated by those selfish leaders; as they have the power of money.
Sumroo’s presidential address at the Azad Muslim Conference in April 1940 also exposed the misplaced arguments of the League, particularly in the name of religion and culture. All through his speech he spoke extensively on the shared history and heritage, stressed on the compositeness of Indian nation and nationalism and emphasised that the compact between diverse communities cannot be severed. Strongly condemning the two-nation theory exponents, The Sunday Statesman of 28 April 1940 quoted him saying in his speech:
A majority of the 90,000,000 Indian Muslims who are descendants of the earlier inhabitants of India are in no sense other than the sons of the soil with the Dravidian and the Aryan and have as much right to be reckoned among the earliest settlers of this common land. The nationals of different countries cannot divest themselves of their nationality merely by embracing one or another faith. In its universal sweep Islam, the faith, can run in and out of as many nationalities and regional cultures as may be found in world.
He underlined the long history of shared heritage of Hindus and Muslims, as mentioned in a Hindustan Times report on the same day:
It is a vicious fallacy for Hindu, Muslim and other inhabitants of India to arrogate to themselves an exclusively proprietary right over either the whole or any particular part of India. The country as an indivisible whole and as one federated and composite unit belongs to all the inhabitants of the country alike and is as much the inalienable and imprescriptible heritage of the Indian Muslim as of other Indians.
Sumroo made these detailed references to the shared history and intermixing of Hindu and Muslim cultures over the centuries to counter both the League as well as those who were arguing for Hindutva majoritarianism. He was aware, like Azad, of the forces which threatened the future of united composite India. Sumroo needs to be talked about today more seriously to counter all those who threaten fellow Muslim citizens to go to Pakistan.
In his address, Sumroo provided a counter for another argument put forth by neo-nationalists today—that Muslims asked for Pakistan and once it was granted by dividing the country, all of them should have moved there. This would have settled the issue forever. All those who make such insinuations today need to know what popular Muslim leaders like Sumroo said of the creation of Pakistan:
It was based on false understanding that India is inhabited by two nations, Hindu and Muslim. It is much more to the point to say that all Indian Mussalmans are proud to be Indian nationals and they are equally proud that their spiritual level and creedal realm is Islam. As Indian nationals—Muslims and Hindus and others, inhabit the land and share every inch of the motherland and all its material and cultural treasures alike according to the measures of their just and fair rights and requirements as the proud sons of the soil.
Azad, too, sent a message of support to the Azad Muslim conference as he was not able to attend it. He expressed his solidarity with the conference and wished that the deliberations would be fruitful for the great cause of the freedom of the country and the Muslims.
This fight for composite and inclusive Indian nationalism, which looks so alarming and threatening today, is more than few decades old. Azad and Sumroo challenged these regressive and divisive forces in the 1930s and 1940s. They almost took the battle to the enemy’s camp by organising a huge conference in Delhi, which unnerved the Muslim League leadership. Sumroo was assassinated in 1943. It was suspected to be the League’s handiwork.
We can comprehend his stature and the sense of loss on his death by reading some of the reactions in contemporary press and also the pain expressed by several nationalist leaders. The Hindustan Times described him as follows:
… finest of Sindhis, one of the truest of Musalmans, one of the noblest sons of India who loved his peasants for he loved the land; and he used to wear khaddar even in the twenties, for he loved the poor. Both the Hindus and Muslims looked up to him as a leader … He had an all-India mind and in the midst of division and strife, pinned his faith on an independent united India, and dreamt the dream of the united State of Asia in the years to come …
His murder was seen as a national calamity by several papers. The Amrita Bazar Patrika called him “one of the most vigorous personalities, endowed with a high sense of duty and rare courage of conviction, who easily commanded the respect and admiration of all, even of those who differed from him on some or the other public questions.” Commenting on his death, the newspaper added, “A life so full of promise has been cut short. And India is much poorer today by the death of the young man of 42 whose sturdy patriotism and devotion to duty would be cherished long after the present unhappy situation has ended and India has come into her own.”
The right wing in India often says that Subhas Chandra Bose, a leader of the anticolonial struggle, did not find his rightful place in Indian history. I find it politically motivated and not really a sincere observation. It is people like Sumroo, who seem to be lost in our history records, even in the writings of the so-called liberal and Marxist historians, except for a chapter in a book by Shamshul Islam titled Muslims Against Partition of India.
Another prominent Muslim voice from the past, who can rightfully represent our composite nationalist ethos is Saifuddin Kitchlew, a Kashmiri freedom fighter whose family moved to Punjab. It was his arrest along with Dr Satyapal, a political leader, that triggered the protests leading to the Jallianwala Bagh massacre in 1919. Most of us are oblivious to his contributions as well. Kitchlew had also mourned the loss of Sumroo saying:
At this critical period of the freedom movement in the country the death of a man like Mr Allah Baksh is a thundering blow to the forces of nationalism. Mr Allah Baksh was a thorough going nationalist. Mr Allah Baksh is dead but his work will remain.
It is necessary to know about such men and women from our past as their profiles directly challenge the ongoing communal and divisive rhetoric where Muslims are projected as a comprador class that was wholeheartedly behind the League’s two-nation theory. Azad was surely the prime political figure, an Islamic scholar, who stressed on the composite nationalism. However, he was not fighting a lone battle against the Muslim League, as Jinnah wanted the British and the Muslims to believe. He was hated and derided as a show boy of the Congress party, precisely to show that most of the other Muslims and their leaders were with the idea of Pakistan. This falsehood needs to be exposed, particularly in the midst of the ongoing divisive politics.
S IRFAN HABIB is a historian and author. He was earlier the Maulana Azad Chair at the National University of Educational Planning and Administration, New Delhi.
source: http://www.caravanmagazine.in / The Caravan / Home> Commentary – History / by S Irfan Habib / July 28th, 2020
An old woman wearing green clothes, which fully covered her body (Burqa), carrying sword and gun, and riding a horse used to exhort the residents of Delhi to fight against the British forces during the summers of 1857. This old woman used to gather civilians behind her and attack the British forces stationed at ridge and Kashmiri Gate. People could never know her whereabouts. Out of nowhere, she used to appear on a horse and after the attack would disappear.
In a letter dated, 29th July, 1857, Lieutenant Hudson wrote to Deputy Commissioner of Ambala that this Muslim woman was very dangerous. The woman was weird and incited the Delhites to revolt against the British. She led the people into the skirmishes and was an able commander, who could manage untrained civilians into war against the trained British army. Hudson further noticed that she was excellent at fighting with swords and shooting with guns. She killed many British soldiers during the different skirmishes.
Hudson paid a tribute to the bravery of this woman by comparing her with Joan of Arc of France. He contended that the courage, leadership and valour of this green wearing Muslim woman was no less than Joan of Arc.
During one of the battles at the ridge in Delhi she fell from the horseback and was captured. Army General, looking at an old Muslim woman, felt unthreatened and ordered her release when Hudson intervened. Hudson told the General that this woman was the actual commander of the Indians and hence really dangerous. Afterwards, it was decided that the old woman would be shifted to a prison in Ambala.
This brave old woman was shifted to Ambala in July, 1857. Neither we know her name nor we have any idea of what happened to her in Ambala but surely this old Muslim woman clad in a green burqa is one of those unsung heroes of the 1857 who ignited a flame which later liberated India from the foreign rule.
source: http://www.heritagetimes.com / Heritage Times / Home> / by Saqib Salim / October 07th, 2020
Yusufpur- Mohammadabad (Ghazipur) , UTTAR PRADESH / NEW DELHI :
As Jamia celebrates 100 years of its foundation, we extend our gratitude to Dr Mukhtar Ansari for his contribution
Dr M A Ansari’s bust during a photo-exhibition at M.F. Husain Art Gallery, JMI on 24 Dec. 2014. (Photo Courtesy: Aniket Dikshit)
The three most important persons who, undoubtedly, not only played the most significant role in the foundation of Jamia Millia Islamia, but also shifted it from the makeshift arrangement of Aligarh to Delhi’s Karol Bagh on 7 July, 1925, are Hakim Ajmal Khan, Abdul Majeed Khwaja and Dr Mukhtar Ahmad Ansari.
In view of upheavals faced in Aligarh, Jamia was shifted but problems existed. The problems that made many think that Jamia will not survive long. However, the trio’s efforts were no way trivial. They set the future course of Jamia as ‘an institution with a difference.’
Mukhtar Ahmad Ansari’s consistent efforts bore fruits. Not only did Jamia get its first house in Karol Bagh in 1931, it was also shifted to a much bigger plot of land of its own in 1936 in its present location in South Delhi’s Okhla, then a ‘non-descript village’ where now it has a panoramic sprawling campus.
However, the journey was not as simple as it might look to a casual viewer. Within those ten years, much sweat and blood went in to nurse the tender sapling whose seed was sown in Aligarh on 29 October, 1920. Dr Ansari’s contribution through all these years is one of the most unforgettable and astonishingly stout chapters in the history of Jamia Millia Islamia.
Born on 25 December, 1880 in Yusufpur-Mohammadabad, Ghazipur in eastern Uttar Pradesh, son of Haji Abdur Rahman and Ilahan Bibi, Mukhtar Ahmad Ansari, received primary and secondary education at Ghazipur and Allahabad, then studied medicine and graduated from Madras Medical College. He went to England from where he achieved M.D. and M.S. degrees. He earned the Master of Surgery degree from the University of Edinburgh in 1910. Being a top-class student and a pioneering surgeon he worked in some well-known hospitals of England where “he had a successful medical career”.
Dr Ansari had everything – money, fame, fortune, and life that could be lived luxuriously. This brief background is provided to underscore the significance of his passion, devotion and commitment not just for Jamia but for the country’s struggle for freedom as those were the years of heightened activism for independence during which Dr Ansari – through his active involvement in and unwavering support for freedom, emerged as a committed nationalist leader.
From England, Dr Ansari returned to India in 1910 and started medical practice at Delhi. His contact with leaders like Motilal Nehru, Hakim Ajmal Khan and Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru rekindled in him the desire to take part in the country’s political developments.
Dr M A Ansari Health Centre, Jamia Millia Islamia. (Photo: Manzar Imam)
During the Balkan Wars of 1912-13, he led a Medical Mission to Turkey to provide medical aid to the Turkish army. “The mission”, according to Dr. Burak Akçapar, Ambassador of the Republic of Turkey to India, “not only established two field hospitals, but also did other humanitarian and political work.”
This was among his first political works which won the hearts and minds of the Turkish public and leaders which created a deep bond between Turkey and Jamia. Many Turkish leaders and prominent literary figures visited Jamia. The series of ‘Extension Lectures’ that began was his brainchild. It was on his invitation that famous Turkish scholars Dr Husein Raouf Bey (1933) and Ms Halide Edib (1936) and Dr Behadjet Wahbi of Cairo (1934) then delivered their lectures at Jamia.
His role in the Khilafat Movement was pivotal and his presence both in the Congress and Muslim League was equally felt. His Delhi house ‘Darus-Salam’ was a meeting point for leading Congressmen. For many years he was General Secretary of Congress and remained a member of the Congress Working Committee all through his life.
Dr M A Ansari Auditorium, Jamia Millia Islamia. (Photo: Manzar Imam)
Dr Ansari was the leader of the Khilafat delegation of 1920 which went to meet the Viceroy. He was also a member of the second delegation of Khilafat which went to England and other countries of Europe under the leadership of Maulana Mohammad Ali Jauhar. He was also president of the Delhi Khilafat Committee. During his presidential address at the Nagpur session of Muslim League in 1920 he demanded Swaraj.
When his name was proposed for the Secretary of the Foundation Committee of Jamia during its foundation, he requested not to appoint him for the post as it would require regular visits to Aligarh. Nevertheless, his interest in the activities of Jamia persisted.
Dr Ansari was among the front leaders of the Congress and was made its president in 1927. According to Prof Zafar Ahmad Nizami his name for the president of Congress was proposed at the instance of Mahatma Gandhi in 1924 who believed that “only he could make the efforts of Hindu-Muslim unity successful.”
Although Dr Ansari could not live long to see Jamia blossom into a beautiful university or see India breathing in freedom from the strangulating slavish life under the colonial rule, he had played his gigantic role both as a freedom seeker and as a founder of Jamia. He was a prominent member of the sixteen-member Foundation Committee formed on 29 October, 1920 to establish Jamia which would become a historic institution and the first one to be set up in response to call for boycott of the British Indian government-run, aided and supported academic institutions.
According to The British Medical Journal:
“As leader of the Congress movement, though at first opposed to the teaching of Gandhi on civil disobedience, he actively associated himself later with the various non-cooperative movements, and served at least one term of imprisonment.”
When it comes to Jamia as also to some other movements that were the currency of the 1920’s and 1930’s, it is very difficult to dissociate the trio of Hakim Ajmal Khan, Maulana Mohammad Ali Jauhar and Dr Mukhtar Ahmad Ansari, the “great Muslim trio of Indian politics”, as they were quite befittingly called so. However, each person has certain unique and individual personality traits and characteristics which separate him from others.
According to Dr Hamida Riaz (1988, p.119), Dr Ansari had a great passion for education. Initially, he highly appreciated Western education and culture and would keep himself completely away from what did not interest him. However, on the call of Mohammad Ali Jauhar, he participated in the medical delegation that went to Turkey and did a tremendous service. In a way, the beginning of international politics in India was made by Dr Ansari’s delegation.
Together with Hakim Ajmal Khan, Motilal Nehru and Maulana Azad, Dr Ansari formed a non-sectarian “Indian National Union.” He had opposed the Rowlatt Bill and participated in Home Rule and Non-Cooperation movements. In 1929, Dr Ansari formed the All India Muslim Nationalist Party. Besides Jamia, he was also associated with the foundation of Kashi Vidyapith, Benaras.
Faculty of Dentistry, Jamia Millia Islamia. (Photo: Manzar Imam)
Riaz (p.121) writes that all through his life he [Dr Ansari] “stayed away from sectarian groups” and continued his efforts to forge “Hindu-Muslim unity”. His wife Shamsun Nisa Begum too, was committed to the cause of women uplift.
Dr Ansari actively participated in the Jamia’s establishment, nurtured it, and, following the demise of Hakim Ajmal Khan in December 1927, served as its second Chancellor from 1928 to 1936. The financial needs that Hakim Sahab used to carry had fallen on his shoulder which he discharged diligently.
The “Ajmal Khan Fund”, set up exclusively for the purpose, was a result of his efforts. At a critical juncture when Jamia faced great financial crisis a Board of Trustees was created. Dr Ansari was appointed its chairman. It was at Gandhiji’s indication that industrialist Jamnalal Bajaj (1889-1942) was made its treasurer. Other bodies were also formed in which he was there.
As Chancellor of Jamia, Dr Ansari could not be an employee and Life Member of the ‘Anjuman Talim-e-Milli’. However, he extended all his support to all the bodies and continued to serve Jamia all his life. Remembering the services of Hakim Ajmal Khan and Dr Mukhtar Ahmad Ansari during a lecture in Jamia on 26 August 2014, former VC and renowned historian Prof Mushirul Hasan (d. 10 December 2018), terming the duo as the “real founders” of Jamia, had said, “Ansari raised money for Jamia and Hakim Ajmal Khan provided nobility and support.”
As mentioned earlier, Dr Ansari did not live long after Jamia was shifted to its present place in the national capital. He passed away on 10 May, 1936 and buried in the Jamia graveyard.
A radio speech which Dr Zakir Hussain had prepared for the 1936 Foundation Day of Jamia, which Dr Ansari could not hear as he passed away before it, sheds enough light both on the impact Dr Ansari had on Dr Zakir Husain and on his character and sphere of activity. It read:
[Dr Ansari] set out for a journey from which no one looks back…Dr Sahab’s personality was a fountain of blessings…a mainstay for anyone in times of need. His heart was a refuge where many would seek solace for their heartfelt grief.
As in life, in death too, he did not part ways from Jamia, writes Ghulam Haider, as he became the first among the founders of Jamia, to find his resting abode in Jamia Nagar where he was laid to rest three months before the primary madrasa of Jamia moved in.
Dr Mukhtar Ahmad Ansari, who died near Delhi on May 10th, at the age of 56, had been a member of the British Medical Association since 1909, and had gained distinction in India as a medical practitioner as well as in politics. In view of his services and to keep his memory as a prominent physician, Jamia has named its health centre and a big auditorium after him.
It was his sincerity for the national cause and his passionate commitment for Jamia that whenever Gandhiji would come to Jamia, he would definitely pay a visit to his grave. As Jamia celebrates 100 years of its foundation, we extend our gratitude to its architect for nurturing it with his consistent remedial care, unflinching commitment and great sacrifices!
[Sources: Celebrating India : Reflections on Eminent Indian Muslims 1857-2007, Meher Fatima Hussain (2009, Manak Publications, New Delhi), “Dr. Mukhtar Ahmed Ansari”, The British Medical Journal (Vol. 1, No. 3933 (May 23, 1936) p.1082, Mohammad Ali Jauhar, authored and published by Hamida Riaz (1988, Nagpur), Nuqoosh-e-Jamia (Jamia ki Kahani Jamia Walon ki Zabani or the Story of Jamia from Jamiites) by Ghulam Haider (2012, Maktaba Jamia Limited in collaboration with National Council for Promotion of Urdu Langue, New Delhi), www.jmi.ac.in.
Manzar Imam is a Ph.D. Candidate at Maulana Mohammad Ali Jauhar Academy of International Studies, Jamia Millia Islamia. He can be reached at manzarimam@rediffmail.com. The above article is ummid.com special series titled ‘Founders of Jamia Millia Islamia’. Read the first part here. To read the second article of the series click here. To read the 3rd article of the series, click here.]
source: http://www.ummid.com / Ummid.com / Home> India / by Manzar Imam, ummid.com / October 28th, 2020
Freedom fighter Captain Abbas Ali who was part of the Indian National Army (INA) died of a cardiac arrest today at the Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College here.He was 94 and is survived by son Qurban Ali and two daughters.
freedom fighter capt abbas ali passes away
Aligarh (UP):
Freedom fighter Captain Abbas Ali who was part of the Indian National Army (INA) died of a cardiac arrest today at the Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College here.
He was 94 and is survived by son Qurban Ali and two daughters.
“He will be laid to rest later this evening at Qila Road graveyard,” a family member said.
An alumnus of Aligarh Muslim University (AMU), Ali had joined the British Indian Army in 1939, shortly before the outbreak of World War II. In 1945, when Subhash Chandra Bose raised the banner of armed revolt, Abbas left the British army and joined the INA.
Shortly thereafter, he was arrested, court marshaled and sentenced to death. When India gained independence, he was released from prison before the death sentence was meted out. Abbas Ali joined politics under the influence of socialist party leaders including Ram Manohar Lohia, Acharya Narendra Dev and Jai Prakash Narain. In 1966, he was appointed State General Secretary of Sanyukt Socialist Party.
He was appointed as a member of the national executive of the Socialist Party. He was arrested again during the national Emergency under the Defence of India Rule (DIR) and remained behind bars during the entire period of emergency. In 1977, when emergency was lifted and his party merged with the Janata Party, he was elected to Uttar Pradesh Legislative Council and was appointed as the first President of Uttar Pradesh Unit of the Janata Party.
Shortly before his death, while attending a public function at Aligarh on the eve of 15th August, Captain Ali had said, “There is only one unfulfilled wish of my life and that is that the true story behind the last few days of my leader Subhash Chandra Bose should see the light of the day. “West Bengal Chief Minister, Mamta Banerjee has assured me that she will leave no stone unturned to unravel the mystery behind his death”, he had said.
source: http://www.indiatvnews.com / India TV / Home> English News> India / by PTI / October 11th, 2014
Illustrated book on legendary hero Kunjali Marakkar brought out for children
The popular witticism – when the going gets tough, the tough get going – has literally set off a young anthropologist- cum- archaeologist to author a book for children on Kunjali Marakkar, the legendary hero of the 16th century.
For N.K. Ramesh, a guide at the Kunjali Marakkar Memorial Museum at Vadakara, it was an opportunity to trace the history of the four Kunjali Marakkars, when his contract was terminated after the museum was closed to the public from March.
“Certainly a difference existed between writing for children and for adults. So I put down a simple narration and included illustrations based on important events during the period of Kunjali Marakkar and also a picture of a mural painting of a sea war,” he says.
Kunjali Marakkar was a honorific title given to the Muslim naval chief of the erstwhile Zamorin of Calicut. “The four Kunjali Marakkars who were the naval commanders of Zamorin fought against the Portuguese from 1507 to 1600. In fact, the Kunjali Marakkars were maritime merchants and supporters of Arab trade who lived in the coastal regions of Kayalpattinam, Kilakarai, Thoothukudi, and Karaikal. But they shifted their trade to Kochi and then migrated to Ponnani after Portuguese trade interference,” Mr. Ramesh says.
He took about four months to pen the book with 104 pages. The book has already hit the stands although the official launch has been deferred in view of the COVID-19 protocol.
Historian M.G.S. Narayanan has given an introduction to the book on Kunjali Marakkar, whose battles against the Portuguese were portrayed as a symbolic national movement.
The book also delves into the objective of the construction of a fort by Pattu Marakkar, the third Kunjali Marakkar, at Iringal (Kottakkal) in 1571 and the political dispute between his nephew Mohammed Marakkar, who became the fourth Kunjali Marakkar, and the Zamorin.
Later, the Zamorin joined hands with the Portuguese to defeat the last Kunjali Marakkar. The fort was also demolished and Kunjali executed by the Portuguese. The decline of Kunjali Marakkar, he says, led to establishment of Dutch Dominion and later British rule in India.
Mr. Ramesh, who holds a postgraduate degree in anthropology from Kannur university and Post M.Sc. Diploma in Museology from Aligarh Muslim University, has been credited with numerous discoveries, including the unearthing of Palaeolithic tools from north Malabar.
For a living, the 34-year-old is now engaged in de-husking at farms and odd jobs at Nadapuram and adjoining areas.
source: http://www.thehindu.com / The Hindu / Home> News> States> Kerala / by Biju Govind / Kozhikode – September 15th, 2020
Dr Mukhtar Ahmed Ansari was a staunch Congressman and author of a book titled ‘Regeneration in Man’. Wednesday marks his 81st death anniversary.
India’s political leadership during the British Raj was dominated by lawyers and journalists. A noted exception was Dr Mukhtar Ahmed Ansari (1880-1936), one of Delhi’s richest men, who dexterously balanced his busy medical practice with a deep involvement with politics.
Ansari was a close companion of Gandhi and an icon of the Khilafat movement. The few scholars who have studied his life have focused solely on his role as a Congress leader, and on his skills on the negotiating table of high politics. His exploits with the scalpel have been ignored. More than 80 years after he died, on May 10, 1936, it is remarkable that forget any serious study, there is hardly any discussion about the hundreds of operations he conducted in India in which he grafted animal testicles – from bulls, monkeys and sheep – onto human beings.
Adviser to princes
Dr Ansari studied at Queen’s Collegiate school in Benares and at the Muir Central College in Allahabad (which was later incorporated into Allahabad University). He later joined the Nizam College in Hyderabad where he was given a scholarship in 1900 to study medicine in the UK. After earning a medical degree at the University of Edinburgh, he worked in London at Charing Cross hospital, the Lock Hospital and St Peter’s Hospital. He returned to India in 1910, and set up his practice in Calcutta before shifting to Delhi.
He acted as medical adviser to the princes of Alwar, Rampur, Joara and Bhopal. His two older brothers were well-known hakims, who practised the traditional unani system of medicine. They were close to the scholars at the respected Islamic school in Deoband. His own circumstances and family background proved crucial in his positioning as a key functionary during the Khilafat movement of 1919. This movement was launched by Indian Muslims to urge the British government to preserve the authority of the Turkish Sultan as Caliph of Islam with the disintegration of the Ottoman Empire after World War I.
A new science
Along with his political activity, Ansari turned his mind to a matter that has obsessed physicians for centuries: the quest for medical interventions to help ageing clients produce heirs. In the early 20th century, medical journals in Europe and America were increasingly documenting cases of xenotransplantation – the transplantation of living cells, tissue or organs from one species to another. It was through such articles that Ansari became interested in this field.
In his role as a medical practitioner, Ansari was also constantly faced with a large number of patients suffering from a “real or imaginary decline in their mental, physical and sexual powers”. His brothers attempted to treat such with traditional medicines. But Ansari looked to Europe for possible answers.
In 1921, 1925 and 1932 he visited Vienna, Paris, Lucerne and London and spent a considerable amount of time in laboratories, hospitals and clinics. He met and observed urologist Dr Robert Lichenstern, Eugen Steiach, Dr Serge Voronoff – all of whom are considered pioneers in the field of grafting animal testicles onto humans. He also collected vast amounts of literature on the subject, sourcing books and journals from Germany, France, Switzerland, Austria and the US.
This procedure may now be ridiculed but in the Roaring Twenties there was quite the rush of men wanting to undergo these regenerative surgeries. Ansari offered a treatment to his clientele in India that was only available to the elite in the West.
Rejuvenating the nation
According to Ansari, there were a few key reasons why the people of India suffered from poor health. These included unhygienic surroundings, poverty and the lack of medical facilities, as well as seclusion and segregation of the sexes, and rules confining the choice of marriage partner to a limited circle.
In his 1927 presidential address to the Congress in Madras, he dwelt on the problem of healthcare in India.
He said:
“Sixty percent of the revenues of India is absorbed by the Military Department in the name of Defence of the country but the government ought to know that there can be no defence of the country when people are allowed to exist in such a state of utter physical degeneration. The real defence lies in tackling the problem of manhood and improving the general health of the nation.”
In the last decade of his life, Ansari conducted such testicle grafting operations on around 700 people. These included property agents, merchants, jewellers, bankers, provincial civil servants, sportsmen and labourers.
In a letter to Aziz Ansari, his cousin, the doctor wrote that Eugen Steinach “urged me to publish my researches (sic) and not to hide my light under the bushel”.
Ansari meticulously noted down around 440 cases of grafting that he had done. He monitored or kept in touch with these individuals for a period of three to four years after the surgery. In one case, he wrote that a wrestler whose testicles were badly damaged by an opponent and lost his “sexual power” for eight years underwent grafting and found that his sexual appetite was restored. In another case, a man in his early 50s, who was a heavy drinker and had contracted sexual diseases in his 30s, found his health to be deteriorating drastically. After Ansari grafted slices of a bull’s testicles onto the man’s gonads, he gained weight, became healthy, and started leading a normal life with a new wife. Through such case studies, Ansari emphasised that his surgeries resulted in the rejuvenation of patients, which added to the productivity of the nation.
He gave Gandhi a copy of his book Regeneration in Man, who read it with great interest in one day. Describing it as evidence of “research and great labour”, Gandhi, whose aversion to western medical practices is well known, asked his friend: “What is revival of youth worth if you cannot be sure of persistent physical existence for two consecutive seconds?”
But for the short, well-built, moustachioed doctor who played the role of Othello in a play while a student at the University of Edinburgh, these procedures were part of a larger vision for a “universal campaign against the disability of old age”.
source: http://www.scroll.in / Scroll.in / Home / by Danish Khan / May 10th, 2017
Coinciding 74th Independence Day on Aug. 15, scholars recollect help of Turkey to India’s national freedom struggle
Abdul Hameed Nomani, General secretary of the All India Muslim Majlis Mushawarat
New Delhi:
Celebrating country’s 74th Independence Day on Aug. 15, under the shadow of recent communal riots in capital Delhi and anti-citizenship law stir, many Indian scholars have called for recalling the role of Muslims during India’s freedom struggle.
Author and scholar Waseem Ahmed Saeed said over time, the contribution of Muslim freedom fighters in India has been forgotten.
In his book titled Kala Pani: Gumnam Mujahideen-e-Azadi 1857, Saeed said from the 1757 Battle of Plassey in Bengal, Tipu Sultan’s Seringapatam battle in South India in 1799 to the massive revolt in 1857 against the British was led by Muslims.
Saeed, who has authored a book on the subject in the Urdu language, said while India’s official history celebrates Udham Singh for killing Michael O’Dwyer, the lieutenant governor of Punjab in India, in revenge for the 1919 Jallianwala Bagh massacre in Amritsar, it does not recognize Sher Ali Afridi, who killed Lord Mayo, British viceroy and governor-general of India from 1869-1872.
Speaking to Anadolu Agency, many Muslim scholars and historians said the role of their ancestors in the freedom struggle has been overlooked.
According to Syed Jamaluddin, director of historical research projects at the Institute of Objective Studies, a think tank, there is no adequate coverage of the role of the Indian Muslims in the national movement.
“The contribution of Muslim revolutionaries, poets and writers is not known today. Similarly, little is known about the contribution of people like Ali Musliyar and Bi-Amma, who made significant contributions,” he told Anadolu Agency. He is currently editing a book on the Muslim role in India’s freedom struggle.
Saeed recalled in his book that it was the ruler of Bengal Siraj-ud-Daulah, who first fought and lost to the British in 1757, which became a cornerstone for the imperial power to colonize India.
He said that even after losing this battle, there were many rebellions led by Muslims until 1850.
Muslim revolts against British
Jamaluddin mentions the Fakir-Sannyasi rebellion, a joint revolt against colonial power by Muslim and Hindu ascetics, for preventing them from collecting religious tax from locals. It started in 1764 and continued until the 1850. He said the rebellion even spread its wings to southern India’s Madras (now Chennai) presidency.
But most prominent and popular movements that hit the British hard in the early 20th century in the subcontinent was the Reshmi-Rumaal Tehreek (Silk Cloth Movement) led by Maulana Ubaidullah Sindhi with the help of Turkey, Germany, and Afghanistan.
Speaking to Anadolu Agency, a prominent Muslim scholar Abdul Hameed Nomani said that despite his best efforts, Sindhi’s contribution has not been included in the official Indian history.
Along with an Indian prince Raja Mahender Pratap Singh, Sindhi, and Maulvi Barkatullah had established the exiled government of India in Afghanistan in 1915.
“The movement picked up around the same time when Subhash Chandra Bose [renowned Indian freedom fighter] was allying with Germany and Japan to oust the British from India. While Bose is celebrated nationwide, not much is known about Sindhi and his supporters,” said Nomani, who is also the general secretary of the All India Muslim Majlis Mushawarat, an umbrella group of prominent Muslim organizations.
It was named Silk Cloth Movement because Sindhi and other leaders used to send letters and directions to their cadres written on silk cloth.
Later, Sindhi went to Turkey and joined the country’s national struggle.
“The movement led to the formation of Indo-German-Turkish mission to encourage local tribes on the borders of Afghanistan to attack Britishers and their interests. While the key figures were arrested by the British, the movement remains a key event in the freedom history,” he added.
He said even though in 2011 the government released a postal stamp to commemorate Sindhi’s movement, there has been no vigor to record the sacrifice of Sindhi and his allies Mahmud Hasan and Husayn Ahmad.
“Only passing reference has been made about the role of Muslims in India’s national struggle,” rued Nomani.
source: http://www.aa.com.tr / Anadolu Agency / by Cheena Kapoor / August 14th, 2020
He was born in village Dihuli of District Muzaffarpur, in Bihar on 3 March 1900.
His father Moulvi Hafizuddin Husain was a zamindar. He first went to a Madarsa, then to North Brooke Zila School, Darbhanga, from where he was expelled for opposing the Rowlatt Act. He passed the matriculation from Pusa High School and was admitted in B.N. College, Patna, for higher studies.
His mother died in his childhood. His elder brother Maulana Manzoor Ahsan was also a freedom fighter.
He was married to Azizul Fatima. His marriage was all Khadi i.e. Bride and Groom both wore hand woven Khadi clothes. After nikah marriage function was transformed into an a public meeting for freedom struggle.
He left his studies at B.N. College to follow Gandhi and joined the non-cooperation movement in 1921.
There after he actively participated in the freedom movement. He mobilised masses against Britishers by organising volunteer corps, Ramayan Mandali, and also collected fund for freedom struggle through ‘Muthia’ drive. ‘Muthia’ meant to take out a muththi or fist of grain before preparing every meal to fund freedom struggle. Once Ajazi unknowingly reached at house of his cousin sister in a remote village. He asked for a ‘Muthia’. He got answer in negative. His sister recognised him and requested him to take meal. But Ajazi refused to take not only meal but even a glass of water. When his sister promised to take out muthia and donated the dues then he agreed to take meal.
He organised ‘Sewa Dal’ established by Sarojini Naidu and formed ‘Ajazi Troop’ to promote and train youngsters for freedom struggle. He first time attended AICC session held at Ahmedabad in 1921 and supported the motion of Maulana Hasrat Mohani on ‘Complete Independence’.
He represented Central Khilafat Committee at the All Parties Conferences. On the direction of Mohd Ali Jauhar he took the charge of Khilafat Committee Calcutta. There he was arrested in a protest march led by Neta ji Subhash and was arrested and released at a farther most place from Calcutta.
He obtained degree from Calcutta Homoeopathic Medical College. In August 1942 movement his house was searched and he worked under ground, though his promising eldest son Muzaffar Husain Ajazi died at young age on 25 July 1942.
Ajazi opposed Jinnah’s Two-nation theory. Muslim League workers used to come in batches at his residence, virtually spitting and shouted slogan. Ghaddar-e-Qaum.
He was also a poet and writer in the Urdu language as well as an orator. His papers, diaries, letters and files are preserved in national libraries.
After independence Ajazi devoted his whole life for the welfare of the downtrodden and for protection of rights as well as development of Urdu language. He was also actively associated with trade union movement.
Ajazi died on 26 September 1966 at his residence in Muzaffarpur city.
source: http://www.milligazette.com / The Milli Gazette / Home> News> Family & Kids / The Milli Gazette / October 14th, 2020
Hyder Ali, who is famously known as ‘the Nepoleon of South India’ for his relentless fighting against the conspiracies of the East India Company and its henchmen and for checkmating the British ambitions of expansion in South India, was born in 1722 at Devanahalli village, Karnataka state. His father was Fateh Mohammad Ali and mother Mujidan Begum.
Though he did not have any formal learning, he received training in martial arts. Hyder Ali was sharp in intellect, strong in will, capable of handling multiple tasks simultaneously and was brave at heart.
He had participated in Devanahalli war in 1749 as a young soldier of Mysore State. Recognizing his gallantry, Nanjaraj, the Minister of Mysore kingdom, honoured Hyder Ali with the title of ‘Khan’ and promoted him as the Chief of a battalion in the Mysore army.
They attacked Mysore several times with the help of the East India Company.
Though Hyder Ali suffered initial losses, he resisted them successfully and proved a virtual nightmare to East India Company. Even then, the British rulers provoked Hyder Ali again which led to the second Mysore war in July 1780. He went to the battlefield along with his son, Tipu Sultan.
While Hyder Ali captured the Arcot, his son Tipu defeated the East India Company troops and captured Kanjeevaram, which was about 50 miles from Madras. This sent shivers to Warren Hastings, the Governor General of East India Company.
He immediately sent additional troops from Culcutta, Madras with abundant funds under the control of his Commander General, Sir Eyre Coote. While fighting against the foreign enemy on one side, Hyder Ali and Tipu Sultan taught a befitting lesson to Malabar Nayars and chieftains, who revolted against him with the active support of Nizam of Hyderbad.
Hyder Ali, while leading his troops towards successive victories, fell ill and died in the battlefield on 7 December, 1782, near Narasingarayuni Peta village, which is now in Chitoor district of Andhra Pradesh.
source: http://www.siasat.com / The Siasat Daily / Home> Featured News / by Nihad Amani / August 22nd, 2020
