fundamentalism, communalism and secularism
whenever we are in india
When we talk about fundamentalism, we are concerned with religious fundamentalism. Fundamentalism is a movement or belief in a return to the original texts or core tenets of revealed religion—usually in contrast, with modernism and liberalism in religion. Fundamentalism in India is related to Hindu fundamentalism and Muslim fundamentalism. Orthodox political parties have an ideology that goes back to rigid Hinduism—the Ram temple and mythological heroes. Muslim fundamentalism on the other hand looks towards the Babri Masjid. These two fundamentalists are not unanimous on the mosque or the temple.
Clashes between Hindu and Muslim fundamentalists
The current Hindu–Muslim conflict is not really a religious conflict, nor is it rooted in medieval history, as is often assumed. drink
buddhism Despite political conflicts such as Aurangzeb and Shivaji, and religious persecution of Hindus by some Muslim rulers, India does not have a history of devastating, centuries-old religious sectarian wars. Nor do we have any historical record of Hindu-Muslim riots in pre-British India. After a period of Islamic invasions, conflicts with invading Afghani, Mughal and Turkish Muslims were resolved constructively in India.
Among many other attempts at accommodation, the Bhakti movement, within the Hindu pantheon, and Sufism, within the Muslim pantheon, built lasting bridges between the two contrasting religions and softened some of their conflicts on a number of theological issues. Kabir, Nanak, Rahim, Ravidas, Tukharam as well as many Sufi saints challenged the religious bigotry and tyranny of those who claimed to speak in the name of God. He created a set of shared beliefs between followers of Hinduism and Islam, by preaching that a life of piety and love was the true religion—not sectarian ritual or blind imitation of a priest.
Almost all the saints, bhaktas and sufis had followers among Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs alike. They influenced the language and belief systems of popular religion and helped develop human norms of living together. Despite all the bloody Hindu-Muslim conflicts of the twentieth century, it is remarkable that none of the major conflicts have been of a religious nature. The contemporary Hindu–Muslim conflict is largely a product of the politics of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.
Communalism is the result of conflict between Hindu-Muslim fundamentalists. Communalism outside India is usually defined in one of the following ways: (1) It is a principle of government in which virtually autonomous local communities are loosely bound into a federation.
(2) Belief in or practice of communal ownership of goods and property, (3) Firm devotion to the interests of one’s own ethnic group rather than that of society as a whole.
It is noteworthy that in the West the word communal is mostly used in a positive sense. But in India it is always used pejoratively to denote a person with religious prejudice. There are parties in India who have hijacked religious symbols for electoral and other political purposes, indicating that their concern is not religious at all.
Communalism
The rising trend of communalism and the accompanying violence has created a feeling of insecurity among the religious minorities. Muslims, Sikhs and Christians in particular fear discrimination and confrontation in the coming days. It may be just a fear, but the country cannot afford to let almost one-fifth of the country’s population fall victim to the crippling suspicion and insecurity. The events between 1984 and 1999 in Kashmir, Punjab, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Gujarat, Assam, Orissa, Andhra Pradesh and Delhi give ample evidence and taste of the devastating consequences of various forms of communal virus. Religious minorities in India are protected by the constitution which provides for justice, tolerance, equality and freedom. But in an era where religious fundamentalism is shifting to religious bigotry, intolerance and narrow-mindedness, the notion of ‘Ram Rajya’ is not misinterpreted by minorities, especially Muslims, as the rule of Lord Ram i.e. Hindu rule. , Police presence (as in Amritsar in 1985 and Kashmir in November 1993 and May 1995) to track and investigate terrorist hideouts in and near religious places is seen as interference with religious faith . Therefore, there is a need to analyze and debate the problem of communalism and communal violence in order to avoid harm to the peace and integrity of the nation. It has become absolutely necessary to define ‘communalism’. Also, it is equally relevant to find out who is ‘communal’.
concept of communalism
Communalism is an ideology which states that the society is divided into religious communities, whose interests are different and sometimes even in conflict with each other. The protest by the people of one community against the people of other community and religion can be called ‘communalism’. This enmity goes to the extent of falsely accusing, harming and deliberately insulting a particular community and extends to looting, burning of houses and shops of the helpless and weak, insulting women and even killing individuals . ‘Communal persons’ are those who do politics through religion. Among leaders, he is like a religious leader.
are ‘communal’, who run business enterprises and institutions like their religious communities and cry “Hinduism, Islam, Sikhism or Christianity are in danger” the moment they find that donations to their pious ‘corporations’ Is finished. or their leadership has been challenged, or their ideology has been questioned. Thus, a ‘communalist’ is not one who is a man of religion but one who preaches
Works by connecting politics with religion. These power politicians are not good Hindus and not good Muslims, Sikhs, Christians, Parsis or Buddhists. They can be seen as dangerous political ‘scum’. For him, God and religion are tools used to live luxuriously as a ‘king parasite’ of society and to achieve political goals (After Day, June, 1990: 35-36) .
tk Oommen (1989) has suggested six dimensions of communalism: assimilationist, benevolent, regressive, regressive, isolationist and isolationist. Assimilationist communalism is one in which smaller religious groups are assimilated/integrated into a larger religious group. Such communalism claims that Scheduled Tribes are Hindus, or that Jains, Sikhs and Buddhists are Hindus and should be covered under the Hindu Marriage Act. Welfare communalism aims at the welfare of a particular community, improving the standard of living and providing education and health to Christians by Christian associations, or Zoroastrian associations working for the upliftment of Zoroastrianism. The purpose of such communal mobilization is to work only for the members of one’s own community. Retreatist sectarianism is one in which a small religious community keeps itself away from politics: for example, the Bahá’í community, which forbids its members from participating in political activities. Vengeful sectarianism seeks to harm, hurt and injure members of other religious communities. Separatist communalism is one in which a religious or cultural group; Wants to maintain its cultural distinctiveness and calls for a separate regional state within the country, for example, the Mizos and Nagas in north-east India or the Bodos in Assam, or the Adivasis of Jharkhand in Bihar, or the West Gorkhas demand for Gorkhaland in Bengal, or Pahari people for Uttarakhand in Uttar Pradesh, or Vidarbha in Maharashtra. Finally, separatist communalism is one in which a religious community seeks a separate political identity and demands an independent state. A very small extremist section of the Sikh population demanding Khalistan or some Muslim extremists demanding independent Kashmir were engaged in practicing this type of communalism. Out of these six types of communalism, the last three movements create problems giving rise to communal riots, terrorism and extremism.
communalism in india
India’s pluralistic society is made up of many religious groups; However, these groups are further divided into various sub-groups. Hindus are divided into sects such as Arya Samajists, Shivits, Sanatanis and Vaishnavas, while Muslims are divided into Shias and Sunnis on the one hand, and ashrafs (aristocrats), ajlafs (weavers, butchers, carpenters, oilmen), And Arzal on the other side. Strained relations between Hindus and Muslims have long existed, while some Hindus and Sikhs have begun to view each other with suspicion only during the past fifteen years. Although now in some states, we also hear about some conflicts between Hindus and Christians and Muslims and Christians, yet, by and large, Christians in India do not feel deprived or exploited by other communities. Shias and Sunnis also have a biased attitude towards each other among the Muslims. Here we will mainly analyze Hindu-Muslim and briefly Hindu-Sikh relations.
Hindu-Muslim communalism
Muslim invasions of India began in the tenth century, but the early Muslim conquerors were more interested in plunder than in establishing religious dominance. It was when Qutubuddin became the first Sultan of Delhi that Islam set foot in India. Later, it was the Mughals who consolidated their empire and Islam in the process. Some of the policies of the Mughal rulers, such as conversion efforts, destruction of Hindu temples and construction of mosques on these temples, led to communal strife between the Hindu and Muslim communities. When the British established their dominance in India, they initially adopted a policy of patronizing the Hindus, but after the First War of Independence in 1857, in which Hindus and Muslims fought side by side, the British adopted a policy of ‘divide and rule’. policy, as a result of which they are deliberately promoting communal conflicts to maintain their supremacy. Relations between Hindus and Muslims became more strained during the freedom struggle when power politics came into play. Thus, although animosity between Hindus and Muslims is an old issue, Hindu-Muslim communalism in India can be described as a legacy of British rule during the freedom struggle. This communalism is working today in a much changed social and political environment.
This is the biggest threat to the secular ideals enshrined in our Constitution.
Let us examine the origins and historical roots of Hindu-Muslim communalism after the First World War in order to provide some understanding of the phenomenon in its contemporary context. what were the religious and political ideologies and aspirations of the participating political parties
done in the freedom struggle? The nationalist appeal was to unite various groups by addressing two important factors: first, freedom from exploitation by colonial rulers, and second, democratic rights for all citizens. But major political parties like the Congress, the Muslim League, the Communist Party and the Hindu Mahasabha did not share these sentiments in the thirties and forties of the twentieth century. From the very beginning, the Congress adopted a policy of ‘unity from above’ in which efforts were made to win over the middle class and upper class in its favor. The Muslims, who were accepted as the leaders of the Muslim community, were left with the task of drawing the Muslim masses into the movement. This ‘unity from above’ approach could not promote Hindu-Muslim co-operation in fighting imperialism. All serious attempts to bring about Hindu-Muslim unity between 1918 and 1922 were in the nature of negotiations between the top leaders of the Hindu, Muslim and Sikh communities and the Congress. Often, the Congress acted as an intermediary between the various communal leaders rather than acting as an active organizer of the forces of secular nationalism. Thus, there was an implicit acceptance within the early nationalist leadership that Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs were distinct communities sharing only political and economic concerns, but not religious, social and cultural practice. This is how the seeds of communalism were sown in the first and second quarter of the twentieth century. However, till 1936, the Muslim League and the Hindu Mahasabha remained organizationally very weak. In the 1937 elections, the Muslim League won only 22 per cent of the total seats (482) reserved for Muslims in the provincial assemblies. It also did not do well in Muslim-majority provinces. It was only after 1942 that the Muslim League emerged as a strong political party and claimed the right to speak for all Muslims; Jinnah described the Congress party as a ‘Hindu’ organisation, a claim supported by the British. Within the Congress, Madan Mohan Malviya, K.M. Munshi and Sardar Patel took Hindutva positions. Thus, the Congress could not purge its ranks of communal elements.
While the slogan of Pakistan was first articulated by the Muslim League in 1940, Congress leaders accepted the partition of the country in 1946, which led to the displacement of millions of Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs amid bloodshed and carnage.
Even after partition, Congress failed to control communalism. Thus, it can be said that Hindu-Muslim communalism in India had political-social origins and religion alone was not the cause of conflict between Hindus and Muslims, economic interests and cultural and social customs (such as festivals, social customs and lifestyle) were factors that further divided the two communities.
Sixteen cities in India have been identified as more vulnerable to Hindu-Muslim communal riots. Five of these (Moradabad, Meerut, Aligarh, Agra and Varanasi) are in Uttar Pradesh; one in Maharashtra (Aurangabad); one (Ahmedabad) in Gujarat; One in Andhra Pradesh (Hyderabad), two in Bihar (Jamshedpur and Patna), two in Assam (Silchar and Gauhati), one in West Bengal (Calcutta); one (Bhopal) in Madhya Pradesh; one in Jammu and Kashmir (Srinagar); and one (Cuttack) in Orissa. Since eleven cities are located in the northern belt, three in the eastern belt and two in the southern belt, can it be assumed that Muslims in South India are culturally better assimilated because of their involvement in trade and commerce, for which Good will is required. Community? Amazingly, this fact applies to five cities in UP. also. Therefore, we have to find another explanation for this phenomenon.
Hindu-Muslim animosity can be attributed to a complex set of factors: these are: (1) Muslim invasions in which invaders looted property and built mosques over/near Hindu temples, (2) Muslim separatism as a result of their British encouragement for their own purposes during their imperial rule, (3) the behavior of some Muslims in India after partition, reflects their pro-Pakistan attitude. Such behavior creates a feeling in the majority community that Muslims are not patriotic. The stereotypical image of an Indian Muslim that pervades the Hindu psyche is that of a bigoted, introverted outcast. A Muslim similarly sees a Hindu as a sly, all-powerful opportunist and feels victimized by him and alienated from the mainstream of society, (4) finding a new aggression on the part of Muslim political parties. A place in the country in an effort to. Attempts by some Muslim extremists to get ‘foreign funds’, turn into foreign agents, indulge in a well-designed scheme to subvert the secular ideals of the country and instigate Indian Muslims and solve their problems about to
There are reports, perhaps out of desperation because they have been affected
From the wave of Islamic fundamentalism in West Asia and Pakistan. Politicians have simply taken advantage of the numerical strength of Muslims (especially in Kerala, Kashmir and Uttar Pradesh) to strike barter deals, secure a share of Muslim seats in parliament and legislatures, and amass power and wealth for themselves and their friends. to seek. (6) The government is also responsible for the neglect of the Muslims, large sections of whom feel alienated and consequently fall prey to selfish politicians. The ruling elite only preach religious harmony and have little understanding of the real problems of Muslims. The Hindu leadership deals only with those Muslim leaders who obey them.
Not surprisingly, Indian Muslims see their future as a question of ‘us’ versus ‘them’. When they make their demands known, as any section of society tends to express their grievances, it often erupts into an orgy of Hindu-Muslim violence, leading to accusations of foreign provocation . Should the Muslim problem be seen only as a communal problem? Is it a fact that the Hindu-Muslim issue is no different from the anti-Brahmin agitation in Tamil Nadu, or the inter-caste conflict in Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and some other states, or the Bengal-Assam problem in Assam, or the Maharashtrian problem in non-Maharashtra? Maharashtrian struggle? In fact the problem is of social and economic interest and rigidity and change in values.
Extremist Hindus say that Muslims are being pampered in the country. The Ramjanmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute in 1992-93 further affected the delicate balance of communal harmony. Disillusioned with the Congress, Muslims developed faith in the Janata Dal (1990), the Samajwadi Party (1995), the Bahujan Samaj Party and the United Front (1996). The assassination of Rajiv Gandhi (May 1991) followed by the break-up of the Janata Dal (November 1990), the Bharatiya Janata Party coming to power in four states (Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Himachal Pradesh) in November 1993. at the Center in 1998, and Janata Dal in Karnataka and Telugu Desam in Andhra Pradesh in 1994 elections, and Shiv Sena and BJP in Maharashtra in March 1995 elections and break-up of coalition ministry of BJP, SP and BSP in Gujarat and BJP in Uttar Pradesh and BSP, the failure of the SP and BSP to win a majority in the Uttar Pradesh elections in October 1996, and the failure of the Samajwadi Party to support Sonia Gandhi in forming a ministry at the Center after Vajpayee’s defeat in Parliament in April 1999—these All illusions have been created. Muslims today feel more concerned about their safety and security than ever before.
Hindu-Sikh communalism
Sikhs make up less than 2 percent of India’s population. Although widely spread throughout the country and even abroad, their greatest concentration is in Punjab, where they constitute the majority of the state’s population.
The Sikh movement started in Punjab in the early eighties. The number of killings increased and the Sikh protest became organised, militant and increasingly violent. In 1984, when the army launched Operation Blue Star to seize weapons from the Golden Temple in Amritsar and arrest militants, Sikhs reacted violently. When Indira Gandhi was assassinated in October 1984 and thousands of Sikhs were killed and their property looted, burnt or destroyed in Delhi and other states, some Sikh extremists were so incensed that they killed hundreds of Hindus. killed in trains and buses, destroyed their property and forced many Hindus to leave Punjab. In May 1988, when Operation Black Thunder was once again launched by the army to flush out terrorists from the Golden Temple in Amritsar, which remained under their control for about ten days, Sikhs bombed, killed Hindus and looted banks. robbed the Thus relations between Sikhs and Hindus remained strained for almost a decade and a half. However, the extremist Sikh militancy in Punjab has now been suppressed and relations between the people of the two communities have improved significantly since 1993. There is goodwill and respect among them for each other’s religious beliefs and places of worship.
racial violence
Apart from Hindu-Muslim conflicts and Hindu-Sikh feuds, how do we view relations between different ethnic groups, between Assamese and non-Assamese? In Assam, for nearly 150 years the state’s economic development was fueled by imported labor and enterprise from outside the state. In this period spanning over a century and a half, Assam has been home to generations of so-called ‘outsiders’ who know no home, no land, except the soil of Assam. Some have become really rich, but most remain extremely poor. The Assamese have now raised the question of nationality. All Assam Students’ Union (AASU) and All Assam Gana Parishad (AAG)
The movement (which gave rise to the AGP as a political party) confused ‘outsiders’ with ‘foreigners’ (including Bengali refugees from Bangladesh). Spectacular figures as to the number of foreigners (Bahiragat) illegally hiding in the state ranged from five million to seven million. This issue of freeing Assam from foreigners led the state for six years from 1979 till the Assam Accord on August 15, 1985.
Held for ransom for a year. Hate was incited against Bodos, Bengalis, Marwaris and non-Assamese Muslims. This separatist movement was responsible for thousands of innocent deaths. The massacre of 1,383 women and children and some men in Nellie and its surrounding ten villages in Nowgong district was a part of this ethnic violence. The AGSP, which was in power between 1985 and 1990, could not control ethnic tensions.
The ULFA militants launched a movement which became so strong that President’s rule was imposed in the state in November 1990 instead of holding elections in January 1991. The army and security forces launched a cordon and cordon operation; Recovery of rebels and weapons. However, President’s Rule was revoked in June 1991 when the new Congress government assumed power in the state. But the ULFA militants also shocked the new government by kidnapping some government employees, including some top officials of ONGC, from different parts of the state on its very first day in office. Even the May 1996 elections could not stop the Bodo vendetta. The extremists have not yet realized that Assam is like all other states of India, and it belongs to all legitimate citizens of India, whatever language they speak, whatever religion they follow and whatever rituals and customs they follow. Let’s do rituals. The Bodos—a tribe that comprised about 49 percent of Assam’s population in 1947 and about 29 percent in 1991 and that ruled Assam until about 1825—are now demanding autonomy. Although an accord was signed by the Assam government and the Bodo leadership represented by the All Bodo Students’ Union (ABSU) and the Bodo People’s Action Committee (BPAC) in February 1993, the issue still remains unresolved. Bodo leaders and the state government failed to reach an agreement on the boundary issue and transfer about 3,000 villages to the Bodoland Autonomous Council. The Bodos also do not want the Assamese language to be imposed on the indigenous tribals. The Bodo movement took place in fits and starts in the 1960s, 1970s, 1980s and 1990s, however, it has now gathered momentum. The Bodos now demand a Union Territory named ‘Udayachal’. Violent activities such as bomb blasts and blowing up of roads and railway bridges by Bodo militants point to the need for strong action by the government to curb insurgent activities, both domestic and ‘foreign’ and aiding and abetting insurgent activities.
communal violence
In communal violence, people belonging to two different religious communities are mobilized against each other and there are feelings of enmity, emotional anger, exploitation, social discrimination and social marginalization. A high degree of cohesion builds around tension and polarization in one community against another. The targets of attack are members of the ‘enemy’ community. Generally, there is no leadership in communal riots which can effectively control and control the riot situation. Thus it can be said that communal violence is mainly based on hatred, enmity and revenge.
Ever since the communalization of politics, communal violence has increased both quantitatively and qualitatively. Gandhi was the first victim after several people were killed in the 1970s and 1980s. Following the destruction of the Babri structure in Ayodhya in December 1992 and the bomb blasts in Bombay in early 1993, communal riots escalated in Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu, Bihar, Uttar Pradesh and Kerala. While some political parties tolerate ethno-religious communalism, some others even encourage it. Recent examples of this tolerance, indifference and passive acceptance or tacit acceptance of activities or religious organizations by some political leaders and some political parties are found in attacks on Christian missionaries and violent activities against Christians in Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh and Allahabad. , The Emergency in the mid-1970s started a trend of criminal elements entering mainstream politics. This phenomenon has now penetrated Indian politics to such an extent that religious fanaticism, casteism and the mixing of religion and politics have increased in different dimensions. Instead of taking a collective stand against these negative impulses affecting our society, political parties and political leaders adopt a ‘holier than thou’ attitude towards each other.
Hindu organizations have accused Muslims and Christians of forcibly converting Hindus. without getting involved in the controversy of conversion or religion
If the conversion was forced or voluntary, the same can be said that raising the issue today is clearly irrational bigotry. Hinduism has been tolerant and talks of the whole of humanity as one family. Therefore, it has to be acknowledged that Indian political leaders and political parties ignore the principles of Hindutva for political and electoral considerations and condemn and act on religious organizations that disturb peace and stability through statements and Threatens the unity and pluralistic identity of India.
Features of communal riots
An examination of the major communal riots in the country in the last five decades revealed that: (1) Communal riots are more politically motivated than religious. Even the Madan Commission, which inquired into the communal disturbances in Maharashtra in May 1970, emphasized that “the architects and makers of communal tension are the communal
There are certain class of qatarists and politicians – they are out to seize every opportunity to consolidate their power as all India and local leaders.” By giving communal color to each and every incident and thereby violating the rights of their religion and their community. They enhance their prestige and enrich their public image by projecting themselves in the eyes of the people as saviors.(2) Apart from political interests, economic interests also play a strong role in inciting communal clashes.(3) ) Communal riots seem to be more common in North India than in South and East India. (4) A town which has had communal riots once or twice is more likely to have a recurrence of communal riots as compared to that town. where riots have never happened. (5) Most of the communal riots take place on the occasion of religious festivals. (6) The use of deadly weapons in riots is on the rise.
secularism
The word ‘secular’ in the dictionary refers to things that are not religious or spiritual. In fact the concept of ‘secular’ was first used in Europe where the Church had complete control over all kinds of properties and no one could use the property without the consent of the Church. Some intellectuals raised their voice against this practice. These people came to be known as ‘secularists’, meaning ‘apart from the Church’ or against the Church. After independence in India, this word started being used in a different context. After the partition of the country, politicians wanted to assure the minority communities, especially the Muslims, that they would not be discriminated against in any way. The new constitution therefore provided that India would remain secular in the constitution which means that (a) every citizen would be guaranteed complete freedom to practice and propagate his religion, (b) there would be no state religion, and ( c) All citizens, irrespective of their religious belief shall be equal. In this way, agnostics were given the same rights as believers. This indicates that a secular state or society is not an irreligious society. Religious exist, their followers believe in a practice that is rooted in religious principles contained in their sacred texts, and no outside agency, including the state, interferes in legitimate religious matters. In other words, a secular society has two important elements: (a) complete separation of state and religion, and (b) complete freedom for followers of all religions as well as atheists to practice their respective religions.
In a secular society, leaders and followers of various religious communities are expected not to use their religion for political purposes. However in practice Hindu, Muslim, Sikh and other religious communities use religion for political goals. Each political party labels the other political parties as non-secular. Filed a case (popularly called the S.R. Bommai Case) in the C Court to dismiss the state governments run by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), following the demolition of the Babri Masjid structure in Ayodhya in December 1992 I went. The judges constituting the nine-judge bench considered the term ‘secularism’ and observed that though the term is associated with equal treatment for all religions and to implement secularism, the state governments had to regulate the law. In such a situation, the petition to dismiss the BJP governments was not accepted on the basis of legal consideration. No wonder, some say that the Supreme Court in S.R. Bommai’s case was against only one political party (BJP). In another case involving the Chief Minister of Maharashtra, the Supreme Court held that an appeal to Hindutva was permissible under the Representation of the People Act. What was banned was criticism of the other party’s religion. Thus it can be said that secularism has created a vote bank for political parties consisting of Muslims and Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. Elections were held for the Lok Sabha in May 1996 and for the Uttar Pradesh Legislative Assembly in October 1996, where the BJP emerged as the single largest party at the center as well as in the north.
d Political parties with vested interests in the state together called BJP a communal party. Communalism, thus, is neither a political philosophy nor an ideology nor a doctrine. It was imposed on Indian society with a political objective. The communal-secular card is now being played only for political purposes. The bogey of communalism is being kept alive not to prevent national disintegration but to ensure that the minority vote bank is not fragmented into the larger Indian ethos. Even those political leaders who are very corrupt and who practice casteism on a large scale, accuse the political leaders of the opposition parties of being communal. Thus the power-seekers use secularism as a shield to hide their sins, thereby ensuring that people remain polarized on the basis of religion and India remains communal.
Many arguments in support of secularism are based on the assumption of the existence of ‘truly religious societies’ in pre-industrial times. As Larry Shiner says ‘those who
Arguing that the social importance of religion has declined, he has the problem of determining when and where we are to locate the supposedly ‘religious’ era from which the decline began’. Anthropologist Mary Douglas argues that it is unfair to use so-called ‘religious’ small-scale non-literate societies as a basis for comparison with modern ‘secular’ societies. She says that there is nothing to contrast the secular with the religious, which is the contrast of secularism, materialism and spiritual fervor to the category of tribal societies.
Charles Glock argues that researchers have been unable to measure the importance of religion because ‘they have not paid enough attention to the concept of religion or religiosity in a broader sense’. Unless they have clearly considered what exactly they mean by religion and righteousness. Glock says that the secularism thesis cannot be adequately tested. In an attempt to address this problem, Glock and Stark define five ‘core dimensions of religiosity’. First, the dimension of belief – the extent to which people hold religious beliefs. Second, religious practice – the extent to which people engage in acts or worship and devotion. Third, the dimension of experience – the degree to which people feel and experience contract and communication with the supernatural. Fourth, the dimension of knowledge – the amount of knowledge people have about their religion. Fifth, the consequence dimension—the extent to which the preceding dimension affects people’s daily lives, Glock and Stark argue that a clear definition for classifying people in religious terms is needed before any scientifically valid statements about religiosity can be made. A clearly defined system is necessary. Created. Only when different researchers use the same concept of religion can their results be compared with any degree of validity.
Even though Glock and Stark’s plan may represent an improvement over previous research degrees, it does not address a fundamental problem of research methodology. It is unrestricted that any research techniques will be developed to accurately measure subjective factors such as the strength of religious commitment, with any certainty, to the meaning and purpose behind that social action.
socio-religious movement
Religion is not sterile. It brings social change. Functionalists have always spoken of religion as an agent of social change. There have been many religious movements in Europe. Catholicism has inspired a great deal of upheaval in Europe and America. Historians have recorded specific periods for social reform. Calvin, Martin Luther King and others have led many reform movements. There were socio-religious movements for religious conversion in India too. Bengal has been the cradle of religious movements. In Punjab and Haryana there was Dayanand Saraswati who rejected the caste system; Jyoti Ba Phule worked against the caste system in Maharashtra. Ambedkar himself as a social reformer. All movements reflect the dynamic aspect of religion. It should not be forgotten that from the Marxist point of view, religion comes in the way of social change. There is an anecdote that there was a famine in the USSR. Some charitable organizations distributed woolen shawls to poor people. This was reported to Lenin who responded: “Stop this charity immediately. It will draw the steam of revolutions from poor people. Let them suffer extreme hardships. And people will be ready to revolutionize.”
Socio-religious movements in India can be understood in the context of Indian nationalism. In pre-modern colonial India, the British also wanted to bring some reforms in the Indian society so that they could establish themselves. The British made some reforms. Even in the Mughal period, Akbar wanted to establish himself as a reformist leader. This country has a history of pluralism. Some reforms were necessary to bring about social unity and harmony in such a society. There were about 3000 castes that had to be brought together to establish an empire. Akbar’s attempt for Din-i-Ilahi was nothing but an attempt at socio-religious reform.
a R. Desai argued in his powerful book on the social background of Indian nationalism (1948) that the religious reform movements in India best reflect the expression of the national awakening. He sees:
The national democratic awakening of the Indian people found expression in the religious sphere as well. The contradiction between the old religious outlook, practices and organization on the one hand and the new social and economic reality on the other gave rise to various religious reform movements in the country. These movements represented attempts to modify the old religion in the spirit of the new principles of nationalism and democracy, which were the conditions for the development of the new society.
The spirit of nationalism was needed to unite the people in a joint effort to solve problems which, under British rule, became national due to the political and economic integration of the Indian people for the first time in history. To further the economic and cultural development of Indian society, now becoming a whole, as well as to counter the restrictions imposed on this development by British rule, constituted the major task set by the growing Indian nationalism. It is true that the early pioneers of Indian nationalism, the early social and religious
The reformers hoped to remove these restrictions under the guidance of British democracy. Nevertheless, he acknowledged that British rule, despite its initially progressive character, hindered Indian national development.
Democracy was another principle adopted by reformers, early leading nationalists like Ram Mohan Roy. Debendra Nath Tagore, Keshavchandra Sen, Telang, Ranade, Phulle, and the founders of the Arya Samaj, in varying degrees, expanded into the field of religion. The modern society established in India by the British conquest was a capitalist society based on the principles of individual liberty, freedom to compete, antitrust, and the freedom of the individual to own and manipulate property at will. Individualism was its main tone in contrast to pre-capitalist society which was authoritarian in character; Maintained social distinctions based on birth and sex and subordinated the individual to the caste and joint family system. The new society demanded the abolition of privileges based on birth or gender as a condition of its development.
The early religious reformers attempted to extend the principle of individual liberty to the field of religion. In fact, these religious-reform movements, the Brahmo Samaj, the Prarthana Samaj, the Arya Samaj and others, were in varying degrees attempts to transform the old religion into a new one to meet the needs of the new society. It is true that some of their leaders (especially those of the Arya Samaj) had a misconception that they were reviving the old primitive social structure of the Vedic period.
Aryans that they were returning to the Golden Age. in fact they were engaged in varying degrees
In adapting Hinduism to the social, political, economic and cultural needs of the contemporary Indian nation. History records instances where the consolidators of new societies imagined that they were returning to the past and reviving the best social forms that existed in older times. In fact, the early religious reform movements in India were attempting to create a religious outlook that would create national unity of all communities, Hindus, Muslims, Parsis and the rest, to solve common national tasks such as India’s economic development. On modern lines, the removal of restrictions imposed on the free development of people, the establishment of equality between man and woman, the abolition of caste, the abolition of Brahman as the monopoly of classical culture and the sole intermediary between God and the individual. Yet, like the leaders of other movements, including European Protestantism and the Religious Reformation, the Indian religious reformers were not rehabilitating any earlier period of society, but only strengthening the emerging new society.
religious reformation
There were religious reform movements before independence but they were typical for the rule of the aristocracy. Liberalism, the philosophy of capitalism, propagated democracy and government by the people. Medieval religion, including medieval religion, stood for privilege based on birth. Liberalism attacked all such privileges as unjust and proclaimed the principles of individual liberty, equal rights and pre-competition. Medievalism demanded from the people a belief in the divine origin of monarchy, in the sacred character of social structure, and in the God-ordained nature of all that exists. Liberalism substituted important religion for faith. Every institution and principle must stand the test of reason.
Sometimes the old gods and goddesses were interpreted in a suitable way to arouse national feelings and hopes among the people. This interpretation of old images of gods and goddesses has given a new meaning to the current rituals of the country, and the majority, while worshiping Jagat Dhatri or Kali or Durga, worship her with devotion…with inspiring slogans of “Bande Mataram”. address with. All of these are popular objects of worship among Indian Hindus … and the transformation of these symbols is at once the cause and evidence of the depth and strength of the present movement. This amazing transformation of old deities is giving the message of new nationalism to the women and people of the country.
Thus the religious revival movement, like the religious reform movement, was inspired by a national ideal.
Another characteristic of the religious reform movements was that their program was not confined to the task of religious reform but extended to the reconstruction of social institutions and social relations. This was due to the fact that religion and social structure were organically intertwined in India. Caste hierarchy, gender inequality, antisemitism and social taboos flourished due to the acceptance of religion. Social reform, consequently, became a part of the platform of all religious-reform movements. While rationalizing religion to a greater or lesser extent, these movements also aimed to rationalize social institutions and relations to a greater or lesser extent. Nowhere in the world did religion dominate and determine the life of an individual as it did in India. Their economic activities, their social life, their marriage, birth and death, their physical activities, were all strictly and closely controlled by Dharma. Religious reform movements had to have a comprehensive program of religious, social and even political reform. They are being practiced in a foreign country in the form of polytheism and idolatry.
Ti fought with the order and the Thebans. He attacked the monopolistic rights of the Brahmins in the field of religion as well as the caste privileges. He attacked all this because they were obstacles to national progress, for which, as necessary pre-conditions, there was national unity based on the principles of equality and liberty of individuals and groups.
The aim of the movements was national progress. The first national awakening of the Indian people took a predominantly religious form. This awakening deepened and expanded in later decades and found increasingly secular forms. We are discussing below some of the socio-religious movements launched against medieval religion.
Brahmo Samaj Movement
The Brahmo Samaj, founded in 1828 by Raja Ram Mohan Roy (1772–1833), who can rightly be described as the father of Indian nationalism, was the first such movement. The king was essentially a democrat and a humanist. In his religious-philosophical and social outlook, he was deeply influenced by the monotheism and anti-idolatry of Islam, the deism of Sufism, the moral teachings of the Krishs.
Fanaticism and the Liberal and Rationalist Theories of the West. He tried to interpret and assimilate the highest elements of Islam, Christianity and modern rationalism or humanism, and fuse them into a single creed, which he found in the ancient Upanishadic philosophy of his community.
He attacked the polytheistic degeneration of ancient Hindu monotheism. He denounced the idol worship of Hindus as derogatory and exposed the concept of one God of religions and humanity. His attack on polytheism and idolatry was motivated as much by national and socio-ethical considerations as by philosophical belief. ‘My constant reflections on the pernicious rites introduced by the peculiar practice of Hindu idolatry, which destroy the very fabric of society more than any heathen-worship, together with compassion for my countrymen, lead me to do everything possible forced so that they can contemplate. … the oneness and omnipresence of the God of Nature.’
Raja Ram Mohan Roy was in favor of a rational approach towards religion. One must study the scriptures directly without a priest and assess the rational character of a religious doctrine. He must subject religious doctrines to the test of his own moral reason and reject those which are contrary to the test.
Since Hindu society was governed and governed by the religious concepts of Hinduism, no religious-reform movement could avoid a social-reform clause in its programme. According to Raj Ram Mohan Roy and the early religious reformers, religious renewal was an important condition for modifying the social structure from a decaying to a healthy basis. That is why the social-reform program became a part of the overall program of the religious-reform movements.
The Brahmo Samaj under the leadership of Raja launched an aggressive campaign against the caste system, calling it undemocratic, inhuman and anti-national. It crusaded against sati and child marriage. It stood for the freedom of widow remarriage and equal rights for man and woman.
Brahmo Samaj gave importance to modern western culture and organized educational institutions in the country for its dissemination among the people. Raja Ram Mohan Roy was an admirer of the liberal democratic culture of the West.
The king considered British rule in India a good thing. He praised it for inaugurating progressive measures of social reform, such as the abolition of sati and infanticide, the establishment of modern educational institutions and a free press, among others. This was natural as British rule in India historically had a progressive aspect during the first half of the nineteenth century.
Despite his great admiration for the British, Raj Ram Mohan Roy organized a protest movement against the measure to restrict the freedom of the press. He also criticized the British government for excluding Indians from high positions.
Since the Brahmo Samaj was not only a religious movement but also included in its program items of social and political reform, it was similar to the later social reform movement started by Ranade and others and the political reform movement started by the early Indian National Congress. was the forerunner. , Thus the religious reform movement prepared for the purely secular social and political reform movements in the country. This is the historical significance of Raja Ram Mohan Roy and
He started the Brahmo Samaj. Raja Ram Mohan Roy inaugurated the modern era in
India.
Debendra Nath Tagore (1817–1905), who succeeded him as leader of the Brahmo Samaj, developed doubts about the infallibility of the scriptures and eventually rejected it. He substituted intuition for the authority of the scriptures. Through intuition he unearthed sections of the Upanishads that served as the theological-ideological basis for the principles and programs of the Brahmo Samaj.
Keshab Chandra Sen (1838–84) was the next leader of the Brahmo Samaj. Under him, the doctrine of Brahmo Samaj was more and more compatible with the doctrine of pure Christianity. At a later stage, he propounded the doctrine of command, according to which God inspires knowledge in certain individuals, whose words are infallible.
and must be accepted as true. A section of Brahmos did not accept this doctrine, left the Samaj and called the Ordinary Brahmo Samaj.
The Brahmo Samaj was the forerunner of the nationalist movement, which began from the workings of history as a religious-reform movement aimed at freeing the individual from the deadening weight of an authoritarian religion that stifled his initiative and hindered individual and collective The mind tarnished both.
The Brahmo Samaj inaugurates a new era for the Indian public by proclaiming
The principles of individual liberty, national unity, solidarity and co-operation and the democratization of all social institutions and social relations. This was the first organized expression of his national awakening.
prayer society
Prarthana Samaj was founded in 186
7 MG in Bombay Ranade. It had a program of religious and social reforms like the Brahmo Samaj. Its founder Ranade was one of the leaders of the Indian National Congress and the Indian Social Conference, which held their first sessions in 1885 and 1888 respectively.
15.5 The Arya Samaj
The Arya Samaj was founded in Bombay in 1875 by Dayanand Saraswati, although it was a movement of a very different kind, embodying the first surge of Indian nationalism. It had a more revivalist character. It declared the Vedas to be infallible and, an inexhaustible storehouse of all knowledge of the past, present and future. One must know how to understand and interpret the Vedas, which contain all philosophical, technical and scientific information. With enough effort one can find all modern chemistry, engineering and even military and non-military sciences in the Vedas.
Since the Vedas were declared infallible, the word of the Vedas and the judgment of the individual was not the final criterion. The Arya Samaj did not and could not allow it to override individual decisions by accepting the infallibility of the Vedas.
the denial of the authority of the Brahmanas, the condemnation of the infinite number of meaningless rites and the worship of images of various gods and goddesses, which divided the people into many warring sects, and the crusade against the mass of religious superstitions which had sustained it, for many centuries For, the Hindu mind was mentally beggar and in a state of spiritual decline – these were progressive elements in the program of the Arya Samaj. Its slogan Bark to Veda was inspired by the inspiration to bring about national unity and to awaken national pride and consciousness. However, since it retained its narrow Hindu base, the national unity it proclaimed could not bring non-Hindu communities such as Muslims and Christians into its fold. It became a semi-rational form of Hinduism.
Arya Samaj also had a program of social reform. In opposition to the hereditary caste system, it stood, however, that the four-caste division of society should be determined by merit and not by birth. Since the Vedas made such a division and since the Vedas were infallible, the Arya Samaj itself could not declare the death of the caste system.
Arya Samaj stood for equal rights of man and woman in social and educational matters. It was a different democratic concept. However, it opposed co-education as co-education did not exist during the Vedic period.
The Arya Samaj created a network of schools and colleges for both boys and girls in the country, where education was imparted in the mother tongue. Dayanand Anglo-Vedic College was established in 1886.
The orthodox section of the Arya Samaj thought that the education imparted in this college was not sufficiently Vedic in character. Therefore, its members under the leadership of Munshi Ram started a Gurukul at Hardwar, where education was imparted in the ancient Vedic way, both in content and method.
In all its activities, the Arya Samaj was generally inspired by the spirit of nationalism and democracy. It attempted to integrate Hindus by eliminating sub-castes. It spread education among the people, proclaimed the principle of equality without distinction of caste, creed, community, race or gender. It sought to destroy their inferiority complex, which was an inevitable product of their status as a subject nation.
The Arya Samaj, despite its narrow Hinduness, as its rational declaration that all knowledge is contained in the Vedas, attracted hundreds of nationalist Indians to its fold. In fact, the Arya Samaj was once one of the main targets of political repression. It is therefore not surprising that when Sir Valentine Chirol visited India on behalf of The Times after 1907 to investigate the causes of the unrest, he presented the Arya Samaj as a serious threat to English and British sovereignty. saw.
Arya Samaj represented a form of national awakening of Indians
people. Limited to a narrow Hindu base and with a negative attitude towards Islam, it over time led Muslims to mobilize on a similar communal basis. It played a progressive role in the early stages when the national awakening was just budding. The Arya Samaj had two aspects, one progressive and the other reactionary. He played a progressive role when he attacked religious superstitions and the sacred tyranny of the Brahmins, when he condemned polytheism, and when he later adopted a program of mass education, abolition of sub-castes, equality of man and woman. But when he considered the Vedas to be infallible and the source of the universe.
Declared the treasure house of all knowledge of the past, present and future, he was playing a progressive anti-semitism when he stood for dividing the society into four castes on the basis of merit. No knowledge can ever be final in an infinite and ever-evolving social and natural world
Therefore Veda could not be the embodiment of all knowledge. In addition, all knowledge is historically conditioned and limited by the level of social and economic development of the era in which it originated. In this way, subsequent generations have to take all inherited past knowledge seriously and subject it to the test of reason and social utility. Here comes the role of personal judgment. While the Vedas were glorified as infallible, the individual as well as the generation to which they belonged were denied the right to make their own independent decisions and pronounce upon the ancient scriptures. It was the intellectual slavery of the scriptures to the individual and the generation. This was a departure from the principles of liberalism.
Again, the Arya Samaj could not be a national or worldwide religion as it demanded from its followers the recognition of the principle of infallibility and omniscience of the Vedas.
However, as mentioned above, the Arya Samaj played a progressive role in the early stages of Indian nationalism. However, as the national awakening broadened and deepened, as the national movement rose to more and more secular heights, it inadvertently hindered the growth of Indian nationalism by contributing to the creation of a belligerent religious-communal atmosphere.
Ramakrishna Mission Movement
The national awakening of the Indian people found expression in the movement
Inspired by Ramakrishna, a great Hindu saint, in direct line with saints like Chandidas and Chaitanya. It is mainly based on the principle of bhakti bhakti. Its chief propagator was Swami Vivekananda, a follower of Ramakrishna and an intellectual of very high caliber, who, after the saint’s death, founded the Ramakrishna Mission to propagate his teaching.
The aim of the Ramakrishna Mission was to protect India from the ‘materialistic’ influence of Western civilization. It idealized Hinduism, including its practice of idol worship and polytheism. Its objective was the spiritual conquest of the world for the revived Hinduism.
One of the harmful consequences of foreign rule in India has been the tendency to alienate Indians from modern Western culture, which is historically a higher form of culture than the pre-capitalist culture to which the average Indian is conscious. life was. based.
There were other religious-reform movements of smaller magnitude, which also expressed the New Awakening. Hinduism began to organize itself nationally in revivalist or reformist forms. These movements spread to various groups including the Hindu society.
Thus, the Bharat Dharma Mahamandal Society for its programs to reform Hinduism and spread religious and non-religious education among Hindus began in 1902. Formed one of the lowest castes of Hindu society, with programs of building temples and establishing schools for the rakshasas and the community.
theology
Theosophy, introduced in India by Madame Blavatsky and Henry Steel Olcott in 1879 and mainly popularized by Mrs. Annie Besant, was another religious-reform movement initiated in India under the influence of new Indian and international conditions. The uniqueness of this movement lay in the fact that it was inaugurated by a non-Indian who was a great admirer of Hinduism. Theosophy subscribed to the metaphysical philosophy of ancient Hinduism and recognized its doctrine of transmigration of the soul. It preached universal brotherhood of men irrespective of caste, creed, race or gender. It stood for the development of a national feeling among Indians. Mrs Besant wrote in 1905, India needs, among other things, the development of a national spirit, an education founded on Indian ideals and not enriched by the thought and culture of the West. Theosophy stood for the comparative study of all oriental religions. However, it considered ancient Hinduism to be the most deeply spiritual religion in the world. However, Theosophy failed to take deep roots in the country. There were smaller religious-reform movements aimed at readjusting Hinduism to the social needs of contemporary Indian people, such as the Dev Samaj and the Radha Swami Satsang. Like their major counterparts, these movements also aimed at integrating Hindus with the core tenets of Hinduism, democratizing social relations among them, and instilling a sense of nationalism among them. He represented the new national awakening of the Hindus in a religious form.
Religious reforms by eminent political leaders
In addition to these organized national religious-reform and religious-revivalist movements, individuals of outstanding ability and political eminence, such as Bipin Chandra Pal, Aurobindo Ghosh, Tilak and Gandhi, contributed without organizing any specific movements.
Religious reform work. Nationalism in Bengal, however, was becoming increasingly secular, for the time being religious in character. It was influenced by the Neo-Vedantic movement of Swami Vivekananda. Therefore, the movement for Swaraj on the part of Bengali nationalists was called Prachi.
Nor was an attempt to discover the spiritual Absolute in one’s innermost self based on the ideal of the Upanishads. Hence, the worship of the mother – the country is depicted in the form of Goddess Kali.
Tilak reinterpreted the Gita and declared karma as its central precept. The basic essence of the Gita’s philosophy, he said, had been missed by the Indian people who, as a result, had sunk into inertia and a fatalistic mood. The Indian nation can wake up to dynamic endeavor only when they recognize it.
Thus the national movement was aimed at national independence from British rule and the establishment of an Indian society and state on a democratic basis and on the basis of a religious movement. Nationalism was expressed in religious terms and clothed in a religious-mystical form. However, Indian nationalism, with its further development, gradually freed itself from the religious element with which it was imbued. It became increasingly secular.
Socio-religious movement among Muslims
Islam out of the democratic ferment of the common people of Arabia against the privileged strata of the society. As such, it has a democratic ring to it. Islam propagates the principle of social equality. This makes the promotion of International Socialism among the Muslim rank and file more successful.
Despite this relative inertia of the Muslims, several religious-revivalist and even religious-reform movements emerged among them in course of time, with a view to their development along nationalist lines. However these movements were not as powerful as their counterparts among the Hindus. Furthermore, most of them lacked a national note. Four main such movements were started by (1) Shah Abdul Aziz of Delhi, (2) Sayyid Ahmad of Bareilly, (3) Shaikh Karnamat Ali of Jaunpur and (4) Haji Shariat-Ullah of Faridpur. All these four movements were more of a revivalist character.
52.8 Ahmadiyya Movement
The Ahmadiyya movement, founded by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad in 1889, was based on more or less liberal principles. It described itself as the standard bearer of the Muslim renaissance. It bases itself, like the Brahmo Samaj, on the principles of the universal religion of all humanity. The founders were strongly influenced by Western liberalism, theosophy and the religious-reform movements of the Hindus.
The Ahmadiyya movement opposed jihad or holy war against non-Muslims. It stood for fraternal relations among all people. This movement spread western liberal education among Indian Muslims. It started a network of schools and colleges for that purpose and published periodicals and books in both English and local languages. Despite its liberalism, the Ahmadiyya movement, like Baha’ism, which flourished in West Asian countries, remained obsessed with mysticism. However, it represented an attempt on the part of Islam to assimilate the principles of Western liberalism.
For historical reasons, the Muslim community initiated national democratic progress later than the Hindus. The tragedy of the Great Revolt in 1857–8 marked the death of the old order, and brought political, economic and cultural devastation to Indian Muslims. It marked more than ever his sadness, his isolation, his suppressed hatred for the new system… The key to the whole situation was the adaptation to the new environment, the use of the new forces coming into play, the new means. Acceptance Progress that was made through English education.
This withdrawal from the new reality cannot last forever. Soon, the Muslims took up education and created an intelligentsia. They also appeared in the field of commerce and industry. The progressive elements among these newly educated Muslims and Muslim businessmen and industrialists steadily developed a national outlook and embarked on the path of nationalism in politics and democratic reform in social affairs.
Aligarh Movement
The first national awakening among Muslims found expression in a movement aimed at making Indian Muslims politically aware and spreading modern education among them. Syed Ahmed Khan was the founder of this movement. He had able allies like the poet Khwaja Altaf Hussain Hali, Maulvi Nazir Ahmad and Maulvi Shibli Numani.
The liberal social reform and cultural movement founded by Sir Syed Ahmed Khan is known as the Aligarh Movement because it was in Aligarh that the Mohammedan Anglo-Oriental College was established in 1875. This college developed into Aligarh University in 1890.
The aim of the Aligarh Movement was to spread Western education among Muslims without weakening their allegiance to Islam. Religious temptation reinforced secular education, which was
It was provided in the educational intuition introduced. The aim of this movement was to develop a separate social and cultural community among the Indian Muslims on more or less modern lines. It condemned the social ban on polygamy and widow-remarriage, though permitted by Islam, but among certain sections of Muslims who were recent converts from Hinduism.
After the beginning of the Aligarh movement, more or less independent progressive movements started in Bombay, Punjab, Hyderabad and elsewhere.
Sir Mahmood Iqbal
Sir Mahmood Iqbal, a poet of world repute, played an important role in the history of Indian Muslims. even though they
He supported the liberal movement, calling on Muslim liberals to be careful not to push the broad humanitarian principles that Islam stood for into the background by emphasizing nation and race. Iqbal described European civilization as inhuman, greedy, predatory and decadent. He even quoted authors such as Nietzsche, Schopenhauer, Spengler and Karl Marx taking conflicting viewpoints to condemn its various aspects. He made passionate attacks on European civilization in poems which are pearls of Persian and Urdu poetry. He was essentially a humanist and regarded Islam as a religion of comprehensive humanism. In the later phase of his life, Iqbal displayed reactionary tendencies. He opposed democracy as a system and became hostile to the Indian nationalist movement.
Other Muslim Reform Movements
Over time, movements came into existence for the emancipation of Muslim women and to fight against institutions like purdah. Tyabji, an enlightened and progressive Muslim, was the founder of this movement in Bombay. Sheikh Abdul Halil Sharar (1860–96), an outstanding writer and journalist, organized a veritable crusade against purdah in the United Provinces.
With the spread of liberal ideas among Muslims, the movement to improve the social status of Muslim women and abolish the customs prescribed for them began to gain strength. Along with child marriage, polygamy also started decreasing. Individual Muslims and Muslim organizations established an increasing number of educational institutions for Muslim women across India. Education started spreading among Muslim women. In this way religious-reform and social-reform movements increased and gained momentum among the Muslims as well. The rise of Turkish and Arab nationalism and the establishment of a national secular state in Turkey had the effect of broadening the outlook of Indian Muslims. The rise and growth of the Indian National Movement also increasingly brought Muslims into the orbit of Indian nationalism. The independent labor and peasant movements that later developed rapidly in India and were mostly led by communists, socialists and left-wing nationalists such as Nehru had the effect of making the Muslim masses nationalistic and class-conscious. These movements became the training grounds for people from both communities and areas of cooperation to carry out national and general class tasks. The economic structure and the existing foreign rule urged them to come together and cooperate for common liberation.