So far, all estimations of Afg̲h̲āni in the West (Europe and America) are restricted to the data regarding his activities in Muslim-majority countries of West Asia that are mainly political in nature. As such, he has been generally described as an anti-British political agitator and a pan-Islamist—one who was planning to shape a block of West-Asian Muslim countries in order to wage war against the Western imperialists and liberate the Muslim countries from their direct and indirect political domination and economic exploitation. Information about his non-political, religious, sociological and philosophical approach and vision has been conveniently ignored since this image of an intellectual did not go with that of an anti-West and pro-East Muslim crusader. This orientalistic tendency of selecting the political Afg̲h̲a~ni and ignoring the intellectual Af_ghāni appears to be the reason why Afg̲h̲a~ni’s stay and work in India which is totally non-political and more modernistic than the modern, has not been studied seriously, so far.

Afg̲h̲āni’s stay in India is significant for many reasons; first, it was his first formal visit to a non-Muslim majority country ruled by the Britain; it was a country with less than 15% Muslim population co-existing with the idol-worshipping Hindu majority for more than a thousand years; their problems were totally different from those in the Muslim countries; they were passing through a difficult phase of oppression due to the British divisive imperialistic political, economic and educational policies. His addressees were not Muslim rulers but the Muslim peoples of India. As such, his attention was confined to the concepts and practical instruments of the process of change in the Muslim society of India. Again, his Indian sojourn is important for a proper study of Afg̲h̲āni because it was in India—in Hyderabad and Calcutta—that he expressed himself in his writings on all vital issues of change in a 19th century society.

These ideas, already mentioned in the previous chapters, would be now identified in order to appreciate Afghani’s persona as a social thinker. His treatise on Naturalism written in Hyderabad is the only exhaustive one written on any topic by him. His Persian articles written in Hyderabad deal in detail with great historical and philosophical insight in to the demands of social change in Asian societies.This was something quite un-expected from a person who had been engaged exclusively for about twenty five year in a mission of comprehensive political change in Muslim countries.

Afg̲h̲āni visited India several times: first in 1853, at the age of fourteen, for educational purposes; then in 1856 on his way to Mecca; and more than once between 1857 and 1869. His last visit was in 1879. All these journeys were very brief, except the last one and were made while he was taking active interest in the political affairs of Afghanistan as an adviser to the Afghan rulers1. It seems that his reputation as a political figure had already been established when he visited India in 1868. On his entry, he was welcomed by the Indian officials, but the government did not allow him to meet the ‘ulama and after a month’s stay he had to leave the country.2 It was during his last visit (1879-1883) that he found an opportunity to acquire a firsthand knowledge of India’s political situation and the conditions of Indian Muslims.
During the first half of 19th century, the British, through the East India Company, had consolidated their political power against the weakening resistance of the Indian peoples, chiefly the Muslims. Among the movements which in their inception had a religious character but later took a political turn were those under the leadership of Shari‘atullah, his son, Muḥammad Muḥsin,3 and Karāmat ‘Ali4, in the East Bengal, and Syed Aḥmad of Rāi Bareli and Shāh Ismā‘il5, in the north-west of India. After the failure of the 1857 War of Independence, frustration and defeatism overtook the Indian Muslims. The East Indian Company, after bringing the internal situation under control, diverted its attention towards acquiring the confidence of the people and introduced gradual changes in the educational system to prepare the Indian youth for administrative jobs. The official language was changed from Persian and Bengali to English and the promotion of Western knowledge among the Hindus and Muslims was encouraged. The Hindu intelligentsia of Bengal was the first to foresee the direction of events and, under the enlightened leadership of the distinguished reformer, Raja Ram Mohan Roy, a movement for learning European languages and sciences came in to existence. Simultaneously, there arose a controversy whether the medium of instruction should continue to be Persian, Arabic, Sanskrit or it should be changed to English. In 1835, the policy of introducing English as the medium of instruction, as suggested by Lord Macaulay, was adopted by the East India Company. This policy, welcomed by the Hindus, was looked upon with suspicion by the Muslims. The educational system prevalent among the Muslims in that period was the Dars-i Ni|zāmi, based upon the traditional pattern followed in the entire Islamic East. The change in the medium of instruction came as a setback to the educated Muslims since, under the new conditions, they found themselves disqualified for government jobs. Further, in view of the growing activities of the Christian missions, the Muslims regarded English education as an indirect means to propagate Christianity. This suspicion developed in to a prejudice against the entire educational policy initiated by the English rulers along with a reaction against Western culture, as a whole. By that time, however, there had appeared several figures among the Muslims who advocated the learning of European languages and sciences and sought to influence Muslim opinion in favour of modern learning. Important among them were Syed Aḥmad k̲h̲ān of Aligarh and Syed Amīr ‘Ali and Navvāb ‘Abdul Lat̤īf k̲h̲ān of Calcutta. Politically, they saw no alternative other than a policy of loyalty to the British. Institutions, such as the Mohammadan Literary Society of Calcutta (1863), the Mohammadan Anglo-Oriental College of Aligarh (1875) and the Central National Mohammadan Association of Calcutta (1887),6 had the object of making the Muslims realize the advantages of European learning and English culture.

However, such attempts attracted little attention of the Muslims who had not yet reconciled themselves to British domination. It was this atmosphere of conflicting ideas and aims that Afg̲h̲āni encountered upon his arrival in India after his expulsion from Egypt in 1879. His longest stay in India was in Hyderabad from September, 1879 to the middle of 1882.

In Hyderabad

Detailed information on his stay in India is not available. It is not clear as to why Afg̲h̲āni decided to travel from Egypt to India or whether he was forced by the British to go to India where he could be kept under observation. After reaching Mumbai from Egypt he travelled directly to Hyderabad. There is no information about his contacts and supporters in Hyderabad who might have extended him the invitation to stay with them. The fact that he found all residential facilities in the city after his arrival and the high respect he enjoyed in the official circles and among the Muslim elite in the city indicates that he was already known as a distinguished Islamic scholar. So far as Afg̲h̲āni is concerned, his preference for the city was quite understandable; Hyderabad was the capital of the largest Muslim princely state of India where he could expect reasonable security and freedom to express his views. However, Afg̲h̲ā~ni was aware that in Hyderabad, also, he was under the political supervision of the British government and, therefore, was not free as he was in Egypt to indulge in any political activism among the Muslims. The politically sensitive environment regarding Afg̲h̲āni’s known anti-British stance in Egypt explains why very little information on his activities is available in the contemporary press. However, his Persian articles published in the Hyderabad Urdu journals, Mu‘allim and Mu‘allim-i Shafīq, as pointed out elsewhere, are very important source material containing his vision of a dynamic Muslim ummah at the beginning of modern age in India. We have already discussed these views in various chapters above. Here we would like to re-emphasise that it was only in these Indian articles that he has discussed subjects like ‘philosophical spirit’ being essential for social progress, importance of the press as a powerful instrument of social mobilization, importance of modern sciences, urgent need of comprehensive changes in the Muslim educational institutions, and a sharp criticism of the traditional ‘ulama of India having no idea of the nature of the challenges posed by new knowledge. Qāz̤i ‘Abdu’l g̲h̲affār’s ā_sār-i Jamāluddīn Afg̲h̲āni, published in 1944, is, perhaps, the earliest well-documented biography of Afg̲h̲āni written in any language, containing some information on his stay in Hyderabad and Urdu translations of some of his Arabic and Persian articles. It also contains parts of a manuscript on Afg̲h̲āni’s life by Syed ‘Abdu’l Jabbār, former ruler of Suwat (Pakistan).

Qāz̤i ‘Abdu’l g̲h̲affār found only one very old person in Hyderabad city around 1944 who had attended Afg̲h̲āni’s discussion groups in Hyderabad and has recorded his reminiscences of those meetings. Following is a summary of this lone narrator. 7

According to this lone narrator, Afg̲h̲āni stayed with a noble and official of the government, Muḥi al-Davlah Navvāb Ras~ul Yār Jang. He used to converse in Arabic or Persian; also knew Turkish and French. Was very short-tempered. The ‘ulama and intellectuals of Hyderabad used to attend in large numbers his academic meets. Maulavi ‘Abduṣ ṣamad and Maulavi Ibrāhīm often engaged him in discussions on difficult philosophical issues. One day Afg̲h̲āni discussed with Maulavi Ibrāhīm the issue of juzv-i la-yatajazza (indivisible atom) and spoke so eloquently that all were stunned. He was against the school of the nicarīs (naturalists, led by Syed Aḥmad k̲h̲ān). The fame of Afg̲h̲āni’s scholarship reached Sir Sālār Jang 1 who deputed Maulavi Masiḥ al-Zamān, the teacher of the King, Nizam the 6th, with the message that he wanted to meet him. Afg̲h̲āni met him. Sir Sālār Jang was greatly impressed by him. He sent a message that Afg̲h̲āni should stay on in Hyderabad by joining government service. Afg̲h̲āni declined. He told Ras~ul Yār Jang: “I am too hot-headed a person to adjust with any government service.” and then added that jealousy was rampant in Hyderabad and that the people would not tolerate his elevation and he would be forced to quit in disgrace. Afg̲h̲āni followed Sunni beliefs and used to offer prayers like the Sunnis. He had also, on the suggestion of Ras~ul Yār Jang, started working on an Arabic dictionary; it remained incomplete.

According to W.S. Blunt (who visited India and Hyderabad in 1884 after Afg̲h̲āni had left India), Syed Ali Bilgrami, a high official in the Nizam’s government, was a great admirer of Afg̲h̲āni but considered him too much of a socialist and short-tempered to complete any reform. Ras~ul Yār Jung believed that, in India, there was not a single ‘alim (scholar) of the stature of Afg̲h̲āni.8
A very significant contribution of a historical nature by Afg̲h̲āni was his proposal, made during his Hyderabad stay, for the establishment of a University for Muslims with their mother-tongue (Urdu) as the medium of instruction. 9 He also got some articles published in favor of this proposal. Later, in 1884, in Paris, when W.S. Blunt was leaving for India, Afg̲h̲āni asked him to draw Lord Ripon’s attention to that proposal. Blunt, during his visit to Hyderabad in December, 1883, talked to some officials about it and later in Calcutta, the next month, he consulted the nobles of Hyderabad and Sir Sālār Jang who were in Calcutta with the Nizam who was there to meet the Viceroy. There was total agreement on the proposal.

He submitted the proposal to Lord Ripon. On January 25, Blunt, after consultation with Lord Ripon, sent the proposal to the Nizam through Sir Salar Jang. Sālār Jang sent a reply to the effect that the Nizam had accepted the proposal since it was necessary for the progress of the Muslims.

The Nizam also suggested that Blunt, as the prime mover of this proposal, should extend his stay in India to pursue the matter further. Unfortunately, Blunt could not do so and the proposal could not go any further. But, after fifty years, this very proposal, originally made by Afg̲h̲āni, saw the light of the day (with necessary modifications required due to the changed circumstances) in the establishment of Osmania University in 1918.

This shows the insight of Afg̲h̲āni who, in 1880s, foresaw the potential of higher education in one’s mother- tongue for providing peoples a sound basis of knowledge necessary for meaningful progress. Osmania University remains as the first University of India which adopted in 1918 an Indian language, Urdu, as the medium of instruction in all faculties in humanities, social sciences, physical sciences, medicine and engineering. After Independence, however, Urdu medium was changed to English.

In Calcutta

On his departure from India at the end of 1883, Afg̲h̲āni left behind him a number of disciples. W.S. Blunt, who visited India in 1884, records his interviews with some of the important figures of that time who sympathized with Af_ghāni’s views.10 In Calcutta, there was an influential group of young Muslims who followed the teachings of Af_g~hāni11 rather than that of the other two existing groups among which one, led by Amir ‘Ali, supported Western culture, and the other, led by Navvāb Abdul Lat̤if k̲h̲ān, emphasized religious education for the Muslims of Bengal.12 Blunt reports, on December 24, 1883, meeting some young persons “who were very poor but worshipped Af_ghāni”. 13 Another group of Muslim youth was found “to be having the same liberal views about religion as that of Afg̲h̲āni. They hate England”. 14

As mentioned above, during his Indian visit, Afg̲h̲āni appears more as a spokesman of the East rather than a Muslim political figure leading a movement against the Western interventions in the Muslim countries. He had, later, in al-Vusqa, made it clear that his chief aim was the liberation of the East from the domination of the West and his taking up the cause of the Muslim countries was because the Muslim areas constitute a major part of the East. His Eastern advocacy is eloquently reflected in a lecture he delivered at Albert Hall, Calcutta, on November 8,1882,15 on the invitation of the Principal of Madrasah-yi ‘āliyah, although the latter, for unknown reasons, did not attend the lecture. (Probably, he had changed his mind and decided not to appear hosting the anti-British Afg̲h̲āni.) Afg̲h̲āni expressed his displeasure on the Principal breaking his promise of being present. However, he was keen to address the large number of young Indians who had come to listen to him. He said:

“I am happy to see those who are the product of the land that was the birth place of humanism and from where it spread throughout the world. They belong to the land where, for the first time, the da’irah-yi mu‘addal al-nahār (area of average day) and, mint̤aqat al-br~uj _(the Zodiac) were determined. Every one knows that achieving this was not possible without mastering geometry. Therefore, we can say, that mathematics and geometry have been invented in India. This same science of geometry reached the Arab lands and from there arrived in Europe.”

He pointed out:

“The youth of this same land have now to learn all the laws and the culture of knowledge from Europe. If you deliberate you would find that the Code Roma, the source of all laws in Europe, had been drawn from the four Vedas and the Shastras. The Greeks were their disciples in poetry, literature and thought. Pythagoras, who spread arts and sciences in Greece and whose opinions were accepted as revealed truth needing no proofs, was also their disciple. Now, the land of Hindustan is the same land and the air is the same and the youth who are present, now, the product of this same motherland.—- I am happy that the Indian youth have come out of their long slumber and are taking their own hereditary wealth back and receiving the fruits of the trees planted by them.”

It is to be noted that he was addressing an audience that was, mainly ‘Indian’ and not ‘Muslim’. He invoked the pre-Islamic Indian philosophical and scientific heritage avoiding any reference to the Sultanate and the Mughal periods of Indian history. He was reminding the Indian youth that they should not be discouraged because of their being subjects of the Western rulers; the West’s superiority in knowledge was, in fact, built on their own, Indian, rich scientific heritage—- and, so, what they were getting from the West was their own heritage. Here, we see the ‘Eastern Afg̲h̲āni’ questioning the claims of Western superiority in knowledge. In Egypt, also, he had invoked the pre-Islamic, Pharaohs’ age of magnificent cultural heritage in comparison with the dominating West. What he did not say was that the Indian youth should not forget to take upon the foreign rulers with full confidence and conviction.

During his seven years’ stay in Egypt, Afg̲h̲āni’s anti-British views had acquired a well-defined and aggressive character and had provided an impetus to the Egyptian national movement. By the time he was expelled by the k̲h̲ediv Tavfīq, at the instance of the British government, Afg̲h̲āni had successfully brought in to existence a group of Egyptian scholars, journalists and political leaders of liberal outlook who were conscious of the benefits of European learning, and were united in their efforts to liberate their country from foreign domination.

Among his Indian friends and followers were, Sālār Jang 1,16 Ras~ul Yār k̲h̲ān17, Syed ‘Ali Bilgrāmi18, , Syed ḥusain Bilgrāmi19, Syed ‘Ali Shustari20, Muḥibb-i ḥusain, Sajjād Mirza, Abd-al- ṣamad, Maulavi Ibrāhīm, Syed Muḥammad Vāṣil, 21 all from Hyderabad Deccan; Qāz̤i ‘Abdul ḥaq and Asg̲h̲ar ‘Ali k̲h̲ān, from Bhopal22, and ‘Abdul g̲h̲af~ur Shahbāz al-Bihāri23 and Navvāb ‘Abdul Lat̤if Khan24 , of Calcutta. It was, perhaps, as a result of his influence that the magazines Mu‘allim, edited by Sajjād Mirza, and Mu‘allim-i Shafīq, edited by Muḥibb-i ḥusain.25, were started in Hyderabad. All his articles written in India, except two published in the Dār al-Salt̤anat of Calcutta, appeared in Mu‘allim-i Shafīq. During his stay in Hyderabad, where he remained for nearly three years, he is reported to have been offered a government post which he declined.26 He is also reported to have started work on the preparation of an Arabic dictionary at the request of Sālār Jang 1.27 In the meanwhile, the Egyptian national movement, under the military leadership of Orabi Pasha, had reached its climax in 1882 and Afg̲h̲āni’s stay in Hyderabad was cut short. He was sent to Calcutta under police surveillance and was not allowed to leave the city for some months.28 The government had taken this precaution probably to offset any repercussions that it might have in India. Orabi Pasha’s revolt was not the only reason for the step taken by the Indian government. The government was apprehensive of the influence his articles might have on Indian Muslims.

Writing in his journal al-‘Urvah al-Vu_sqa, in 1884, on British occupation in India, he said that after establishing themselves on the Indian soil the British found that the only force which could provide any resistance to their future advances were the Muslims who had been deprived of their power and authority. They realized that the Muslims had not become reconciled to the loss of their empire and that, as long as they were firm in their religious faith, it was not possible to make them acquiesce to foreign domination. Thus, Afg̲h̲a~ni described the missionary activities of the Christians and the hostile action of the government against the ‘ulama as steps to destroy the faith of the Muslims, thereby, weakening their morale.29

The policy followed by the British rulers in India during the first half of the nineteenth century had a particularly detrimental effect upon the economic stability of the Muslims.30 They were deprived of their jobs in the department of justice, revenue, police and army where they were formerly employed in large numbers. By 1832, the new educational system had come in to force and the Muslims, who had been educated on the oriental pattern, with Persian and Urdu as medium of instruction, had difficulties in obtaining employment. This state of affairs produced great discontent among the Muslims, especially the ‘ulama. Before the introduction of reforms in the educational system, Muslim schools were mostly financed by religious foundations. The ‘ulama were alarmed when the government declared its preference for English language, and became doubtful of the usefulness of their educational institutions. In 1928, the Resumption Laws took over the administration of the large endowments and one of the chief sources of financial aid to these institutions was lost. In 1864, the practice of appointing qāzis was discontinued by the government. All these measures had the effect of curtailing the privileges of the ‘ulama. At the same time their resentment against foreign rulers and their opposition to Western reforms became increasingly pronounced. Thus, when Syed Aḥmad k̲h̲ān embarked upon his mission, the main opposition came not from the Hindus or the government but from the orthodox sections of the ‘ulama. Syed Aḥmad k̲h̲ān strongly advocated the learning of modern sciences and the use of English as the medium of instruction, and appealed to the Muslims to consider the issue without any religious bias. This stand was criticised by the more conservative ‘ulama. On the question of language, they favoured Urdu as the medium of instruction. This view was supported by Afg̲h̲āni who laid emphasis on the fact that the progress of a nation depended on having all scientific knowledge necessary for its industrial, commercial and cultural development in its own language. He suggested that Urdu might be adopted as a national language and that its scope might be widened by drawing upon the resources of the allied languages such as Sanskrit, Marathi, Bengali and even English, if necessary.31 At the same time, Afg̲h̲āni gave due importance to the learning of English not only because it was the language of the rulers but that its knowledge was useful for transferring all modern sciences and arts in to the national language and also to provide facilities for conducting business and commercial transactions.32

Afg̲h̲āni found that Indian Muslims were averse to Western culture on religious grounds which had also coloured their outlook on education.33 He blamed the ‘ulama for their dogmatic attitude towards modern knowledge and held them responsible for not giving a correct lead to the Muslims by failing to popularise modern sciences among their followers.34 His concept of an ‘ālim was not that of a person who merely preached Islamic doctrines or issued fatāvās (legal opinions based on various schools of Islamic jurisprudence). An ‘ālim, according to him, was a scholar fully conversant with ancient as well as modern sciences through which he could build up the character of a nation.35 Again, in his article, Favā’d-i Falsafah, he criticized Muslim philosophers who merely re-produced the concepts of Greek philosophers without any critical examination. His evaluation of morality and defining of virtue and vice as not always eternal valiues but relative to various situations is quite novel coming from a Muslim scholar. Another formulation is that a belief in superstations/ irrational concepts does not in any way hamper material progress as the Greek history shows; religious beliefs and material progres are two separate mutually exclusive regimes. Communities can progress along with their beliefs provided thcy also have the knowledge required for progress. In all the afore-mentioned discussions he offers his own views without any reference to any traditional Muslim authorities.

However, his main criticism was reserved for the Aligarh school led by Syed Aḥmad k̲h̲ān, who believed that the Indian Muslims could regain their economic stability, first, by inspiring confidence in the government as to their loyalty, and, second, by acquiring Western modes of life and modern education. Among the objects of Mohammadan Anglo-Oriental College, as mentioned by him, were “to make the Mussalmāns of India worthy and useful subjects of the British Crown; to inspire in them that loyalty which springs not from servile submission to a foreign rule but from genuine appreciation of the blessings of good governance.”36 In order to give religious sanction to the need of bringing the Muslims nearer to the Christians, he wrote a book entitled, Tabyīn al-Kalām, 37 a commentary of the Bible, refuting the common belief of the Muslims that the Scriptures were corrupted by the Christians and the Jews, and a treatise entitled, Aḥkām-i t̤a ‘ām-i Ahl-i Kitāb, (Rules for Dining with the People of the Book)38 , in favour of inter-dining with the Christians. Holding no other authority except the Qur’ān as the source of Islamic beliefs, he explained that Islam was a religion of nature and, therefore, all beliefs must not go against natural laws and should be based on rational grounds. It was this point of view which found expression in his book, Tafsīr al-Qur’ān,39 and aroused a storm of protest not only from the extreme sections of the ‘ulama, but also from those who shared his enthusiasm for modern learning and earned for him and his followers the title of nicari .40

There is reason to presume that Afg̲h̲āni did not read all the writings of Syed Aḥmad k̲h̲ān since he was not fully conversant with Urdu. However, the criticism contained in his articles shows that he was given a fairly good account of the latter’s career, the high official patronage which he enjoyed, and of the contents of Tabyīn al-Kalām and Tafsīr al-Qur’ān. During his stay in Hyderabad he wrote a treatise entitled, ḥaqiqat-i Maz̲hab-i Nicari v Bayān-i ḥāl-i Nicariyān (The Truth about the Nicari Doctrine and a Description of the Nicaris)41, which was ostensibly a condemnation of Syed Aḥmad k̲h̲ān, based upon a mistaken view of his religious ideas. Confusing Aḥmad k̲h̲ān’s concept of Nature with the one advanced by the Naturalist school of philosophers, he condemned him and his followers as heretics and atheists.42 Then followed several articles attacking the political, educational and religious outlook of Syed Aḥmad k̲h̲ān and his followers. He criticized the principles and method of Syed Aḥmad’s Tafsīr al-Qur’ān which he described as an attempt to make Muslims servile to the English,43 . He pointed out that the interpretation of the fundamental principles of Islam in other than their literal meaning might lead to complete loss of faith. This he considered dangerous especially at a time when Indian Muslims were subjected to the influence of their Christian rulers and the intense activities of Christian missions.44 He regarded the Tabyīn al-Kala~m as an attempt to please the rulers.45 In fact, the high favour in which Syed Aḥmad k̲h̲ān was held by the British government and the official patronage extended to the Mohammadan Anglo-Oriental College made Afg̲h̲āni more suspicious of the former’s motives of religious reform and his education policy. Syed Aḥmad and his colleagues did not respond to Afg̲h̲āni’s criticism.

For Afg̲h̲āni, the re-orientation of Islam was dependent upon two factors: first, the liberation of Muslim countries from Western domination; and, second, the freedom of Muslim mind from resistance against modern learning. In the peculiar conditions obtaining in India at that time, these objectives were advocated separately, to the exclusion of one or the other, by the two rival groups led by the ‘ulama and Syed Aḥmad k̲h̲ān, respectively. Being essentially an enemy of foreign imperialism, Afg̲h̲āni’s sympathies naturally lay with the anti-British attitude of the‘ulama although he did not share their hostility to modern learning. On the other hand, he was against the political views of the Aligarh school which aimed at a compromise with the British rulers.

It is to be noted that, before this Indian visit, during his brief sojourn in Constantinople and during his seven years’ in Egypt, he was chiefly engaged in, (i) projecting Islam as a functioning social, economic and political system of life rather than a theology, and, (ii) leading a political movement against the Western/British domination of Egyptian government of k̲h̲ediv Tavfiq.

His concept of al-Vahdat al-Islāmiyah had not yet emerged. It was after his return from India to Paris when in his journal, al-‘Urvah al-Vu_sqa, he introduced this novel project as a means for a collective political, social, educational and economic regeneration of the Muslim societies of the world. While no notice had been taken by the Indian Muslims of his views expressed in India on the urgent need of fundamental changes in their attitudes towards religion and life, al-‘Urvah received considerable attention of the Indian Urdu press. Afg̲h̲āni had expressed with approval reproduction of his views expressed in al’Urvah in Indian journals like, Koh-i N~ur, Mushīr-i Qaiṣar, Avadh Ak̲h̲bār, Dār al-Sultanah and Vat̤an. He also mentions that persons who gathered around him during his stay in Paris included some Indians, as well, who helped him in the publication of the journal.46 It was about twenty years, later, that his pan-Islamic project attracted the attention of the English and Urdu press in India and by the British press.
āzād (weekly) of Lucknow of January 22, 1892 in its editorial note referring to critical comments in the Indian newspapers on a book on Afg̲h̲āni written by Riyāz̤ al-Dīn Aḥmad, points out that, according to this criticism, Afg̲h̲āni was opposed to England. The critics do not believe that Af_ghāni was an Afghan. He was with Dilip Singh during his period of refuge in Russia. Afg̲h̲āni with the help of the Russian journalist, Katkof, was staying in Moscow. They also say that Afg̲h̲āni openly declares that Islam cannot flourish until England were safe. All the problems of Afghanistan are the creation of England. The Indian daily, Pioneer, comments that Afg̲h̲āni is a man of strong reformist zeal. However, the newspaper denies that England is against Islam. āzād comments that it is not a sin to write a biography of such a person; attack on the author is meaningless. In the issue of March 11, 1892, āzād mentions an article by Padre Arhobas published recently in Contemporary Review that Afg̲h̲āni was a well-intentioned Eastern diplomat who had taken up the cause of Muslim sufferings in Afghanistan, Iran and Constantinople. In an article by Muḥmmad Ma|zhar in the Urdu journal, Saḥifah, V.2, No. 11, on, Pan Islam or Ittihād al-Muslimīn, it is pointed out that this concept was being discussed in Europe and America as a project to strengthen the position of the Sult̤ān of Turkey. However, the concept of pan-Islam is not found anywhere except in some forgotten writings of fifteen years back, by W.S. Blunt and Jamāl al-Dīn al-Afg̲h̲āni. In fact, the spread of Islam in Europe and America and travels of some able and learned Muslims to Muslim countries should be considered the basis of present movement of pan-Islam. In India, it started with the efforts of extending help to the Muslims of Europe and America by the Indian Muslims and with the publication of books, ‘Ahd-i ḥuk~umat-i ḥamīdiyah, by Maulavi Insha’llah k̲h̲ān and, Safar- nāmah-yi Miṣr v Rom v Shām by Shibli Nu‘māni. The author thinks that the 1895 disturbances in Armenia produced great resentment among Indian Muslims. A big public meeting was held for the first time in Madras against these developments; this event had a special place in the current pan-Islamism movements. In this meeting, the Muslims, for the first time, declared that differences of countries, governments, languages and nationalities had no impact on the circle of Islamic unity. This meeting was considered very significant by the Anglo-Indian and British press and the London Times wrote a leading article on this meeting. In a biography of Amir ‘Abdu’l Raḥman of Afghanistan (considered in certain circles to have been written by the Sultan, himself) a proposal was made for unification of Afghanistan, Iran and Turkey. A pan-Islamism society was also established in London.

In the second part of this article, published in the issue of February, 1908, the author denies that there is any conspiracy against any one; and concedes that a movement that did not exist a few years back, has appeared throughout the Islamic world. The Muslims have realized that they have to progress like Europe with the help of science. The author point out that pan-Islam is not a monster which would swallow Christianity. This movement aimed at checking their growing decline by going back to the real objectives of Islam and to regain their past glory. It is a movement for social and religious unity and not for political unity. In the author’s opinion, the Indian institution, Nadvah al-‘Ulama, in India also aims at such unity although its area of activity is limited to India. The second indication of Muslims getting involved in Muslim unity movement is their growing interest in the affairs of Muslim countries. The newspapers run by the Muslims are publishing news from Muslim countries, also. Third, there is a growing desire among the Indian Muslims to travel to Muslim countries. The most important step taken by Arabia with regard to the pan-Islamic movement was the project of Hijaz railway that was to be built in collaboration of all Muslim countries.

However, the influence of Afg̲h̲āni’s religio-political idea of total change found greater expression in later years, mainly, in the writings of certain eminent individuals such as Maulānā ‘Abu’l Kalām āzād and the poet-thinker, Iqbāl. āzād was deeply influenced by Afg̲h̲āni’s model of ‘functioning Islam’. In the beginning of twentieth century, he started in 1912 a weekly journal, al-Hilāl, exactly on the pattern of al-‘Urvah inviting Indian Muslims to go back to the teachings of the Qur’ān. The early issues of this journal published several articles on Afg̲h̲āni’s life and career and his views on religious reforms (but not on his concept of Vaḥdat al-Islāmiyah). Iqbāl was another distinguished thinker who believed that the man “ who fully realized the importance of the task (of rethinking the whole system of Islam without completely breaking with the past) and whose deep insight in to the inner meaning without completely breaking with the past and whose deep insight in to the inner meaning of the history of Muslim thought and life, combined with a broad vision engendered by his by wide experience of man and manners, would have made him a link between the past and the future was Jamal-ud-Din Afghani.”48

However, Hyderabad remained consistently attached to its 19th century guest as one of the most discussed persons during the last century. It was only in Hyderabad that his first comprehensive biography in Urdu was written, the only collections of Urdu translations of his Arabic and Persian articles and a collection of articles by eminent intellectuals, ‘ulama and political figures of Hyderabad were published. However, with the growth of Indian Independence Movement and after Independence this influence became subordinated to several problems specific to Muslims and was reduced to a mere sentimental sympathy for an ideal Muslim brotherhood.

References

1. For full details of Cf. g̲h̲ulām Jīlāni A’|zami, Majallah Kābul, July 1931, pp. 35 et seq
2. Shaik̲h̲ Muḥammad ‘Abduh (tr.), Rasālah fi Ibt̤āl Maz̲hab al-Dahriyīn v Bayān Mafāsidihim v I_sbāt an al-Din Asās al-Madaniyah v’l-Kufr Fasād al-‘Umrān, Beirut, 1303 A. H., Introduction, p.5.
3. ḥāji Shari‘atullah, in 1802, started his reform movement known as the Farā’iz̤i movement aiming at the purification of Islamic beliefs from Hindu rites and customs. Under the leadership of his son, Muḥammad Muḥsin, known as Dādu Miyān (1819-60), the movement declared, as its mission, besides religious reforms, the defence of the rights of the poor peasantry against Hindu zamīndārs and the government. For a considerable time the movement enjoyed large support of the peasants and the labourers.
4. Karāmat ‘Ali (d. 1873) followed the programme of religious reforms introduced by Syed Aḥmad of Rāi Bareli
5. Syed Aḥmad (1786-1831) of Rāi Bareli and Shāh Ismā’īl (1779-1831) concentrated more on the political rehabilitation of Indian Muslims than on purely religious reforms. Their armed action against the Sikhs in Punjab was initially encouraged by the government which afterwards became apprehensive of its growing strength and popularity. The movement was accused of propagating Vahhābi doctrines and was crushed by the government.
6. These institutions were founded by Navvāb ‘Adu’l Lat̤īf k̲h̲ān, Syed Aḥmad k̲h̲ān and Syed Amir ‘Ali, respectively.
7. Qāz̤i ‘Abdu’l g̲h̲affār,ā_sār-i Jamāl al-Din Afg̲h̲āni, Delhi, 1944, pp. 121-124
8. Ibid.
9. Ibid., pp. 126 et seq
10. Ibid., pp. 124 et seq
11. Ibid.
12.Ibid.
13. Ibid., p. 125
14. Inbid.
15. Rif ‘at, Syed Mubārizuddīn , Maqālāt-i Jamāl al-Dīn Afg̲h̲āni, Hyderabad, 1944, pp. 33 et seq
16. He was the ṣadr-i A’|zam of Hyderabad at that time.
17. With his official titles he was known as Muḥi al-Daulah Navvāb Ras~ul Yār Jang. Afg̲h̲āni stayed at his house. Qā|zi, op.cit., p.122. He was a judge and chief of the ‘ulama of Hyderabad. W.S. Blunt, India under Rippon, London, 1949, pp. 63, 68.
18. A well-known scholar who was employed as a civil engineer, Blunt, op.cit., pp. 62, 63.
19. Brother of Syed ‘Ali Bilgrāmi. Was a scholar and private secretary to Sālār Jang 1.
20. Head of the Shi’ah ‘ulama of Hyderabad. Blunt, op. cit., p. 69.
21. Principal of Madrasah-yi A‘izzah, Hyderabad. Qā|zi, op. cit., p.122.
22. Maḥmud ‘Ali k̲h̲ān, Ta’rik̲h̲-i Af_g-h~nistan, Lahore, Urdu translation of Afg̲h̲āni’s Tatimah al-Bay~ān fi Ta’rik̲h̲ al-Afg̲h̲ān, p. 12.
23. He compiled the first collection of Afg̲h̲āni’s Persian articles published in Indian journals in 1884 under the title, Maqālāt-i Jamāliyah.
24. He was a judge in Calcutta. Blunt, op. cit., p.97.
25. These journals were published in 1880 and 1881, respectively.
26. Qā|zi, op. cit., p.123.
27. Ibid., pp. 123-124.
28. ‘Abduh, op. cit., p. 8.
29. Al-‘Urvah al-Vu_sqa, Beirut, 1328 A.H.
30. W.W. Hunter, The Indian Muslims, Calcutta, 1945,, pp. 135-135.
31. ‘Abdu’l g̲h̲af~ur Shahbāz al-Bihāri, Maqālāt-i Jamāliyah, Calcutta, 1884, pp. 20-21.
32. Ibid., p. 21.
33. Ibid., p.15
34. Ibid., pp. 49-50.
35. Ibid., p. 8.
36. Quoted, G.F.I. Graham, The Life and Works of Syed Ahmad Khan, London, 1885, p. 275
37. Published in 1862.
38. Published in 1868.
39. Vol.1, published in 1880; Vol.2, 1882; Vol. 3, 1885; Vol. 4, 1888; Vol.5, 1892; Vol. 6, 1895.
40. For full details of such opposition Cf. J.M.S. Baljon, The Reform and Religious Ideas of Sir Sayyid Ahmad Khan, Leiden, 1994, pp. 68 et seq. Alt̤āf ḥusain ḥāli, ḥayāt-i Jāvid, Lahore, 1957 edition, pp. 612 et seq. Syed Amīr ‘Ali and his followers were described by Navvāb Abdu’l Lat̤īf as ‘the worshippers of Nature and were accused of “having lost contact with the community by effecting English dress and ways”. W.S. Blunt, op. cit., pp. 97, 113.
41. It was first published in India in 1298 A.H., followed by several editions in original Persian and translations in Urdu, Turkish and Arabic. The Arabic translation by Muḥammad ‘Abduh was published in 1303 A.H., in Beirut; See Chapter 4 for ff.; pp. 81-83 above
42. Cf. Al-‘Urvah, Part 11, August 28, 1884, p. 138.
43. Maqālāt-i Jamāliyah, p. 46
44. Ibid., pp. 44-45
45. Al-‘Urvah, op. cit., p. 137.
46. Al-‘Urvah, Prt 1, May 1, 1884, p. 101.
47. Muḥammad Iqbāl, The Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam, Lahore, 1954, p. 97.