The Partition and the Pasmanda Muslims!
By Ghulam Rasool
Dehlvi, New Age Islam
13 August
2024
They Particularly
Sought to Combat Communalism and Contested Islamization and 'Ashrafisation'; That Is the Imitation of
the Upper-Caste Muslims. They Challenged The ‘Two-Nation’ Theory Advanced by
The Muslim League and Rejected the League Leadership as Representing Only the
Interests of the Higher Muslim Castes/Classes and Thus They Derived Legitimacy for
Their Claim to Represent the Lower-Caste Muslims
------
Why did the
Pasmanda Muslims vehemently oppose the Two-Nation Theory and the partition of
India?
"Bhai
Saheb! My village is completely Pakistan which is surrounded by India".
"What do you mean by India and Pakistan?”, I asked. Only Sheikhs and Syeds
live in the village and on the periphery, there are settlements of Kunjras (green-grocers), Qasaais (butchers), Julahas (weavers), Dhuniyas
(cotton-carders), Nais (barbers),
etc.", he replied.
The above
excerpt from the book, “Zaat-Paat Aur
Musalman” (Casteism among Muslims
p: 453) by Prof. Masood Alam Falahi reproduced here at New Age Islam tells us a
revealing story.
The book
sheds light on the history of “Pasmandas”
(lower-caste Muslims) and their anti-caste movement in pre-partition India, the
caste-based discrimination, and anti-caste mobilisation based on a propounded
theology within Indian Muslims. But it also unravels what is the Indian Muslim
imagination of an independent and sovereign nation. It also explains why it is
crucial to understand the social structures of Indian Muslims in order to
ascertain their political behaviour since the partition of the country. This
question has both cultural and theological dimensions. First, the institution
of caste is fundamental to Hinduism, whereas an Islamic society, as
conventionally said, is built on the basic Qur’anic principle of Masawat (equality). But studies and
books like the above tell us that Indian Muslims have a social structure that
is not dissimilar to that of Hindu caste system. As a result, Indian Islam
gradually began to incorporate the casteist elements found in Hinduism.
Now Muslims
across India are generally seen as a homogeneous community, but in reality,
Indian Muslims are segmented into different caste-based categories on the basis
of status, income, occupation, education and lineage. Unlike the Hindu caste
system, where it is easy to discern the stratification, caste identities among
Muslims are not defined rigidly, making any study of the prevailing system that
much more difficult. In fact, caste and the practice of caste system have
prevailed among Indian Muslims since the medieval times. Ever since, the
upper-caste domination has continued and intensified later in the modern
period. In colonial India, it was the elitist Muslims who formed the leadership
of the Muslim League which only served the interests of upper-caste Muslims
with the ‘two-nation theory’ resulting in partition of India on religious
lines.
This essay
argues that in terms of the nationalist Muslim activism in India, the
lower-caste Muslims were probably the first among the disenfranchised Muslim
castes to organize themselves against the emerging separatist tendencies.
Considered socially inferior by the higher caste Muslims, and economically
marginalized due to colonial policies, they sought incessantly a course of
action where they could fight not only for their social dignity and political
empowerment but also run a nationalist movement.
The
Pasmanda Muslim leaders and thinkers strongly challenged the “two-nation
theory” and Muslim League politics. Pre-eminent Pasmanda leader, Abdul Qayyum
Ansari who belonged to the Julaha
(weaver) community is a glaring example. He led the Momin Conference, the
movement in pre-Independence India which strongly advocated against the
country’s partition in 1947. They were strongly against the “Two Nation Theory”
which gave birth to the call for partition. Some Muslim weavers categorised as
the ‘Ansari caste’ organised themselves as a group called the ‘Momins’ and formed the All India Momin
Conference (AIMC) in 1926. In 1937, the Momin Conference which was a reformist
organization took a strong political stand against the Partition of India and
countered it. It functioned until 1947 as the ‘first wave’ of the Pasmanda
movement.
They were
even trolled in various newspapers and journals by the elitist Islamic
leadership which tried to theologically justify the creation of Pakistan. But
Abdul Qayyum Ansari, himself a practicing Muslim, called did not heed those
ulema and shunned their voices as ‘divisive’. Following Ansari, several
prominent Muslim leaders who preferred to stay back in their country took on
the Muslim league and continued to oppose the partition movement.
Thus,
through the Momin Conference, the
Pasmanda Muslims in India, during the partition, strived to forge the
solidarity of all subordinated Muslim castes in order to contest the elitist
separatist politics. They particularly sought to combat communalism and
contested Islamization and 'Ashrafisation';
that is the imitation of the upper-caste Muslims. They challenged the
‘two-nation’ theory advanced by the Muslim League and rejected the League
leadership as representing only the interests of the higher Muslim
castes/classes and thus they derived legitimacy for their claim to represent
the lower-caste Muslims, who formed the majority within the Muslim population.
These Pasmanda Muslims strongly believed that the interests of ordinary Indian
Muslims were in sharp conflict with those of the Muslim League, which they
considered as an Ashraaf/elitist Muslim party.
Since the
partition of India, the Pasmanda Muslim discourse in the country is that the
'upper caste' or the Ashrafia Muslim
leadership which thrives on championing 'non-issues' the real community
concerns such as the protection of the Muslim Personal Law, has only helped in
marginalizing the mainstream Muslims, disintegrating them and in enabling an
environment for communal tensions in which the major victims are the Dalits,
both Hindu as well as Muslim.
This is
precisely why the Pasmanda Muslims challenged the mainstream Muslim politics in
their discourses. They believe it has only furthered the elite-driven symbolic,
emotive identity politics in the post-partition period such as Babri Mosque,
Uniform Civil Code, status of Urdu, the Aligarh Muslim University and so on.
These issues, Pasmanda Muslims believe, have thoroughly discounted the
developmental concerns and aspirations of common Muslims in India. By
emphasising that the Muslim identity is not monolithic and is segmented into
various castes/classes, the Pasmanda movement has dislodged the commonplace
assumption of any putative uniform community sentiment or interests of Indian
Muslims. To put it precisely, the Pasmandas suggest that just like any other
community, Muslims too are divided with different sections harbouring different
interests, and that the emotive religious issues raised by the upper-caste
Muslim leaders do not reflect their concerns, but rather deter the process of
democratisation of the Muslim society in particular and the Indian state and
society in general. Therefore, the Pasmandas’ pre and post-partition fight
against “social injustice” emanating from the continuing elitist politics is an
enduring struggle within the community. It was actually an organic development
in pre-partition India which has a deep-rooted historical underpinning.
The first
freedom movement—the revolt of 1857—which was spearheaded by both Hindu and
Muslim revolutionaries was castigated by some elitists Islamic theorists. Sir
Syed Ahmad Khan went to the extent of slandering the Muslim patriots who
participated in the Revolt as 'Badzaat
Julahe' (a caste slur). In his book “Ithas
Ka Matantar”, historian Mubarak Ali notes that the Ashraaf (Muslim elite) pressured the British to maintain their
influence over the country. Some elites masquerading as 'Muslim
representatives' told the government that as the founders of the country, they
still had influence over the provinces and were therefore more important than
the numerical majority. Sir Syed Ahmad is known for championing modern
education among Muslims but not many know that he also had barred backward
Muslims from his educational movement. Thus, modern education was denied to
them and even freedom and democracy was opposed because, according to the
elitist Muslim leadership, it would emphasize the identity of those who were
socially and politically dominated by them.
Following
the Partition, systematic persecution and educational and social deprivation of
Pasmanda Muslims illustrates why they were vehemently opposed to the Two-Nation
Theory and the partition of India. Leading political and social actors of the
Pasmanda Muslim movement in different Indian states today seek to find their
rights and place in mainstream Indian politics as well as in the Islamic
jurisprudence.
--------
A Regular Columnist with Newageislam.com, Ghulam Rasool Dehlvi is an
Indo-Islamic scholar, Sufi poet and English-Arabic-Urdu-Hindi writer with a
background in a leading Sufi Islamic seminary in India. He is currently serving
as Head of International Affairs at Voice for Peace & Justice, Jammu &
Kashmir.
------
Note:
Translated from Urdu by Yoginder Sikand
for NewAgeIslam.com, all parts of Masood Alam Falahi's Urdu book Hindustan Mai Zat-Pat Aur Musalman (‘Casteism Among Muslims in India’) are
accessible here:
Caste and Caste-Based Discrimination among Indian Muslims
URL: https://www.newageislam.com/islam-sectarianism/partition-pasmanda-muslims-ashraaf/d/132922
New Age Islam, Islam Online, Islamic Website, African Muslim News, Arab World News, South Asia News, Indian Muslim News, World Muslim News, Women in Islam, Islamic Feminism, Arab Women, Women In Arab, Islamophobia in America, Muslim Women in West, Islam Women and Feminism