Today is our topic of discussion Syed Ismail Hossain Shiraji .
Syed Ismail Hossain Shiraji
Syed Ismail Hossain Shiraji was born in 1880 in Sirajganj in the district of Pabna. He did not have much formal education but was able to place himself in a front – rank position among the contemporary social and political thinkers in Bengal. He left school and went to Turkey at an early age of fifteen.
A romantic love for the past glory of Islamic culture and the Muslim world led him to go to the seat of the Islamic Caliphate,3 He came back to Sirajganj after staying there for two years and soon turned into a writer, a preacher of Islam and a great orator intending to reform the Muslim society in Bengal.
Shiraji’s involvement in politics and social activities began in the backdrop of the 1905 partition of Bengal, the Swadeshi and the boycott movement. He had joined the anti-partition movement led by Surendranath Banerjee 4 All through his political career he was very anti-British and at the same time strongly pan-Islamic.
He was involved in all movements which were against the British irrespective of parties. He participated in movements led by the Congress, the Muslim League, the Swarajya Party, The Krishak Samiti and The Anjumani Ulama-i Bangala.
Although he lacked formal education he was well-informed about both regional and national politics and could speak for hours on any issue he was asked to talk about. He was deeply attached to the Islamic world but was intellectually very modern. He advocated social enlightenment and female education.
He was against child marriage and polygamy, against extravagance and the practice of dowry.5 He was one of the earliest social reformers in the Muslim community who advocated liberation of women particularly from the evils of purdah 6 He made a significant distinction between aborodh (seclusion) and purdah (use of veil).
He cited the example in Turkey, another Islamic state, where women put on veil but compared to Bengal or to the whole of India they were far advanced in education, occupation and in modern thinking 8 After coming back from Turkey he explained in his book Turki Nari Jibon (Life of Turkish Women) that Turkish women used veil but did not lag behind because they had come out of seclusion.
Turkish women had advanced in respect of education, in jobs and even in politics because they had come out of seclusion. Purdah, according to Ismail Hossain Shiraji, was not, of course, the only reason for their backwardness.
The greatest barrier to advancement of the womenfolk, he believed, was their strict seclusion which had made them ignorant about health and sanitation, child-rearing and conservativeness.8 He believed that both the Hindu and Muslim women in Bengal should follow the instance in Turkey.
Ismail Hossain Shiraji was a follower of Shibli Nomani (1857-1914) and poet Mohammad Iqbal (1876-1938). Iqbal and Nomani retained their inclination to Islamic tradition, but at the same time felt that a co-ordination between religious and secular thought was necessary to stop the growing rift in the Indian Muslim community 10 They were influenced by modern education and ideas but were emotionally attached to religion.
Both Iqbal and Nomani were religious thinkers but were not opposed to modern thought. They represented the dual trend of orthodoxy and heterodoxy which prevailed in the Indian Muslims.11 Shiraji, too, in his actions, in his numerous writings and speeches revealed that he was strongly sensitive to Islamic thought and culture and at the same time preached modern ideas in respect to social reform. He believed that Muslims should hold the Quran in one hand and Science in the other.
He wrote in the contemporary journals like, the Al-Eslam, the Islam Pracharak, the Prabashi, the Pracharak the Kohinoor, the Soltan, the Weekly Mohammadi, the Saogat, and Nabajug the Nabanur12 All his writings exposed him as a thinker who was very modern in the western sense of the term but who clung passisonately to the past glory of Islam and believed in the regeneration of the faith.
Both Ismail Hossain Shiraji and Moniruzzaman Islamabadi (1874- 1950) were modern intellectually but emotionally they upheld Islamic tradition. On the one hand, they glorified Islamic culture and heritage, advocated the use of Arabic language and remained firm believers of Pan- Islamism.
On the other, they spoke for female education and wanted the society to be free from irgnorance, all kinds of superstitions and conservativness prevailing in the backward Muslim community in Bengal. He stressed that Bengali should be the mother tongue of Muslims in Bengal13.
Shiraji mentioned this repeatedly in the Islam Pracharak, the Mihir O Sudhakar, The Soltan and in the Naba Nur.14 He had earlier believed that Muslims of the whole world should make Arabic their national language. He wanted Arabic to be the language of the Muslim ummah. Later, he spoke in favour of Bengali.
15 He was, in this respect, an upholder of a trend that can he termed Bengali Muslim nationalism. Maulana Moniruzzaman Islamabadi belonged to this category as well. Both of them believed in communal harmony, stressed the need for social upliftment through modern education and scientific knowledge but at the same time adhered to Pan-Islamism and to the strict Shariah of Islam.
Ismail Hossain Shiraji had left for Turkey in 1895 at the age of fifteen but came back after two years. He got himself admitted to school again in 1897 but left school before he could take his matriculation examination, 16 There ended his formal education. His father, Abdul Karim Khandkar (1856-1924) who practiced unani or herbal medicine, was not financially well-off.
Shiraji started to write at an early age, 17 His first verse book was Anal Prabaha (Streams of Fire), published in 1899 by Munshi Mohammad Meherullah (1861-1907).18 In this book he urged the Muslims to re-invoke the past glory of Islam. He pointed out the need for Muslims to wake up again as a strong and superior community. He thought of a Muslim renaissance.
He wanted that Muslims of India should reincarnate into a strong community, regain their lost glory and invigorate their faith in Islam.19 In Anal Prabaha, Shiraji also pointed out that India was being exploited under colonial rule and it was essential for the Muslims to act unitedly and strongly to make India free 20 This was undoubtedly a very bold stand against the British in the first decade of the twentieth century because most Muslim leaders in Bengal projected their loyalty to the British in those days.
The extremists were also very active in Bengal and there were instances of communal riots in many places 21 Shiraji’s book expressed strong anti-British feeling and was considered to incite communal discord.
When the second edition of the book was brought out in 1908, it was banned and the author was arrested by the British government, 22 He was released from prison in 1912 after which he left for Turkey, this time he accompanied the medical team led by Dr. Ansari 23 Ismail Hossain Shiraji’s anti-British attitude was deep-rooted in him which lasted till the end of his life.
All his writings reveal his anti-colonial feeling on the one hand and love for the motherland on the other. These attitudes worked deep in him and he urged the Muslims to take an active role in the nationalist movement. He was, in this respect, a sort of Muslim counterpart to Bankim Chandra Chatterjee (1844-1894). Bankim Chandra preached a Bengali Hindu nationalism, Shiraji preached Bengali Muslim nationalism but he was not communal.
In his poem Naba Uddipana (Re-invigoration), 1905 he mentioned that Hindu and the Muslim communities were “twin children of Mother India” 24 He urged the Muslim to unite together for the advancement of this motherland and to free their country from British rule. He believed that the urgent need of the time was to make India free first. Religious intolerance or communalism, he believed, was the result of political friction and for the contest of gaining political power.
He wrote in his poem, Akangkha (Desire), 1906 that India was for the Indians, not for the outsiders 25 Although in his novels, Ray Nandini (1915), Tara Bal (1916), Feroza Begum (1918), Nooruddin (1919) he exposed Hindu – Muslim conflict existing in the contemporary society, he also depicted the harmonious relation between the two communities existing for centuries in India.
Shiraji did not incite communalism in his writings. It was believed that Shiraji wrote in retaliation to Bankim Chandra’s Durgesh Nandini (1865) and Anandamath (1882) but all his writings were meant to glorify the Muslims, rejuvinate them, and at the same time to uphold the tradition of Hindu-Muslim co-existence.
There existed in Bengali literature in the early part of the twentieth century, two distinct trends among Muslim writers — one simply attempting to express Muslim heritage and culture following the comtemporary literary style.
They wrote not to emphasize Muslim separatism but to portray in literature Bengali Muslim life and society. Writers like Mosharraf Hossain (1848-1911), Kaikobad (1857-1952) and Mozammel Huq belonged to this group 27 The other trend, popularly known as the Shudhakar group, imitated the creation of a purely Islamic literature.
This group initated the style of the contemporary Hindu writers and at the same time wrote in order to glorify the Muslim heritage and culture. During anti-partition and Swadeshi movement, particularly, they came to realize that as in politics, so in literature they should have a different path. To exist politically and as a separate community in a country dominated by the Hindu majority, they needed to proceed on their own.
This group wrote in response to Bankim Chandra Chatterjee’s anti-Muslim literature, where he identified the Muslims as outsiders who attacked and conquered India 29 Bankim Chandra believed that Muslims were alien and that the country should be made free of the Muslims 30 Muslim writers like Abdur Rahim (1859-1931), Reazuddin Ahmad Mashadi (1859-1918),
Mohammad Reazuddin Ahmad (1862-1933) believed that India also belonged to the Muslims and at the same time glorified their heritage and culture 31 They claimed that Islamic culture was much superior to that of the Hindus and that they were ignorant and in darkness because they still worshipped idols.
Ismail Hossain Shiraj’s writings were very similar to those of the Sudhakar group, but Shiraji was more anti-British than anti-Hindu. Most of Shiraji’s contemporary writers of the Muslim community had attempted to carn sympathy and favour of the British. The Muslims had earned the disfavour of the British from the time of the Wahhabl trials (1871),33 Muslim writers of the late nineteenth and early twentieth century had attempted to earn the favour of the British and to remove anti-British feeling from the minds of the Muslims.
They also evoked the past glory of the Muslims and urged them to rise up again with strength and confidence. Shiraji did similarly follow this trend but he was different on one point and that was, he could never accept British rule in India. Most of his writings, mainly poems, expressed anti-British feeling on the one hand and urged the Muslims to regain their lost glory on the other.
In this respect he was very much like the radical poet Kazi Nazrul Islam (1899-1975). Shiraji was also non-communal. Most of his writings, in fact, preached inter-communal harmony. His novels were set on the background of love and marriage between Hindu women and Muslim men. But, Nazrul’s language, images, style of writing were much more bold and fiery.
Besides, he was much more humanistic, liberal and syncretic in his writings and also in personal life. Shiraji, however, was conservative in the sense that he never accepted cultural syncretism and strongly upheld religious purity. He preached against manats, visiting of mazars and tombs, veneration of pirs and performing pujas by the Muslims.
He was a follower of the Wahhabis in this respect 34 But, he criticized the illiterate and half literate mullahs who, he believed, wasted their precious time and energy by unnecessary arguments between the Hanafi and the La-mazhabi.35 He was also very pan-Islamic.
He even believed that very soon the Amir (Islamic ruler) of Kabul would conquer India and he hoped that Muslims would rule the country again. It is interesting to note the thought process of Syed Ismail Hossain Shiraji that even in the mid-1920’s he believed that the Amir of Afghanistan would come to India “within six months” to establish Islamic rule.
Therefore, Swaraj Party or the Swarajist movement was unnecessary. He even believed that there was no need for Hindu – Muslim Pact 36 This he conveyed to Abul Mansur Ahmad in the mid 1920’s when the Muslim failed to gain any practical favour from the Bengal Pact (1923) and the communal relation in Bengal was getting worsened.
However, to be a pro-Muslim did not mean that Shiraji was anti-Hindu or communal. He was conservative in the sense that he believed in the following of strict religious sharlah, which in a way meant religious separatism in a multi-racial, multi-religious country. Attempt to uphold the idea of pan-Islamism seemed unrealistic and conservative to those who believed in modernism.
But to be a conservative does not mean to be communal. One can be very religious and at the same time tolerant to other religions. Shiraji never expressed hatred for Hinduism or for the Hindus and he never incited communalism. He has been often represented as a very liberal minded Muslim leader and writer.37 He had participated in the nationalist movement led by the Congress, in the anti-partition and Swadeshi movement.
Shiraji’s political activities in the 1920’s superseded his literary pursuits. He was deeply concerned at the failure of the Bengal Pact. Even before the death of C.R. Das in June 1925, Shiraji observed that the pact gave only a placebo to the Muslims.
When Khan Bahadur Musharraf Hossain (1871-1966) and other loyalists including other Swarajist Muslims proposed in March 1924 that the Bengal Pact be put to immediate effect, C.R. Das replied that the pact could be implemented only after Swaraj was attained.38 From this incident C.R.
Das was dubbed a hypocrite and most Muslim leaders in Bengal became anti-Congress and anti-Swarajist although for political gains many contested to the Bengal Legislative Council elections as Swarajists in 1923.39 The Swarajya Party which included several Muslim leaders also won a great victory in the Calcutta Corporation elections, held in March 1924.
Sirajganj, the sub-division where Syed Ismail Hossain Shiraji belonged to, was a centre of peasant uprising throughout the period under British rule 41 In the early 1920’s this trend took a communal turn. Failure of the Bengal Pact to make the nationalist Muslim or the Muslim community happy, was a major factor that led to communal disturbances in many places, including Pabna.
Shiraji was involved in mobilizing the peasants in this region. Civil disobedience, Satyagraha and non-co-operation led by the Congress, was going on but it made little impact on the peasantry 42 In June 1924 two conferences were held at Sirajganj. One was the Bengal Provincial Conference led by C.R. Das, Maulana Mohammad Akram Khan and other Swarajist Party leaders.
The other was called the Muslim Conference which was led by Ismail Hossain Shiraji, Musharraf Hossain and others.43 Shiraji’s Conference drew large number of Muslims, particularly from Pabna district, whose main demand was drastic tenancy reforms.44 Shiraji mobilized the agrarian sector, which he did on anti- Zaminder, anti-Swarajist and anti-Hindu lines.45 For this reason the Sirajganj meeting led by Ismail Hossain Shiraji was dubbed anti – Hindu and he was marked as a communal person.
In early 1924 landless peasants, mostly bargadars of local Hindu landlords boycotted them in Chatmohar, a village in Sirajganj sub-division 46 Appeals were made by mullahs to boycott Hindu festivals and pujas thoughout eastern Bengal in the years 1925-26.47
In Pabna, particularly.
Muslim with middle class background and the mullahs gave leadership to this anti-Hindu and anti-zamindar movement. In 1926 Muslim peasants attacked Hindu houses, destroyed properties belonging to the Marwari moneylenders and Hindu jotedars 48 Peasants were also motivated to boycott union board elections and ryots were involved in no-rent campaigns.
Satyagraha and non-co-operation was strong in Pabna and Shiraji was an active participant in the movement, particularly in Sirajganj. Because these movements took anti-Hindu turn Shiraji was held responsible for communal antagonism in the region.
Swarajist opposition to the Tenancy Amendment Bill in December 1925, consolidation of the revivalist Muslim association, like the Anjumans, the Ulama and the Tanzim committees, and the retaliation by the Hindu community through stengthening the Shuddhi and Sangathan movements worsenend communal relation to a great extent and there were riots in Calcutta and other places 50 Slump in jute price and severe trade recession in the 1920’s was also a major reason behind anti-zamindar feeling of the peasants.
Shiraji was actively involved in peasant movement and attended several meetings where he demanded safeguards for the interest of the ryots. A large meeting was held at Salimpur, Mymenshing in January. 1926 where about 15,000 ryots, cultivators, ulama, doctors and lawyers gathered to form a resolution on Tenancy Bill. 51 The meeting was presided over by Ismail Hossain Shiraji. Demands made at the meeting were,
1) the ryot must have kaimi and permanent rights in his arable and homestead land at fixed jama,
2) they must have unlimited and unqualified right for transfer of their land and that the landlord will have no right to dispossess the purchaser thereof,
3) zamindars should not be permitted to have khas possession of land sold after payment of compensation to purchaser,
4) right of zamindars for khas possession or transfer of whole jama must be stopped,
5) provision of increment of rent after lapse of every fifteen years must be declared null and void.
6) the ryot must have right to valuable trees grown on his land, 7) the ryot must have complete right to excavate tank, sink pakka well or erect building in their own land without giving any nazar, etc 52 Shiraji was credited in his time for his dedication to the cause of the peasants.
To take up any issue in favour of the peasants meant a collision with the established system of the role of the zamindars, the chain of jotedars and the money – lending groups who were mainly Hindus. Shiraji’s speeches, therefore, were anti-Hindu. But, he was never communal and he never meant to be communal. Two other factors worked behind the allegation that he was communal.
First, Pabna, particularly, did not have large number of namasudras compared to other provinces. Anti-zamindar agitation in Pabna was on the whole led by Muslim ryots and peasants.
Second, the Wahhabi ulama were quite influential here. Shiraji’s involvement in politics under these circumstances made one believe that he was communal. Although he was not so, it is essential to note that however enlightened he was, he was strongly against the syncretic trend existing in Bengali Muslim society.
He was a liberal-minded writer and politician but not without contradictions. He was socially conscious and was concerned about the welfare of the Muslims in India, particularly Bengal. Although he supported the partition of Bengal in 1905, at times he spoke against it.
In the 1920’s he spoke in favour of the Caliphate. He supported the Khilafat movement, never questioning the justification of its extra – Indian aspect. He wanted communal harmony but never attempted sincerely to make the Bengal Pact workable. He was, in many respects, closer to the ulama in thought rather than to the English – educated, western – influenced leaders of the time.
He was not just a politician. He was a writer as well. He is the author of several books; he wrote poems and novels. He was primarily known in his time as a literateur and a social reformer. His involvement in politics, particularly in peasant movement reveal another facet of his conscious effort to improve the conditions of the Bengali Muslims.