Risala Asbaab Bighawat e Hind

TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................2
CHAPTER 1: BRIEF PROLOGUE........................................................................4
ABOUT SIR SYED AHMED KHAN.......................................................................4
ABOUT THE RISALA......................................................................................4
CHAPTER 2: DETAILS...................................................................................7
CONTENTS OF THE RISALA.............................................................................7
RISALA ASBAAB-E-BAGHAWAT-E-HIND..............................................................11
DEFINITION OF "REBELLION".......................................................................12
1) IGNORANCE ON THE PART OF THE PEOPLE...................................................14
2) THE PASSING LAWS THAT WERE INCONSISTENT WITH THE ESTABLISHED CUSTOMS......17
3) THE IGNORANCE OF GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF THE COUNTRY AND THEIR SUBJECTS. 19
4) NEGLECT IN MATTERS WHICH SHOULD HAVE RECEIVED CONSIDERATION FROM
GOVERNMENT........................................................................................21
5) THE INSUBORDINATE STATE OF THE INDIAN FORCES........................................24
CHAPTER 3: AFTERMATH.............................................................................26
CHAPTER 4: CONCLUSION............................................................................27
REFERENCES.............................................................................................28
REFERENCES:BIBLOGRAPHY.............................................................................29
Research Paper Risala Asbaab-e-Baghawat-e-Hind
INTRODUCTION
Sir Syed Ahmed Khan was a brain, and he worked throughout his life
for the betterment of Muslims of subcontinent. He was very concerned
about the political situation of India and its overall impact on Muslims
of the region. His pain and anxiety made him to step forward and take
some bold and unpopular decisions like suggesting the learning of
English, establishing M.A.O College for the Muslim children to seek
western knowledge along with Islamic education.
As the political worker his actual work began when the conditions went
worst between the then rulers of India, The British, and the local
political entities. He acted as a bridge between the local population
and British rulers. He rightly conveyed the sentiments of the local
population to the higher authorities of British Empire.
The war of Independence 1857 was the real test of his wisdom and
political farsightedness. The British went totally against the politicians
as well as local public. They declared the war of 1857 to be a revolt
and mutiny. And this was the time when a negotiator was required to
cool down the British as well as to put forward the aspirations of the
locals. And bring peace and harmony to the region.
The Risala Asbaab-e-Baghawat-e-Hind is the endeavor of Sir Syed

Ahmed Khan which contributed a lot to bring the things back to normal.
In this Risala he took the courage of telling the British to analyze their
mistakes and change their policies. He discussed the concerns of both
Hindus and Muslims.
In this report I have tried to highlight his objectives of writing the

Risala. The report contains a Brief Prologue of Sir Syed Ahmed’s life
and his political contributions. However, the main emphasis is on the
various aspects of the Risala. Chapter # 2 discusses various details,
causes of 1857 restlessness and their implications on the life of people
Muhammad Tanveer Iqbal
2
of India. This report also discusses the aftermaths publishing this Risala
on the prevailing socio-political chaos in India.
The Risala Asbaab-e-Baghawat-e-Hind played a pivotal role in the

bringing both the parties to the discussion table. The British at last
acknowledged the needs and demands of the local population. The
locals were given a platform to raise their voice to the British Power
Corridors.
It can be easily said that the Risala represented the voice of the whole
of India and earned peace and harmony to the region.

3
CHAPTER 1: BRIEF PROLOGUE
ABOUT SIR SYED AHMED KHAN:

Sir Syed Ahmed Khan Bahadur (October 17, 1817 –
March 27, 1898), commonly known as Sir Syed, was
an Indian educator and politician, and an Islamic
reformer and modernist.
Sir Syed pioneered modern education for the Muslim

community in India by founding the Muhammedan
Anglo-Oriental College, which later developed into
the Aligarh Muslim University.
His work gave rise to a new generation of Muslim intellectuals and

politicians who composed the Aligarh movement to secure the political
future of Muslims in India.
Born into Mughal nobility, Sir Syed earned a reputation as a

distinguished scholar while working as a jurist for the British East India
Company.
During the Indian Rebellion of 1857 he remained loyal to the British

and was noted for his actions in saving European lives.
Syed Ahmed was serving as ‘Sadr Amin’ in Bijnor when the revolt broke
out in Delhi on May 10, 1857. The events of 1857, directly or indirectly
had not only shaken the very foundations of British rule and ultimately
resulting into independent India, but also shattered the unity of Hindus
and Muslims, and in particularly the mind set of Syed Ahmed. During
the Indian Rebellion of 1857 he remained loyal to the British and was
noted for his actions in saving European lives.

4
ABOUT THE RISALA:

In 1858, he was appointed to a high-ranking post at the court
in Moradabad. As soon as Sir Sayyid reached Moradabad, he began to
write the pamphlet entitled The Causes of the Indian
Revolt (Asbaab-e-Baghawat-e-hind), in which he did his best to clear
the people of India, and especially the Muslims, of the charge of
Mutiny. In spite of the obvious danger, he made a courageous and
thorough report of the accusations people were making against the
Government and refused the theory which the British had invented to
explain the causes of the Mutiny.
When the work was finished, without waiting for an English translation,
Sir Sayyid sent the Urdu version to be printed at the Mufassilat Gazette
Press in Agra. Within a few weeks, he received 500 copies back from
the printers. His friend warned him not to send the pamphlet to
Parliament or to the Government of India. Master Ramchandra's
younger brother, Rae Shankar Das, who was munsif in Moradabad and
a great friend of Sir Sayyid, begged him to burn the books rather than
put his life in danger. Sir Sayyid replied that he was bringing these
matters to the attention of the British for the good of his own people, of
his country, and of the Government itself. He said that if he came to
any harm while doing something that would greatly benefit the rulers
and the subjects of India alike, he would gladly suffer whatever befell
him. When Rae Shankar Das saw that Sir Sayyid's mind was made up
and nothing could be done to change it, he wept and remained silent.
After performing a supplementary prayer and asking God's blessing, Sir
Sayyid sent almost all the 500 copies of his pamphlet to England, one
to the Government, and kept the rest himself.
When the Government of India had the book translated and presented
before the Council, Lord Canning, the Governor-General, and Sir
Berthold Frere both accepted it as a sincere and friendly report. The
Foreign Secretary, however, severely attacked it, calling it 'an
extremely seditious pamphlet'. He wanted a proper inquiry into the

5
matter and said that the author, unless he could give a satisfactory
explanation, should be harshly dealt with. Since no other member of
the Council agreed with his opinion, his attack did no harm.
Later, Sir Sayyid was invited to attend Lord Canning's Durbar in

Farrukhabad, and happened to meet the Foreign Secretary there. He
told Sir Sayyid that he was displeased with the pamphlet and added
that if he had really had the Government's interests at heart; he would
not have made his opinion known in this way throughout the country,
but would have communicated it directly to the Government. Sir Sayyid
replied that he had only had five hundred copies printed, the majority
of which he had sent to England, while one had been given to the
Government of India, and the remaining copies were still in his
possession. Furthermore, he had the receipt to prove it. He was aware,
he added, that the view of the rulers had been distorted by the stress
and anxieties of the times, which made it difficult to put even the most
straightforward problem in its right perspective. It was for this reason
that he had not communicated his thoughts publicly. He promised that
for every copy that could be found circulating in India he would
personally pay one thousand rupees. At first, the Foreign Secretary was
not convinced and asked Sir Sayyid over and over again if he was sure
that no other copy had been distributed in India. Sir Sayyid reassured
him on this matter, and the Foreign Secretary never mentioned it
again. Later he became one of Sir Sayyid's strongest supporters.1

6
CHAPTER 2: DETAILS
CONTENTS OF THE RISALA:
1. WHAT WERE THE CAUSES OF THE REBELLION IN HINDUSTAN?
1.1. Definition of "Rebellion" exemplified with instances.
1.2. Why it is resorted to.
1.3. The Rebellion of 1857 did not originate from a single cause,
but from a complication of causes.
1.4. The distribution of "Chuppaties," had not league for its object.
1.5. Russia and Persia not chargeable with a league in this matter.
1.6. The subject of the Proclamation which was found in the tent of
a Persian Prince discussed.
1.7. The dispatch of a Farman by the ex-king of Delhi to the king of
Persia not improbable, but not the origin of the rebellion.
1.8. The annexation of Oudh not the cause of the general rise.
1.9. The national league not framed with the view of overthrowing
the government of strangers.
1.10.The position of Ex-king of Delhi well-known within the town,
and its environs, but overrated in the district Provinces.
1.11. The declaration of Lord Amherst, in the year 1827, to the effect
that the sovereignty of India belongs to the British
Government, and that it no longer existed in the Timor family
did not offend any one.
1.12. The Mahommadans did not contemplate Jehad against the
Christians prior to the outbreak.
7
1.13. The preaching of Jehad in India, 35 years before with this

reservation, its practice against the British Government was
opposed to the doctrine of the Mahommadan religion and from
the same cause its practice on the other side of the Indus
provinces, i.e. against the Seiks was held before.
1.14. None of the acts committed by the Mahommadan rebels during
the disturbances were in accordance with the tenets of the
Mahommadan religion.
1.15. The Futwah of Jehad printed at Delhi was a counterfeit one.
1.16. A large number of the Moulvies who considered the King of
Delhi a violator of the law left off praying in the Royal Mosque.
1.17. The same persons whose seals are said to be affixed to the
Futwah at Delhi protected the lives and honor of Christians.
1.18. The Bengal army was not previously in league for an out-
break.
1.19. Nor was there any league between the army and Ex-king
though it is not improbable that some Sepoy or Non-
Commissioned Officer may have been his disciple.
1.20. The non-admission of a native as a member into the
Legislative Council was the original cause of the out-break.
1.21.The importance of such an admission discussed.
1.22.The non-admission of such a member proved a hindrance to
the development of the good feeling of the Indian subject
towards the Government and of their good intention towards it;
on the contrary, contrary effects were produced.
1.23.The outbreak of rebellion proceeded from the following five
causes.
2. CAUSE I -- IGNORANCE ON THE PART OF THE PEOPLE, THAT

IS, MISAPPREHENSION OF THE INTENTIONS
OF GOVERNMENT:
2.1. Misunderstanding on the part of the Indians.

8
2.2. Apprehension of interference of Government with the religious

customs of the Indians.
2.3. Mention of the Secundra Orphan Asylum.
2.4. Religious discussion being carried to a great height during the
present time.
2.5. The covenanted officers assumed the Missionary functions.
2.6. Preaching of the Gospel by the Missionaries.
2.7. The establishment of Missionary Schools and the covenanted
officers attending examinations at them.
2.8. Village Schools.
2.9. The introduction of female education.
2.10.Alterations in the usual system of education in large Colleges.
2.11.The issue of Government proclamation on the subject of
admitting Government College English students to
appointments in preference to other candidates.
2.12.Introduction of the messing system in the Jails.
2.13.The circulation of Mr. E. Edmond's letters from Calcutta.
2.14. The interference in religious matters more repugnant to the
feelings of the Mahommadans, and its causes.
3. CAUSE II-- THE PASSING OF SUCH LAWS, REGULATIONS AND

FORMS OF PROCEDURE AS WERE INCONSISTENT WITH
THE ESTABLISHED CUSTOMS AND PRACTICES OF HINDUSTAN
AND THE INTRODUCTION OF SUCH AS WERE IN THEMSELVES
OBJECTIONABLE:
3.1. The promulgation of objectionable laws and procedures. Act 21
of 1850.
3.2. Act XV of 1856.
3.3. Giving liberty to females.
3.4. The promulgation of certain Acts in cases wherein the parties
are of one religion.
3.5. The resumption of M'afis.

9
3.6. The result of extinguishing the Native states, according to Sir

Thomas Munro, in place of raising to debase the whole people.
And according to the Duke of Wellington "To degrade and
beggar the natives making them all enemies."
3.7. Public sales of Zemindari rights.
3.8. Heavy assessments of lands.
3.9. The abolition of Talookdari rights, particularly in the Oudh
provinces.
3.10.The introduction of stamped paper.
3.11.The system of Civil Administration in the Bengal provinces
superior to that in the Punjab, but requires revision in certain
points.
4. CAUSE III -- THE IGNORANCE OF GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE

OF THE COUNTRY AND THEIR SUBJECTS:
4.1. The ignorance of Government of the State of the country and
their subjects.
4.2. Local authorities generally unacquainted with the condition of
their subjects.
4.3. Overwhelming poverty of the Indians, particularly of the
Mahommadans.
4.4. Scarcity of employments, generally the Mahommadans whose
profession is commonly service were particularly
impoverished.
4.5. The same causes induced them to serve the rebels on one
anna, one and half annas, or one seer of flour per diem.
4.6. The stoppage of charitable pensions and stipends tending in a
great measure to the poverty of the Indians.
4.7. The investment of capital in Government loans.
4.8. Poverty the cause of the subject's rejoicing at the idea of a
change of Government, and wishing for it.

10
5. CAUSE IV – NEGLECT IN MATTERS WHICH

SHOULD HAVE RECEIVED CONSIDERATION FROM
GOVERNMENT:
5.1. Neglect in matters which should have received consideration
of Government.
5.2. Want of cordiality towards the Indians.
5.3. In ancient times, as long as cordiality was not observed by the
reigning powers, tranquility was not established.
5.4. Treating the Indians with contempt.
5.5. The ill-temper and uncouthly address of local authorities
towards the natives.
5.6. This ill treatment more repugnant to the feelings of the
Mahommadans, and its causes.
5.7. Exclusion of natives from promotion to high appointments.
Lord Bentinck's system of employing natives in high grades of
service an inadequate one.
5.8. The not holding of Durbars by the Governor General of India
and not conferring rank and honor due to merit according to
the usage of former emperors.
5.9. The observation of these rules by Lords Auckland and Ellen
borough a very proper one.
5.10.The facts of the rebellion in India appeared more serious to
the authorities than they in reality were; their causes.
5.11. The promulgation of Her Majesty's Proclamation highly
commendable, indeed may be said to have originated under
divine inspiration.
6. CAUSE V -- THE INSUBORDINATE STATE OF

THE INDIAN FORCES:
6.1. The paucity of the English forces.
6.2. If these two castes formed distinct Regiments perhaps the
Mahommadans would not have objected to the use of the new
cartridges.
11
6.3. The employment of Hindus and Mahommadans in the same

regiment.
6.4. The pride of the Indian forces and its causes.
6.5. The league of the Indian Army against the use of the new
cartridges: formed after January 1857.
6.6. The impropriety of punishing the non-commissioned officers at
Meerut, which touched the vanity of the Indian forces.
6.7. Want of confidence in the Indian forces towards Government
after the occurrence of Meerut.
6.8. Why the mutiny did not break out in the Punjab, and its
causes.
RISALA ASBAAB-E-BAGHAWAT-E-HIND:
The opening remarks of Sir Syed, regarding the Queen's Gracious
Proclamation, do correctly represent Native opinion. Natives generally
say that its merciful and considerate spirit had the best effect. He
stated that:
“Since I began this Essay on the causes of the Rebellion in Hindustan I

have been tempted to keep silence on the events of the past, and even
to wish my remembrance of them should be blotted out. The
proclamation issued by Her Majesty contains such ample redress for
every grievance which led up to that revolt, that a man writing on the
subject feels his pen fall from his hands. Why enter further into the
matter when the cause of all the dissatisfaction has been discovered
and provided against? Yet I think those loyal men and such as really
wish well to their government, should not content them with reflection:
but explain with all possible fidelity, their views on the origin of this
rebellion. Although, therefore, the causes of complaint have been met,
and the grievances redressed, I think it my duty to record my opinion
on the subject. That many well-informed, able, and experienced men
have written on the causes of the disturbance, I know; but I am not
aware that any native of the country has hitherto been among their
number. I venture therefore, publicly to express my opinion“2
12
Definition of "Rebellion" exemplified with instances:

He states the definition of Rebellion as under;
“
1. To fight with, or oppose, the servants or subjects of Government.
2. To neglect, and set at nought the Orders of Government, with a view
to resist its authority.
3. To aid and assist or in any way take part with those who are in open
opposition to Government.
4. To show a turbulent disposition, and such as is likely to lead a
lawless riot; and disregard of the Authority of Government.
5. To swerve at heart from respect and loyalty to the Government; and
in times of trouble, to withhold from it an active support.”3
After defining rebellion, the author goes on to say— "There is but one
thing which causes rebellious intentions to arise in the mind, viz. the
introduction of measures unsuited to the disposition, or to the wishes,
institutions, or customs of those who rebel."4
It is evident that, though such a cause may be of great importance, yet

there may be other causes.
Then the author clears the ground by mentioning various things which
did not cause the rebellion. This part of the Essay is very true. He
shows that there could have been no conspiracy; that Russia and
Persia could have had nothing to do with it; that the King of Delhi could
not have raised such a storm; that the domination of foreigners is not
necessarily distasteful to the people; that Mahommadans did not
contemplate Jehad against the Christians prior to the outbreak.
The author says that in the early days of our rule "the people and
chiefs were inclined towards our Government. The report of its justice,
mercy, generosity, faith, and treaties, and admirable arrangements for
ensuring happiness to the people and peace in the country, had made
the neighboring Hindu and Mahommadan states wish to be taken
under its protection."5

13
This, I believe, is a correct representation of Native opinion. The British

are not so popular now in these days as they are said to have been in
the days of Lake, Ochterlony, or Wellesley. Doubtless there are causes
for this, some of them inevitable. Still it is very desirable to retain as
much of the old popular policy as may be consistent with the progress
of the age.
After showing what not the cause was, he proceeds to show what
primarily was the cause, namely, the non-admission of Natives to the
Legislative Council of India!
Now without entering into the question whether natives ought or ought
not to be admitted into the Council, and with the admission that the
Legislature ought to have all due regard to the feelings of the people,
still it were [would have been] impossible to suppose that Natives
rebelled because they were not allowed to send Members to the
Legislative Council.
Moreover, some of the author's expressions are so strong as to lead (if

accepted) to the doctrine, that not only ought the laws to be framed
with due regard to the customs of the people, but also that whatever is
the custom ought to be legalized, whether the Government thought it
right or not. It is impossible that the British Government should go so
far as that.
Then the author says that the non-admission of Natives to the

Legislative Council kept the people in the dark as to the real intentions
and designs of Government.
It is difficult to understand this. The attendance of certain Native

Members at the Legislative Council would not in any special manner
have enlightened the Native public as to the views of Government.
Again, many of the misunderstandings on the part of the people to

which the author alludes are of many years' date, whereas the
Legislative Council has only existed for five years.

14
It is probably vain to suppose, as the author supposes, that "all these

erroneous notions might have been dissipated," if Natives had been
admitted to sit in the Legislative Council.
The author then proceeds to state that this non-admission gave birth to
certain circumstances which directly brought on the rebellion. These he
divides into five parts.
[1.0] CAUSE I -- IGNORANCE ON THE PART OF THE PEOPLE, THAT

IS, MISAPPREHENSION OF THE INTENTIONS OF GOVERNMENT
He says that the people at large believed that Government had serious
designs on their religion and customs. But he says it was understood
that these designs would be worked out not suddenly, nor forcibly, but
gradually and by means of instruction and moral suasion. This is rather
a remarkable statement as coming from a Native.
Further on the author writes— "during the famine of 1837, numerous

orphans were converted to Christianity. This was considered proof of
the intention of Government to reduce the country to poverty, and to
make the people Christians."6
Now this passage hardly redounds to the author's credit. The allusion
apparently refers to the Secundra Orphan Establishment. During the
famine these children, perfectly friendless, were rescued from
starvation, and made over to the Missionaries for education. Surely this
was a noble charity, and the sentiment of the author, though it might
be entertained by some evil-disposed persons, could hardly (we may
hope for the credit of human nature) have been general.
Then the author says that the people believed the Missionaries to be
really paid and approved by the State. Some may have thought this,
but at least many knew that such was not the case.
In the same place it is said that Civil Servants and Military Officers
discussed religion with their Native subordinates, and directed
attendance at the preaching of Missionaries.

15
Now in the North-Western Provinces, such things were at least

extremely rare. Hardly an instance of this kind is known in those
provinces.
Next the author remarks that Christian books were published,

containing offensive observations, regarding the holy men and sacred
places of the Native religions. Now, without doubt, whatever
expressions were used must have been such as the writers deemed to
be absolutely true. Still it is politic and expedient to avoid severity of
expression in this respect, as much as possible, consistently with
advocacy of the truth.
The statement that a Government Policeman was occasionally deputed

to attend on Missionaries, is an extraordinary one, and would not
generally be credited.
It is said that the Missionaries frequented mosques, and temples, and

fairs, to preach. Now here I must observe that if the Missionaries ever
entered a mosque or temple, it must have been with the consent of the
people. As to fairs, that is another matter; the Missionaries had a right
to attend these as much as any other people.
Next the author says the people objected to the establishment of

Mission Schools. But feeling that it might be justly replied that the
people must apparently have liked these schools, because they
voluntarily sent their children to them, the author says "this
circumstance ought not to be considered a proof of the absence of any
kind of dissatisfaction, but rather a convincing one of the wretched
state of the country;"7 and that the parents, though they hated the
schools, still sent their children to them, in order that the children
might learn enough to enable them to gain a livelihood!
This is a somewhat extraordinary passage. Many European readers

would think that it breathed the very spirit of fanaticism, which is
radically hostile to the spread of knowledge and of European
civilization.

16
It is indeed difficult to understand how the people could have disliked

these schools. In most places they showed a marked preference for
them over the Government Schools. In many places the people are
known to have the highest respect for Missionaries as instructors of
youth, and in their anxiety to obtain secular instruction for their
children seem to overlook the religious character of the instructors.
Again, if the people did not like the Mission Schools, they might have
resorted to the Government Schools always at hand, which were well
known to be quite secular.
The author asserts that the Government Village Schools were believed
by the people to be the precursors of religious instruction. There may
have been such an impression partially prevalent, but not universally.
Sometimes too the teachers may have been called clergymen in
disguise. But some (in some districts many) of the teachers were
drawn from the Molvi class of Mahommadans, who could not possibly
have been supposed to be the emissaries of Christianity.
Then the author comments on the Government Colleges: he says that

the system of instruction had become changed. The learned languages
of Asia, the Asiatic sciences and laws, ceased to be studied; European
knowledge instead was conveyed in Asiatic language. This of course is
true enough. But here many European readers would say that such a
course gave no just cause of dissatisfaction to the people, if indeed
such dissatisfaction existed; and that the whole passage is pervaded
by an illiberal and bigoted tone.
Then the author states that a preference was given to those candidates
for public employment who had been educated. This is no doubt true.
But surely it must be exaggeration to say that this caused a deep
gloom to fall on the minds of the people.
The author is correct in stating that the system in Jails, whereby

prisoners of various castes were obliged to mess together, was
regarded by Natives [as] a proof of hostility on the part of Government

17
towards the Native religions. But I must observe that this system was
not universally adopted.
He is also quite correct in saying that a pamphlet, published and

circulated in 1855, by a Mr. Edmond of Calcutta, did cause a
mischievous excitement in many parts of the country. And moreover
the fact that such excitement could be thus created, shows that there
must have been a kind of general fermentation going on in men's
minds.
The remark of the author that the Mahommadans are comparatively

well grounded in the doctrines of their religion, while the Hindus look
but little to religion, and much to caste, is perfectly true.
[2.0] CAUSE II-- THE PASSING OF SUCH LAWS, REGULATIONS

AND FORMS OF PROCEDURE AS WERE INCONSISTENT WITH
THE ESTABLISHED CUSTOMS AND PRACTICES OF HINDUSTAN
AND THE INTRODUCTION OF SUCH AS WERE IN THEMSELVES
OBJECTIONABLE:
Then the author brings forward the second cause, viz. the
promulgation of laws unsuited to the country, or opposed to the
customs and interests of the Natives.
In support of this he cites the Acts that declared [that] a man should
not forfeit his right of inheritance because he changed his religion, and
which legalized the remarriage of Hindu widows; also the recognition
by the Courts of the rights and freedom of women. Doubtless these
laws were unpopular with Natives; still, they are generally considered
to be right. Also the author notes as a cause of dissatisfaction, the slow
and ineffective action of the Courts in cases of adultery, seduction, and
the like. There is some truth in this.
Then the resumption of rent-free tenures is named as a source of bitter

dissatisfaction. This is quite true.

18
Further, the sale and transfer of landed property for realization of the
public revenue, or in satisfaction of private debt, is correctly mentioned
as causing unpopularity, and as opposed to the ancient custom of the
country. Hereditary property in land has a kind of sanctity in the eyes
of Natives, and the forcible transfer of it is regarded as a terrible thing.
The author then states that the settlement of the land tax was
praiseworthy, but that the assessments were too heavy, and had a
depressing effect. Without doubt the utmost pains were taken at the
time of settlement to make the assessments moderate. Certainly
agriculture in Hindustan has flourished. The increase and diffusion of
wealth has been great; that part of Hindustan which was ceded from
the Nawab Wuzeer of Oude, 50 years ago, and now yields double the
revenues of various kinds which it then yielded. So vigorous has been
the husbandry that the land has been apparently over-cultivated, so
that the productive power of the soil has been partially exhausted from
over-work. The author himself remarks this, yet immediately
afterwards he says with some inconsistency that cultivation has been
neglected.
Again, the author quotes the liberal terms of the land settlement made
by the Mogul Emperor Akbar the Great. But he does not add that the
terms allowed by the British Government are still more liberal.
It may seem strange that a Native of intelligence and education should

believe that his country was becoming impoverished, while it could be
shown in a hundred ways to be increasing in wealth. But it is
unfortunately a fact that as yet the Native gentry have no idea of
political economy. Enquiry would probably show that they usually
entertain the belief of this impoverishment of India. The decadence of
certain families gives to some natives, the impression of national
decay. The gradual elevation of the mass, on the other hand, fails to
strike them. When property changes hands, they think this to be a sign
of nothing but distress, forgetting that the class which buys the
property from another must be thriving. The transfer of property from

19
one class to another, owing to social changes, to revolutions in trade,

industry, and the like, strike them as indications of misfortune alone.
Certainly the Natives of some parts of India would smile if they were
told that Hindustan was driven by poverty into rebellion! Many suppose
the very contrary to be the fact.
The author is correct in stating that the Taluqdaree settlement in

Hindustan gave dissatisfaction to the upper classes especially.
The alleged unpopularity of the stamp revenue is not borne out by any
known facts. By much such an idea would be considered absurd. This
item of revenue has always been elastic and flourishing.
Next the author states that the system of civil justice in Hindustan is
highly commendable. Many persons will smile at reading this. The
author, having been himself employed in that department, is
prejudiced in its favor. The system has just been materially altered by
the Legislature, with the happiest results. In this passage too, the
author has a digression on the Punjab Code, which is not relevant to
the subject. He considers the system in Hindustan to be superior to
that of the Punjab. It is not necessary to discuss this, as the Legislature
has just introduced into Hindustan a procedure based on principles the
same as those which have prevailed in the Punjab. It will suffice to say
that the author's remarks show that he is not acquainted with, and is
much misinformed regarding, the method of the Punjab administration.
It is worthy of remark that the author mentions the undue facility of

appeal as a cause of unpopularity.
[3.0] CAUSE III -- THE IGNORANCE OF GOVERNMENT OF THE

STATE OF THE COUNTRY AND THEIR SUBJECTS:
The third cause given by the author is the ignorance of Government of
the manners and conditions of the people.
He commences by stating that Government officers were ignorant of

the real state of things, and that the people feared to speak out their
mind. Now the extraordinary reticence of Natives is no doubt a great
20
difficulty in Indian Government. As a rule it is very difficult to induce a

well disposed man to tell a disagreeable truth. It is only the most
experienced officers that can learn the inner sentiments of Natives;
and as European Officers know this, they are apt to suspect (and with
truth) that in these times a Native who criticizes the conduct of
Government, does so with some bad motive. This circumstance again
heightens the mutual distrust, and it becomes extremely difficult, if not
impossible, to know exactly what Natives do say of us. There is every
reason however to believe that in Hindustan many classes used to
speak, and still speak, of the British in very unjust and malevolent
terms— terms indeed of which we generally had no idea at the time,
and of which even now we can have no accurate conception.
The author is mistaken in supposing that when unpopular laws were

enacted, there was none to raise his voice. In such cases members of
the Legislature did explain the extent to which any particular
enactment was opposed to local custom; but for reasons (still
considered good and sufficient), the Legislature decided to pass the
laws. Such was the actual fact, though a Native writer could hardly be
expected to appreciate it.
Then a thoroughly Native idea [is] reproduced. It is said that under

Native Governments abundance of employment existed, most of which
disappeared under the British. Now, "employment" (Noukeree) does
not mean here, as in England, industrial occupation for the production
of wealth, but service; in service is included service as soldiers, as
retainers, as menials, as "employees" of every grade and kind. Now,
however contrary the notion may be to true political economy, it is the
fixed opinion of Natives that a Government which provides plenty of
opportunities for service of all kinds is a good one. Judged by this
standard, the British Government, however good it might be generally,
and however much it might advance the interests of the people, would
never be deemed a beneficial and popular one. It must always be a
source of difficulty to the British Government that there is a restless
class, half political and half Military, for whom it is difficult to find
21
employ, and who do not follow any profitable industry. A Native

Government does certainly find more employment for such a class
than the British Government can.
In the same strain the author goes on to say that the Native
Government bestowed liberally pensions and stipends which the British
Government did not. Here again is a thoroughly Native idea. However
contrary the notion may be to true political economy, it is the fixed
belief of Natives that one of the first duties of Government is to support
by direct grants in land or cash the aristocracy of the country.
Wherever such a system has prevailed, anything like a sudden
discontinuance of it by the British would lead to bitter discontent; and
to insurrection also, if opportunity should arise.
It is always to be remembered that a self-supporting aristocracy rarely

exists in Native states. An aristocracy always exists, but it is supported
by the Government direct, by landed grants and cash stipends. One of
the very few instances to the contrary, namely the land-holding
aristocracy of Bengal, which really and truly lives on what is now its
own property, is a British creation, and would not have been created by
a Native Government.
The author then is quite correct in saying that "old families

distinguished for their affluence were reduced to penury."8 The
circumstance may indeed be regretted. It did not however arise from
the direct action of Government, but simply because these families had
no real root or substance of their own. The fact however is cited as a
sure proof of the impoverishment of the country, and is strangely
connected with the raising of Government loans, and the issue of
Company's Paper.
In development of the same idea, it is said that each new conquest of

the British Government grieved the people, because it was felt that
thereby "employment" would be lessened (that is, service, as already
explained), and Native manufactures be superseded. Such opinions

22
doubtless were held by certain classes, though probably not by the

people generally.
This part of the brochure concludes with a warm commendation of the

British Government, in respect to its vigorous administration and the
preservation of external order and in the protection afforded to the
oppressed.
[4.0] CAUSE IV -- NEGLECT IN MATTERS WHICH SHOULD HAVE

RECEIVED CONSIDERATION FROM GOVERNMENT:
Fourth cause is said by the author to be the neglect by Government of
certain matters affecting the people, which ought to have been
attended to.
In support of this he declares that of late years the Government has

failed to win any popular affection, and that those has been an utter
want of sympathy between its officers and the people, which has been
more especially felt by the upper classes, and this opinion he enforces
at great length; and, strange to say, with numerous quotations from
our Scriptures.
He states that of late years, there has been a great change in the
manners and habits of British Officers, which has estranged them from
the people; and that while some continue to evince sympathy with the
people, many treat them with contempt or harshness.
The manner in which he speaks of some of the Civil Officers is indeed

rancorous, and would look as if he had some kind of spite or enmity. He
asks whether the Government do not know that the highest Natives in
the land tremble in the presence of its officers. Certainly, this is not
known generally, and is indeed scarcely to be believed. Again, he says
that the Native ministerial officials are often harshly spoken to, and
curse their fate in having to earn bread by such a service. Doubtless
such a thing may occasionally happen, but more frequently the very
reverse is the truth. The Native ministerial officials are so clever at
business and at adapting themselves to their masters that they

23
generally succeed in ingratiating themselves too much; and they boast

but too often, and sometimes too truly, of the favor in which they are
held by the European Officers.
But making due allowance for language of rancor and exaggeration on

the author's part, it is doubtless true that much of our old personal
popularity has departed; that the estrangement between our officers
and the people is more and more increasing; that this defect was
brought out into strong relief by the late rebellion; and that it would be
good policy on the part of Government to correct this unfortunate
tendency, and to retrieve (so far as may be done consistently with our
other principles) our popularity with the Natives. With care and
consideration we may hope to regain our lost popularity, as surely as
we once possessed it.
It is true that the gradual estrangement has been brought about by the
improved manners of the times. Doubtless the officers of Government
have behaved just as English gentlemen would always behave neither
better nor worse. In the present age Englishmen as a rule are not
popular with any alien nation, and it is the same with the English in
India. In India however this circumstance is politically unfortunate. The
present pamphlet adds one proof to many others that the Natives feel
it deeply. Moreover, this pamphlet shows that the Natives know, as
well as we do, that we are bound by the dictates of our Christian
charity to pursue a more conciliatory course, and exhibit a more
sympathetic and kindly demeanor, towards the Natives of India.
It is difficult to over-estimate the political importance of such a course

being universally pursued by English Officers in India. The influence of
the upper class with the people is great in all countries; in India, it is
enormous. This upper class is often proud and always sensitive, keenly
alive to slight, and immeasurably gratified by kindness and
consideration. Civility is always said to be cheaply given; but in India,
probably more than in any other country, it is cheaply bestowed, and is
fruitful of positive result. Besides this, however, there is certainly

24
needed on the part of our officers, a sympathetic interest in the

Natives, a certain degree of social intercourse with them, and a certain
knowledge and appreciation of their hopes and fears, their aspirations
and grief. The result of such a policy, consistently and steadily
pursued, would be manifest in any time of trouble. Moreover, such
policy does entirely consist with [=correspond to] the advance of the
age, and with the progress of our own civilization.
In illustration of his general position, the author adverts to various

points.
He says that fewer Natives of birth, family, and conations are

employed, and a strict system of examination has given an almost
exclusive preference to talent alone. In this there is much truth. It may
be quite practicable to give a better scope than heretofore to the upper
classes, while a certain standard of qualification is insisted on.
Again, the author says that "the prospects of Natives in the service of
Government have not been improved to the extent that is desirable."9
It is no doubt true that the throwing open to Natives of various offices

of higher emolument, would increase their loyalty, while probably it
might not detract from any other important interest of the State.
Then he dwells on the political expediency of admitting Natives to

durbars and other State ceremonies. All this is quite true. Orientals are
very imaginative. And any Government which produces an imposing
effect on their imagination is sure to have a real influence with them.
Native rulers are all well aware of this.
The sentence which states that "God has created kings to represent
Him, in order that the people might through them recognize Him, and
that earthly kings should Endeavour to imitate the attributes of their
Heavenly Father,"10 does correctly describe the Native theory of
Government.
Among some arguments for mercy towards rebels, the author states
that thousands not really guilty joined the rebels, fearing that they

25
might be hereafter punished as rebels, though they remained with the

British; and that thousands served the rebels, believing that British rule
had been swept away, and that all men had better obey the ruler of
the moment; is true enough.
[5.0] CAUSE V -- THE INSUBORDINATE STATE OF THE INDIAN

FORCES:
Lastly the author adverts briefly to the Indian Army. He adds his
testimony to the fact that the English army system in India has always
been faulty, and one great fault was the paucity of English troops.
When Nadir Shah conquered Khorassan and became master of the two
kingdoms of Persia and Affghanistan, he invariably kept the two armies
at equal strength. The one consisted, or rather was composed, of
Persians and Kuzul Bashies, and the other was composed of Afghans.
When the Persian Army attempted to rise, the Afghan army was at
hand to quell the rebellion, and vice versa. The English did not follow
this precedent in India. The sepoy army was no doubt faithful in its day
and served the Government well, but how could Government feel
certain that it would never act contrary to its orders? What measures
had Government taken for quelling at once on the spot any rebellion in
that vast army, such as that which happened last year?
Secondly he states that Government certainly did put the two

antagonistic races into the same regiment, but constant intercourse
had done its work and the two races in regiment had almost become
one. It is but natural and to be expected, that a feeling of friendship
and brotherhood must spring up between the men of a regiment,
constantly brought together as they are. They consider themselves as
one body, and thus it was that the difference which exists between
Hindus and Mahommadans had, in these regiments, been almost
entirely smoothed away.
Thirdly he mentions that if a portion of the regiment engaged in

anything, all the rest joined. If separate regiments of Hindus and
separate regiments of Mahommadans had been raised, this feeling of
26
brotherhood could not have arisen, and, in my opinion, the

Mahommadan regiments would not have refused to receive the new
cartridges.
The pamphlet concludes by some observations on the Punjab. He says

that Mahommadans there had been greatly oppressed by the Sikhs,
and had received no injury at the hands of the British. When the British
first took the country, oppression was rife. This was day by day
decreasing, whilst the contrary was the case in Hindustan proper.
The whole of the Punjab, when first annexed, was disarmed, and thus
the weapons necessary for rebellion were not forthcoming. The Sikhs,
too, though not so wealthy as in former days, had still sufficient to live
upon, chiefly from monies which they had inherited. The poverty which
was rife in Hindustan had not yet had time to become rife in the
Punjab.
Besides these, there were other cogent reasons why the Punjab
remained tranquil. Firstly, there was a powerful European army on the
spot. Secondly, the wisdom shown by the officials in at once disarms
the sepoys. Thirdly, the number of the rivers and the shutting up of the
ferries on them, which rendered the few who did rebel, powerless.
Fourthly, all the Sikhs, Punjabi and Pathans who might otherwise have
tried their hand at rebellion had already taken service or were being
formed into corps, and the desire for the plunder of Hindustan was
strong in them. We thus find that the service which the people of India
took in the rebel army under such difficulty and changes was easily
obtained in Government services in the Punjab. The circumstances of
the Punjab were quite different from those of Hindustan proper.

27
CHAPTER 3: AFTERMATH
When the Government of India had the book translated and presented
before the Council, Lord Canning, the Governor-General, and Sir
Berthold Frere both accepted it as a sincere and friendly report. The
Foreign Secretary, however, severely attacked it, calling it 'an
extremely seditious pamphlet'. He wanted a proper inquiry into the
matter and said that the author, unless he could give a satisfactory
explanation, should be harshly dealt with. Since no other member of
the Council agreed with his opinion, his attack did no harm.
Later, Sir Sayyid was invited to attend Lord Canning's Durbar in

Farrukhabad, and happened to meet the Foreign Secretary there. He
told Sir Sayyid that he was displeased with the pamphlet and added
that if he had really had the Government's interests at heart; he would
not have made his opinion known in this way throughout the country,
but would have communicated it directly to the Government. Sir Sayyid
replied that he had only had five hundred copies printed, the majority
of which he had sent to England, while one had been given to the
Government of India, and the remaining copies were still in his
possession. Furthermore, he had the receipt to prove it. He was aware,
he added, that the view of the rulers had been distorted by the stress
and anxieties of the times, which made it difficult to put even the most
straightforward problem in its right perspective. It was for this reason
that he had not communicated his thoughts publicly. He promised that
for every copy that could be found circulating in India he would
personally pay one thousand rupees. At first, the Foreign Secretary was
not convinced and asked Sir Sayyid over and over again if he was sure
that no other copy had been distributed in India. Sir Sayyid reassured
him on this matter, and the Foreign Secretary never mentioned it
again. Later he became one of Sir Sayyid's strongest supporters. After

28
that all the policies of British Government were influenced by Syed’s

risala.

29
CHAPTER 4: CONCLUSION
Sir Syed mentioned all the causes of the revolt 1857.This risala played the
vital role for influencing the British Government and realizing them that not
Muslims were only the part of revolt but all the nations.
Sir Syed went on to prove the innocence of the Indians in general and
Muslims in particular, while superficially seen to be appeasing the alien
rulers. He skillfully presented all the many opinions of Indians with regards to
the Revolt. In very plain words, he drew the conclusion that the British were
themselves responsible for the Indian’s revolt as the Company’s haughty and
unjust officers neither understood nor made any attempt to understand the
Indians viewpoint. Indirectly he also pointed the destination at the European
clergy who took unfair advantage of the Indians’ destitution and poverty-
especially in times of famine and civil unrest-to convert the hungry and sick
to Christianity.
He also mentioned that the role of British Bureaucracy was also quite against
the Muslims and not unsurprisingly so: Having been the losers in the power
struggles, the British still suspected them of being less loyal than the Hindus
and less likely allies in future political dispensation.
But in his own times, Sir Syed had the misfortune of having being doubly
misunderstood both by the ultra-conservative religious Muslims and equally
narrow minded British rulers.
Sir Syed was a rebel within the ranks of the British officialdom. At no point in
his life employment with the colonial establishment bear upon his fierce
independence of thought and actions. Indeed, working for the establishment
was part of his grand design-to serve as a presenter for drawing millions of
his Muslims brethren towards the future state of affairs which was becoming
obvious with every passing day. And today he should be role model for us.

30
REFERENCES:

31
1 Altaf Husain Hali and translated by David J. Matthews, Hayat-i-Javed (A
Biography of Sir Sayyid),Rupa and Company, New Delhi, 1994, PP 92-95
2 Major-General G. F. I. Graham and Sir Auckland Colvin, English Translation of

“An Essay on the Causes of Indian Revolt”, MEDICAL HALL PRESS, Benares,
1873, PP 01.
3
Ibid, PP 02
4
Ibid, PP 02
5
Ibid, PP 04-05
6
Ibid, PP 08
7 Ibid, PP 36
8 Ibid, PP 42
9 Ibid, PP 45-46
10 Ibid, PP 50-51
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
• Glasse, Cyril, The New Encyclopedia of Islam, Altamira Press,UK,2001
• GRAHAM, George Farquhar, The Life and Work of Syed Ahmed Khan, C. at
S. L.. Blackwood, 1885.
• http://books.google.com/sirsyed/
• http://www.Britannica.com
• http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/pritchett/00fwp/srf/srf_sirsayyid.pdf
• http://www.storyofpakistan.com/person.asp?perid=P001. Retrieved 2006-
10-14.
• Johannes Marinus Simon Baljon, The reforms and religious ideas of Sir
Sayyid Ahmad Khan, 1964.
• John W. Wilder, Selected essays by Sir Sayyid Ahmad Khan,2006.
• Major-General G. F. I. Graham and Sir Auckland Colvin, English

Translation of An Essay on the Causes of Indian Revolt, MEDICAL HALL
PRESS, Benares, 1873.
• SirSyed Ahmed Khan Bahadur,An Essay on the Causes of Indian

Revolt,Mufassilat Gazette Press,Agra,1859.

Risala Asbaab Bighawat e Hind

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Risala Asbaab Bighawat e Hind

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

TABLE OF CONTENTS

The Risala Asbaab-e-Baghawat-e-Hind is the endeavor of Sir Syed

In this report I have tried to highlight his objectives of writing the

The Risala Asbaab-e-Baghawat-e-Hind played a pivotal role in the

Muhammad Tanveer Iqbal

CHAPTER 1: BRIEF PROLOGUE

ABOUT SIR SYED AHMED KHAN:

Sir Syed pioneered modern education for the Muslim

His work gave rise to a new generation of Muslim intellectuals and

Born into Mughal nobility, Sir Syed earned a reputation as a

During the Indian Rebellion of 1857 he remained loyal to the British

Muhammad Tanveer Iqbal

ABOUT THE RISALA:

Muhammad Tanveer Iqbal

Later, Sir Sayyid was invited to attend Lord Canning's Durbar in

Muhammad Tanveer Iqbal

1.13. The preaching of Jehad in India, 35 years before with this

2. CAUSE I -- IGNORANCE ON THE PART OF THE PEOPLE, THAT

Muhammad Tanveer Iqbal

2.2. Apprehension of interference of Government with the religious

3. CAUSE II-- THE PASSING OF SUCH LAWS, REGULATIONS AND

Muhammad Tanveer Iqbal

3.6. The result of extinguishing the Native states, according to Sir

4. CAUSE III -- THE IGNORANCE OF GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE

Muhammad Tanveer Iqbal

5. CAUSE IV – NEGLECT IN MATTERS WHICH

6. CAUSE V -- THE INSUBORDINATE STATE OF

6.3. The employment of Hindus and Mahommadans in the same

“Since I began this Essay on the causes of the Rebellion in Hindustan I

Definition of "Rebellion" exemplified with instances:

It is evident that, though such a cause may be of great importance, yet

Muhammad Tanveer Iqbal

This, I believe, is a correct representation of Native opinion. The British

Moreover, some of the author's expressions are so strong as to lead (if

Then the author says that the non-admission of Natives to the

It is difficult to understand this. The attendance of certain Native

Again, many of the misunderstandings on the part of the people to

Muhammad Tanveer Iqbal

It is probably vain to suppose, as the author supposes, that "all these

[1.0] CAUSE I -- IGNORANCE ON THE PART OF THE PEOPLE, THAT

Further on the author writes— "during the famine of 1837, numerous

Muhammad Tanveer Iqbal

Now in the North-Western Provinces, such things were at least

Next the author remarks that Christian books were published,

The statement that a Government Policeman was occasionally deputed

It is said that the Missionaries frequented mosques, and temples, and

Next the author says the people objected to the establishment of

This is a somewhat extraordinary passage. Many European readers

Muhammad Tanveer Iqbal

It is indeed difficult to understand how the people could have disliked

Then the author comments on the Government Colleges: he says that

The author is correct in stating that the system in Jails, whereby

Muhammad Tanveer Iqbal

He is also quite correct in saying that a pamphlet, published and

The remark of the author that the Mahommadans are comparatively

[2.0] CAUSE II-- THE PASSING OF SUCH LAWS, REGULATIONS

Then the resumption of rent-free tenures is named as a source of bitter

Muhammad Tanveer Iqbal

It may seem strange that a Native of intelligence and education should

Muhammad Tanveer Iqbal

one class to another, owing to social changes, to revolutions in trade,

The author is correct in stating that the Taluqdaree settlement in

It is worthy of remark that the author mentions the undue facility of

[3.0] CAUSE III -- THE IGNORANCE OF GOVERNMENT OF THE