7/29/2019 Sir Syed (1)

1/5

Sir Syed Ahmad Khan

This is a difficult task to study a reformer of nineteenth century especially Sir Syed Ahmad Khan

(b. 17 Oct. 1817 d. 27 Mar. 1898) in present context of changing dynamics of reforms in

modern society. The ideas of modernity have redefined the paradigm of reforms impelling

Muslim community to open up to the ideas of reform and modern values. Considering SirSyeds contribution with present construction of reform would definitely lead us to belittle his

efforts. However if we take into consideration the inertia of Muslim society towards modern

reform in nineteenth century Sir Syed appears as a remarkable pioneer of reform among

Muslims.

The establishment of British rule in India replacing the Mughals had far reaching consequences

on the Muslim ruling class as well Muslim society in general. The replacement of Muslim ruling

class by the British officials led to the considerable displacement of Muslim aristocracy. The

political change transformed the Muslim society and substantially redefined their socio-political

and economic status. The community suffered with the loss of resources, power and privilege.

His time represent a situation when the Muslims were not ready to accept any modern reform

on account of the Muslim revivalist Movements of nineteenth century. The revivalist

movement with its violent tone and tenor alarmed the British government against the Muslims.

Moreover the relationship of British Government with Muslims further deteriorated after the

Revolt of 1857. Muslims being arch culprit of Revolt faced planned bashing by the British

Government. On the other hand the second half of the nineteenth century witnessed the

growth of nationalism and national movement. The construction of nationalism and associated

political developments reinforced the fear psychoses among Muslims resulting in the

realization of a need to transform the community as a political class for the favorable bargain

from the British Government. Thus for Sir Syed it would have been a difficult task to satisfy the

expectations of his community- the religious, social and political- with his idea of reform, as

well as, to win over the confidence of British Government without undermining the

commitment of Muslims with growing tide of nationalism.

Nineteenth century is viewed by some Historians as the Renaissance of Indian history. This is a

period when the Colonial Government was facing the dilemma of reform and imperialism, the

Indian educated classes were responding to the modern ideas of west and the onslaught of the

Christianity on the Indian religions. The response of the Muslim society to the change was by

and large reactionary and apprehensive. Nevertheless, Sir Syed on the other hand, represented

the other dominant initial voice of reform and dissent from the existing theological framework

of Islam, paving the way for the reconciliation of the Muslim elite with the British government.

The revivalist movements redefined the relationship of Islam with other religions. These

reforms emphasized on the rejection of medieval Islam (a resilient and moderate face of Islam)

in India in favour of early Islam in Arabia . This transformation of Islam and the growing

tendency ofjehad not only constricted the shared spaces of Hindus and Muslims but also

reinforced the British belief after 1857 that the Muslims were by nature fanatical and

7/29/2019 Sir Syed (1)

2/5

irreconcilable and could only be kept quiet by a judicious mixture of buffets and boons.1

On the

other hand the revivalist movements among Hindus also proved counterproductive for the

growth of communalism. For a short while the elites of northern India were united on the issue

of Urdu which suffered a final breach by 1860 due to the divide of Urdu speaking elite on the

issue of Urdu-Nagri debate on religious line paving the way for the growth and development of

the idea oftwo nations with conflicting interests.2

Sir Syed therefore had to work for modern reform among Muslims to keep pace with the

development of modern values and challenge. This in turn would automatically reshape Muslim

identity during the nineteenth century which was essential to win the confidence of the British

Government. It is evident that throughout his life, he kept responding and moderating the

British governments perception of Muslims as a political class, or was trying to induce reform

in Islam to reconcile with the modern age so that the Muslims take up modern reforms.

We find Sir Syed concerned with the purification of Muslim religious practices long before the

events of 1857. The family background of Sir Syed was fundamentally religious but represented

a blending of both Wahhabis and rationalist. A number of family members were endowed with

exceptional interest and ability in the mathematics and physical sciences and were

conspicuously serving under British Government. Brought up under the influence of divergent

intellectual streams, He was talking about religious reforms since 1830s through the newspaper

of his brother Saiyid al-akhbar.3

His contribution of religious reform has been seen by Iqbal in

the following words:

The first modern Muslim to catch a glimpse of the positive character of the age that was

coming but the real greatness of the man consists of *Sic] the fact that he was the first

Indian Muslim who felt the need of a fresh orientation of Islam and worked for it. We may

differ from his religious views, but there can be no denying the fact that this sensitive soul was

the first to react to modern age.4

Scholars have seen differently the religious reform of Sir Syed, which can be categorized undertwo broad categories. One views his contribution to Islamic thought as primarily a defensive

and protective exercise, either on the pattern of theological apologetics vis--vis Christianity, or

by proving Islam to be liberal, rational, and progressive religion. The other group sees Sir

Syeds religious thought as mainly an endeavor in bold religious construction or destruction,

and even as new theological synthesis.5

The religious reforms of Sir Syed could not have been a smooth sailing in face of strong

revivalist movement. He invited opposition and criticism of theologians in strongest words

especially after the establishment of Aligarh College and its program declaring him the

Khalifah (representative) of the Devil himself who is intent upon leading Muslims astray,

1P Hardy, The Muslims of British India, pp. 59-60, Cambridge University Press 1972

2Francis Robinson, SepratismAmong Indian Muslims The Politics of The United Provinces Muslims, 1860-1923, p.

97 Cambridge University Press 2008 (First Print 1974)3

Christian W Troll, Sayyid Ahmad Khan A Reinterpretation of Muslim Theology, p. xviii, New Delhi, 1978.4

Muhammad Iqbal, Islam andAhmadaism, with a reply to questions raised by Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru (Lahore:

Anjuman-I Khuddam-ud-din, 1936); Cf Christian W Troll, opcit, p. 17.5

Ibid, pp. 17-27.

7/29/2019 Sir Syed (1)

3/5

whose perfidy is worse than that of the Jews and Christians.6

Shaikh Jamal al-din al-Afghanis

(1839-97) criticism of Sir Syed (in 1884) is still a landmark comment for his opponents till date.

He wrote in his essay in Arabic:

He appeared in the guise of the naturalists [materialists], and proclaimed that nothing exists

but blind nature, and that this universe does not have a wise God (this is clear error), and that

all the prophets were naturalists who did not believe in the God taught by the revealed religion(we take refuge in God). He called himself a neicherior naturalist, and began to seduce the sons

of the rich, who were frivolous young men.7

The opposition of Sir Syeds religious reform and Aligarh College was natural in the face of

contradiction between religion and the development of modern sciences. To resolve this

contradiction Sir Syed reinterpreted Islam and tried to synchronize it with the development of

modern sciences. This of course is one of the greatest achievements of Sir Syed which became

the bedrock of his educational reform of Muslim community. His efforts to reconcile religion

with sciences could be seen in his attempts make Greek philosophy and empirical sciences

popular. He wrote:

But now the extraordinary difficulty arose that Greek philosophy and the natural sciences on

which the ulema of former times has based many religious tenet, had been proved to be

erroneous. Furthermore, the proofs of the modern sciences had not remained merely

analogical (qiyasi) and hypothetical (farzi); rather, experience and practice (tajribh aur amal)

had definitively given them the status of observation (mushahidah), to the point that it began

to become a generally accepted fact that the sciences are in contradiction to religion and that

they would destroy religion in the same way as frost kills tender plants. Since I tried to spread

the new sciences and the English language among the Muslims, the thought occupied me: Do

these sciences really [as clearly] contradict the religion of Islam as it is maintained.8

Thus he established the rule of exegesis and asserted that if the religion is not substantiating

the science or vice versa then there is something wrong with the interpretation of religion. In

the formulation of his principles of exegesis (Tahrir fi usul al-tafsir) in early 1890, he was greatlyinfluenced by Delhi Renaissance (1840s-1850s).

9During this period Sir Syed was exposed not

only to the ideas of evangelical missionaries and western historians, but also to deliberate

efforts by British-sponsored colleges to undermine superstition, to place misunderstandings

of natural phenomena by accurate knowledge and to disseminate wholesome faith.

While interpreting revealed book he adhered to basic idea that the real truth of the holy books

stands as heretofore and will not change, however much our knowledge and reason will go on

changing. Mankind makes progress in knowledge. Scientific concepts and theories may change

but spiritual truth remains and can be gathered from revealed words if only they are correctly

interpreted.10

Referring Shah Wali-Allah as an authority, Sir Syed held that although the

prophets communicated one din or belief to mankind, they each brought a different sharia,

6A H Hali, Hayat-i-jawed, p. 541, Lahore 1966; Cf Christian W Troll, opcit, p.21.

7Ibid, pp. 21-22.

8Christian W Troll, opcit, p.145.

9C F Andrews,Zaka Ullah, Cambridge 1929, Cf Christian W Troll, opcit, p. 150. Andrews coined the phrase Delhi

Renaissance in the backdrop of stirring effects of English education and ideas upon the educated in Delhi during

the 1840s and 1850s.10

Christian W Troll, opcit, p.154.

7/29/2019 Sir Syed (1)

4/5

adapted to their circumstances of their times. There was a clear distinction between the

mandates relating to din, which were eternal and those relating to temporal affairs, which were

mutable. The Quran itself abrogated the laws brought by earlier prophets, because history has

outgrown them.11

Thus we see that Sir Syeds religious reform not only tried to adjust the scientific aptitude of

modern age in Islam but also produced a dissenting voice to the existing revivalist reaction inIslam. This moderation and dissent from the revivalists played a crucial role in redefining the

relationship of Muslims with the British Government and Muslims began to be recognized as a

political community under British rule.

Under this backdrop Sir Syed started his educational reform with foundation of Translation

Society in 1863 while he was posted at Ghazipur. This was later renamed as the Scientific

Society and shifted to Aligarh. The aims and objective of this society was to introduce and

promote European sciences among the elites of the Upper Provinces by means of translations

of standard textbooks into Urdu. Besides they also tried to introduce agricultural reform

through purchase of more advanced tools and implements. For the wider circulation of his

ideas he introduced the publication ofAligarh Institute Gazette (1866) which paved the way for

larger discourse with British.

However in spite of his emphasis on modern and scientific education, he rejected English as a

medium of instruction, instead he insisted on vernacular as medium of instruction throughout

his campaign of educational reform. It was only after coming back from England in 1871 he

reconciled with the English as a medium of instruction. Moreover, he was also susceptible of

the role of Government institution in spreading modern education and appealed for the

community initiatives to establish the educational institute to impart education. Since a long

time, he was dreaming for establishing a college which was realized in the form of

Mohammadan Anglo Oriental College (MAO College). The primary school was started on Queen

Victorias birthday, 24 May 1875 and on 1 January 1876 Viceroy, Lord Lytton, formally laid the

foundation of the college. In 1878, intermediate classes and in 1881, BA classes were started.Simultaneously in 1881, a civil service preparatory class was started for the aspirants of

government services and in 1887 the Aligarh College began to prepare students to enter the

Engineering College at Roorkee.

His efforts at MAO College, however, clearly catered to the educational needs of the elite of the

community rather than of the common Muslim. The outreach of the College could be seen from

these figures. Out of the total 1,184 Muslims graduating in India between 1882 and 1892,

Aligarh produced only 220, compared with 410 from the University of Allahabad.12

This

indicates that the MAO College had limited success in educating the Muslims in India, not even

of North Western Provinces. The reason might be the representation of mainly the elite

Muslims of North Western Provinces who thronged to the MAO College in pursuit of bettergovernment job. This is worth noting here the remark of Crosthwaite, the Lieutenant-Governor

of the North Western Provinces, it is better for the future of your racethat ten men should be

11P Hardy, opcit, p. 100.

12Ibid, P. 103.

7/29/2019 Sir Syed (1)

5/5

sent out than that a hundred should be sent out, able indeed to satisfy the examiners but

otherwise imperfectly trained.13

In the twentieth century, MAO College and later Aligarh Muslim University played an active role

in the freedom struggle in spite of the older generations caution against the movement.

Besides, it has been a matter of debate among historians as to how far the campus promoted

communal agenda among the Muslims. In the context of socio-religious and political role ofAligarh Muslim University the following observation is worth noting:

The purpose of Aligarh was to further the temporal progress of the Muslim community as its

founder visualized it that is of the gentlemanly portion of it, particularly in Northern India. The

boys at Aligarh were not exhorted to an unhealthy anxiety about the fate of their souls, or

indeed to an individual investigation of Gods demands upon them in the modern world. Islam

for them was a matter of cultural rather than of religious conviction. Whatever the founders

real intentions, Aligarh became an institution for coming to terms with the British-created

world on a footing of equality, rather than for questioning that world from burning religious

conviction.14

For a better understanding of the nature of the institution, it becomes imperative to

understand its origin though this could only in certain ways explain the issues in the present.

How the institution has moved over time from the point of origin needs to be taken up in detail

to understand the sociological issues in the present.

13Ibid, p. 104.

14P Hardy, opcit, p. 104.