 | This articlecontainstoo many or overly lengthy quotations. Please helpsummarise the quotations. Consider transferring direct quotations toWikiquote or excerpts toWikisource.(March 2022) (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
Shah Ismail Dehlvi | |
|---|---|
_%2c_Balakot.jpg) Grave of Shah Ismail inBalakot | |
| Personal life | |
| Born | 26 April 1779 |
| Died | 6 May 1831(1831-05-06) (aged 52) |
| Parent |
|
| Notable work(s) | Taqwiyatul Imaan |
| Alma mater | Madrasah-i Rahimiyah |
| Known for | Battle of Balakot (1831) |
| Relatives | Shah Waliullah (grand-father) |
| Religious life | |
| Religion | Islam |
| Denomination | Sunni |
| Jurisprudence | Independent[1] |
Shah Ismail Dehlvi (26 April, 1779 – 6 May, 1831) was an Indian Islamic scholar and Salafi-oriented Sufi andtheologian.[2] He was an active member in the jihad proclaimed bySayyid Ahmad ofRaebareli with the support of Pashtun tribes against theSikh Empire, which ruled northwest India with their base inPunjab in the early half of the 19th century. He is considered as an important influence on theAhl-i Hadith and theDeobandi movement.[3][4][5]
Ismail Dehlvi was born on 26 April 1779.[4] He was the grandson of famous Islamic scholar and leaderShah Waliullah Dehlawi, through his son Shah Abdul Ghani.[4] When a new Islamic religious revivalist movement appeared innorthern India under the leadership ofSayyid Ahmad ofRaebareli (1786 – 1831), he was joined by two members of the Shah Waliullah family: Shah Ismail Dehlavi (1771-1831) and Maulvi Abdul Hai (died 1828)[6] who joined it because they shared its mission and objectives. "The agenda of the new movement known asTariqa Muhammadiyya was to purify the tenets ofIslam fromHindu customs, traditions and cultural practices."[7] "His motive was to convince the Muslim community to purify Islam from Hindu influences and Shiite rituals. He was harsh in his criticism and believed that religion should be practiced in its original form; a thought process which gradually evolved into a Jihad movement."[7] Professor of history at theUniversity of California;Barbara D. Metcalf writes:
Sayyid Ahmad's reformist teachings were set down in two works that, when printed on the new lithographic press of the day, soon achieved wide circulation. The Sirat'ul Mustaqim (the Straight Path) was compiled by Muhammad Ismail in 1819. Written initially in Persian, it was translated into Urdu in order to reach a wider audience. The second work, Taqwiyatul-Iman or the strengthening of the Faith, was written directly in Urdu. The two works stressed above all the centrality of tawhid, the transcendent unity of God, and denounced all those practices and beliefs that were held in any way to compromise that most fundamental of Islamic tenets. God alone was held to be omniscient and omnipotent. He alone, entitled to worship and homage. There were, the followers of Sayyid Ahmad argued, three sources of threat to this belief: false sufism, Shiá doctrines and practices, and popular custom.
— B. Metcalf, "Islamic revival in British India: Deoband, 1860–1900", pp. 56 - 57, Princeton University Press (1982).
According to Andreas Rieck, Syed Ahmad visited towns of North Indian plains from 1818 to 1821 with hundreds of missionaries to preach against Shia beliefs and practices. Syed Ahmad repeatedly destroyedta'ziyas, an act that resulted in subsequent riots and chaos.[8] Barbara Metcalf offers the following explanation to hisanti-shi'ism:
A second group of Abuses Syed Ahmad held were those that originated from Shi’i influence. He particularly urged Muslims to give up the keeping of ta’ziyahs. The replicas of the tombs of the martyrs of Karbala taken in procession during the mourning ceremony of Muharram. Muhammad Isma’il wrote, ‘a true believer should regard the breaking a tazia by force to be as virtuous an action as destroying idols. If he cannot break them himself, let him order others to do so. If this even be out of his power, let him at least detest and abhor them with his whole heart and soul’. Sayyid Ahmad himself is said, no doubt with considerable exaggeration, to have torn down thousands of imambaras, the building that house the taziyahs
— B. Metcalf, "Islamic revival in British India: Deoband, 1860–1900", p. 58, Princeton University Press (1982).
In 1821, Shah Ismail left forHajj (pilgrimage) along with Syed Ahmad and a group of his devotees. He returned from Haj in 1823, and once again visited different parts of India. For Syed Ahmad and the followers of theFaraizi movement, India was “Darul Harb” (the abode of war) and therefore jihad was obligatory for the Muslims. In his book, Sirat-e-Mustaqeem, Shah Ismail Dehlavi wrote:
"a large part of present-day India has become “Dar al-Harb”. Compare the situation with the heavenly blessings of India two and three hundred years ago".[6]
Comparing India withDarul Islam, he said:
"compare India with Rome and Turkey in terms of heavenly blessings".[6]
Shah Ismail broke with the popular IndianHanafi tradition, but subsequently became convinced that he could not set up his ideal society so long as thecompany rule held sway over thesubcontinent. Shah Ismail joined the cause of Sayyid Ahmad, who had moved to the Pashtun areas borderingAfghanistan (today’sKhyber Pakhtunkhwa) with his followers to lead an armed Jihad against the British. Sayyid Ahmad established a mujahideen state and proclaimed himself as theAmir ul-Mu'minin (Commander of the Faithful).[9] The main objective of the Jihad movement led by Sayyid Ahmad was to establish anIslamic state that rules over the subcontinent. At that time, much ofNorth India was ruled by the British. So the leadership of thejihad movement concluded that they should move to an area with less control of the British and with large majority of Muslim population -North-West Frontier region - which is now known as Khyber Pakhtunkhwa in Pakistan. The Frontier region was chosen to carry out this experimentation, based on the assumption that being devout Muslims, the Pashtuns would support the reformist movement.[10]
The opponents of the mujahideen of Sayyid Ahmad and Shah Ismail labelled them as "Wahhabis", associating them with theMuwahhideen reformers who had risen to prominence in the Arabia. Their followers, however, preferred the termTariqah-yi Muhammadi (way of Muhammad) to describe themselves. TheTariqah-yi-Muhammadi movement coupled their emphasis on the direct consultation of Scriptural texts with an aggressive campaign againstshirk (polytheism) andbidat (heretical innovations), attacking practices they asserted that Indian Muslims had adopted from Hindus or Shias. While the rest of the Indian clergy had commonly differentiated betweenbidat-i-hasanah andbidat-i-sayyia (good and bad innovations), theTariqah-i Muhammadiyya criticised all forms of bidat, insisting that the Prophet’s own life and practices were the best guide for Muslims.[11]
Following the teachings of theMujahidin commander Sayyid Ahmad, Shah Ismail Dehlvi advocated the purging of numerous practices and rituals such asistigatha (asking needs) to the dead, wearingtawiz (amulets), making vows, etc.; which he condemned asshirk (polytheism). Equating these practices to idol worship of Hindus and excommunicating those who practised them, Shah Ismail declared in his treatiseTaqwiyat al-Iman:
"It is customary for many people, in the time of difficulty, to invoke the spirits of pir, apostles, imams, martyrs and angels, and fairies, and to beg them to fulfil their wishes. To propitiate them, vows and of erings are made in their names. Moreover, childrcn arc named after them, for instance, 'Abdun Nabi (slave of apostle), Ali Bakhsh(gift of Ali); as well as Hasan Bakhsh, Husayn Bakhsh, Madar Bakhsh, Salar Bakhsh, and also Ghulam Muhiy-u-Din (slave of the reviver of the Faith). And for the life protection of their children some keep a lock of hair on their heads, and others make them wear a woven thread around their necks and clothe them in the name of some saints. Some people put chains on the leg of their children, and some offer sacrifices. Many of them invoke the saints in the time of difficulty and take oaths in their names. In short, what the Hindus do towards their idols, these pseudo Muslims do all these things with prophets, saints, imams, martyrs, angels and fairies, and yet they claim that they themselves are Musalmans.[12]
When the military actions were initiated, some Muslimnawabs, likeAmir Khan ofTonk, provided funds but did not join them for jihad. Around 8,000 mujahideen who accompanied them were mostly clergymen or poor people who joined the militia. The rulers of Tonk,Gwalior andRampur supported him with British consent because they were dependent on British forces and they knew well enough that the British would not stop them from aiding an enemy of the Sikhs. Since Syed Ahmad’s campaign was based on Islamic concept of jihad, his spokesman, Shah Ismail Dehlavi, tries to create desire for the war by saying:
"as far as the special benefits are concerned that go to the faithful Martyrs, the Muslim Mujahideen, the ruling Sultans and the brave men of the battle field, don’t need to be elaborated here".[6]
Arriving in Peshawar valley in late 1826, Syed Ahmad and his followers made their base in towns ofHund andZaida inSwabi District.[13] Syed Ahmad called upon the localPashtun andHazarewal tribes to wagejihad, and demanded that they renounce their tribal customs and adopt theSharia. The traditionalkhans were replaced by Wahabi-style reformistulama (Islamic scholars) and a system of Islamic taxes was established to finance thejihad. Soon after this evangelist campaign and the establishment of theSharia system,jihad was declared.[14][15] He sent an ultimatum to Ranjit Singh, demanding:
[...] either become a Muslim, pay Jizyah or fight and remember that in case of war,Yaghistan supports the Indians.[16]
Themujahideen were educated with both theological doctrines and physical training sessions. Syed Ahmad organized wrestling, archery training, and shooting competitions. Themujahideen also repeated several Islamic anthems. One such popular anthem has survived, known as "Risala Jihad".[17] On 21 December 1826, Syed Ahmad and his 1,500 followers clashed with 4,000 Sikh troops in thebattle of Akora Khattak and obtained a significant victory.[18] On 11 January 1827, allegiance was sworn on his hand and he was declaredCaliph andImam.[19] Syed Ahmad's claim toKhilafah was viewed with suspicion in theFrontier region as well as in the clerical circles of North India. When theJumu'ah (Friday prayer) sermon was read in his name, symbolizing his claim to power, the tribal chiefs became wary. According to prominent PathanSardars like Khadi Khan,Maulvis were ill-equipped to run the affairs of a state.[6] In response to the criticisms, Syed Ahmad asserted that his aim was not material but to lead ajihad againstkuffar. Defending his claim to Caliphate, Syed Ahmad writes:
We thank and praise God, the real master and the true king, who bestowed upon his humble, recluse and helpless servant the title of Caliphate, first through occult gestures and revelations, in which there is no room for doubt, and then by guiding the hearts of the believers towards me. This way God appointed me as the Imam (leader)... the person who sincerely confesses to my position is special in the eyes of God, and the one who denies it is, of course sinful. My opponents who deny me of this position will be humiliated and disgraced.[6]
Regarding his Imamate, Syed Ahmad wrote to Nawab Wazir ud-Dawla, the ruler of Tonk:
"believe me, the person who sincerely confesses to my position is special in the eyes of God, and the one who denies it is, of course sinful. My opponents who deny me of this position will be humiliated and disgraced".[6]
After the conquest ofPeshawar by themujahideen, Syed Ahmad announced the abolition of all tribal rituals that he regarded asbid'ah (religious innovations). He abolished various practices such as: the bride being paid a regular price for marriage; the widowed of the deceased Muslims being divided among his heirs; practice of more than four marriages; denial of inheritance to women; clan wars being considered likejihad and its plunder being considered as booty. He also pushed for aggressive and violent policies to enforceSharia. These included: allowing brides as long as half of the agreed money was given; young girls eligible for marriage should be married immediately; flogging people who didn't pray.[6]
In addition to the stated social agenda, Sayyid Ahmad also attempted to collect the Islamic tithe (usher) of ten per cent of crop yields. The alliance was defeated and the Islamic reformers finally occupied Peshawar. Over several months during 1830, Sayyed Ahmad tried to conciliate established power hierarchies. But before the end of 1830; an organized uprising occurred and the agents of Sayyid Ahmad in Peshawar and in the villages of the plain were murdered and the movement retreated to hills.
They ran into trouble in this area with many of these Pashtun tribes because they had no cultural or linguistic relation to the locals and tried to wipe out their own old tribal rules and customs by force. Some of their old tribal leaders had sensed a threat to their own prevailing influence over the local tribal population and their traditional Pashtun nationalism which they were not willing to give up and hand their power and influence over to the newcomers in their area in the name of Islam.[10]
Punjab, parts of North-West Frontier and Kashmir regions, in 1831, were under the strict rule of powerful Maharaja Ranjit Singh who also had future ambitions to control all of the North-West Frontier region of the Pashtuns. So he sent his powerful Sikh army to fight them and after a fierce battle, defeated them, atBalakot. There in the town of Balakot in 1831, Syed Ahmad was killed by the Sikh Army. He was beheaded.[13][20]
Ismail Dehlvi was killed on 6 May 1831 during a fiercebattle at Balakot against the army of MaharajaRanjit Singh (1780 – 1839), the ruler of the Sikh empire that governed the region at that time.[3] "Traditional historians accused the Pakhtun tribes of betraying the religious cause and glorified the role of the movement."[10] Some other historians point out that the British government silently supported the movement and its planned migration to the North-West Frontier region. "Most probably, the British government wanted to shift the troublesome elements from the territory under their control to that of the Sikhs' in order to weaken the Sikh rule."[7][4]
The historical roots ofAhl-i Hadith, the puritanicalreform movement that emerged in mid 19th-century India, is traced back to the Jihad movement of Shah Ismail. Shah Ismail's doctrines onTawhid (monotheism) and fervent condemnations of various practices he regarded asshirk (polytheism), denunciations of celebrations likeMawlid asbid'ah (religious innovation); along with his emphasis on the requirement to directly return to scriptural sources without imitating amadhab (legal school) would deeply influence theAhl-i Hadith. Although theIslamic state of theMujahidin was later destroyed by the Sikh Empire, Shah's followers continued to spread his teachings travelling across the Indian subcontinent; and described themselves asAhl-i Hadith. This set the stage for the emergence of an organised form ofSalafism in the subcontinent. By the early 20th century,Ahl-i Hadith had become an important religious movement all across South Asia. Major scholars and religious students of theDeobandi movement also refer to Shah Ismail's treatises for theological guidance.[21][22]
On the other hand, theBarelvi movement claim Ismail Dehlvi broke the unity of Indian Muslims with the claim that God can lie, something they consider blasphemous.Fazl-e-Haq Khairabadi was one of the early scholars to refute Ismail Dehlvi beforeAhmed Raza Khan Barelvi a few decade later.
While linked with the Waliullah legacy, Sayyid Ahmad and Shah Ismail's style was far more antagonistic and less subtle than earlier critiques of taqlid. They relentlessly attacked customary rituals that they believed were not soundly based in the Quran and hadith, often enraging other Muslims in the process.. By suggesting that common Muslims did not need the guidance of learned scholars or religious leaders, Shah Ismail advanced a far more radical critique of taqlid than did Shah Waliullah. Arguing that the meaning of divine texts was self-evident,.. Shah Ismail argued for a literalist approach to texts, which eliminated the risk that the imposition of interpretative interventions, rooted in human reasoning (aql), would distort the true meaning of the Quran and hadith.
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location (link){{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location (link){{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location (link){{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location (link)| International | |
|---|---|
| National | |
| Other | |
