The Historical and Political Context: A Prelude

Maulavi Chiragh Ali¹ (1844-1895) was a modern reformist thinker of late nineteenth century. He was a writer and polemicist who defended Islam from the Christian wings under the British rule. He addressed important issues like Islamic law (Sharī‘ah), social reforms and the concept of war (jihād). Our paper will primarily focus on two themes in his works: 1) Islamic law; and 2) the

concept of war. Before proceeding to analyze his thought it is imperative to comprehend the historical and political scenario in which he developed his thinking.

Power Siege and Transfer

The sub-continent was ruled by Muslims for nearly 200 years. East India Company arrived for the purpose of trade and gradually de-established the Mughal rule.² After Aurangzeb, the dynasty of Mughals crumbled due to incompetence, power-struggle and internal conflicts. By 1850’s, British officially overthrow the Mughal Empire and established British government.³ British applied multiple strategies that contribute to the fall of Mughal Empire; but one of the strategies was divide and rule. Hence, they successfully created a rift between Hindu and Muslims.⁴ However, due to drastic cultural and racial barriers along with the loaded policies imposed by the British led people of the sub-continent (both Hindus and Muslims) to revolt against them. This attempt at independence was crushed easily in 1857.

Aftermath of 1857 Revolt

Although, both Hindus and Muslims attempted the revolt against British, but British became specifically weary of Muslims since they thought it was Muslim rule that they have overthrown. Moreover, due to Hindu hatred against Muslims, they also convinced British that only Hindus are their loyal subjects.⁵ The Muslims of the sub-continent were downgraded with suspicion and mistrust after the revolt of 1857.⁶ Several colonial historians, authors, diplomats and politicians like Sir William Muir (1819-1905), David Urquhart (1805-1877), William R. Wood Stephens (1839-1902), Edward Sell (1839-1932), Malcolm Maccoll (1831-1907) and Edward William Lane (1801-1876) endorsed that in order to maintain the supremacy of Islam; Muslims are compelled by their Islamic law to wage war of aggression.⁷ So as propagators of war (jihād), they would be a continuous threat to British government and must never be trusted.⁸ As Bosworth Smith erroneously claimed that “Persecuted no longer, Mohammed becomes a persecutor himself; with the Qur’ān in one hand, the scimitar in the other, he goes forth to offer to the nations the threefold alternative of conversion, tribute, death.”⁹

The following table have collaborated similar absurd and rather blasphemous allegations against Islam that were prevalent in Europe during that era.

Table 1. European Allegations against Islam¹⁰

Islam was being exposed to such false accusations partly because of the power shift from Muslims to Christian monarchy; and partly because oriental scholars have portrayed Islam in their writings and fatwas as rigid and extreme that can urge a person to fanaticism, fundamentalism and militancy.²⁷ After banning of philosophical pursuits in the Muslim world, Islamic jurisprudence and traditionalist scholars opposed reformist endeavors. Amidst these contested times, empowering Muslims to reform law in response to modern day challenges was becoming imperative.

The Aligarh Movement

In this scenario, the Aligarh Movement emerged as defensive reformist project.²⁸ Sir Syed Ahmad Khan, a subordinate judge under the British government, witnessed all the atrocities done by the British against Muslims.²⁹ He observed that Muslims relied heavily on superstitions, stagnant ancient learning and customs while the Western world is pacing fast in education, technology and adaptability.³⁰ His mission was to re-enact religion and science as was the case in the golden era of Islam.³¹ He inaugurated Mohammadan Anglo-Oriental College in 1877 which got the status of University in 1920.³² Through progressive education, he started to close the gap between British and Muslims.³³ According to Dar:

Islamic modernism emerged in the mid-nineteenth century as a response to European colonialism, “which pitched the Muslim world into crisis” (2). In India the three broad responses to British imperialism came from “traditionalists,” “reformists/proto-fundamentalists,” and “modernists.” The last of these sought to generate a new synthesis of Islam within the frames of tajdīd (revival) and iṣlāḥ (reform).³⁴

The adherents of the Aligarh Movement had three goals in mind:

To refute colonial stereotypes ingrained by European missionaries;

Rehabilitate Muslim image; and

Enable Muslims of south Asia to embrace modernity as opposed to Orientalists.

Following this intent, Chiragh Ali sought to defend Islam against Hindu and British misrepresentations as well as encouraging internal reforms for Muslims to adapt modernity for the sake of their survival under British rule.

Medieval Jurists Approach to Sharī‘ah and Ijtihad

For Traditional Ulamas, Qur’ān, Hadīth, Fiqh and consensus (ijma) and analogy (qiyas) together are considered binding law. Medieval jurists interpret this Sharī‘ah as fixed. Many scholars, specifically after al-Ghazali favors taqlīd and declared philosophical reasoning forbidden, hence closing the doors to ijtihad. Islamic law is a complete legal system that must regulate every aspect of life. Furthermore, caliphate or Islamic political order is considered as obligatory in classical thought. Similarly, the concept of war in classical thought is often viewed as expansionist, aggressive and armed struggle to establish Islamic rule over non-Muslims. In colonial context, this created the image of Islam being rigid and militant.

Influential Works and Themes in Chiragh Ali’s Thought

According to him, the idea that Islamic laws are unalterable has been so deeply ingrained in Europeans mind that they neither enlighten themselves on the subject nor deeply study Islam.³⁵ Their knowledge of Islam is superficial and based on unreliable sources.³⁶ He undertook this task to enlighten Europeans regarding Islam in his works.

His primordial contributions as a Muslim modernist reformer are: A Critical Exposition of the Popular Jihād (1885), The Proposed Political, Legal and Social Reforms in The Ottoman Empire (1883); and Modern Mohammedanism (1887). The major themes included in his works are defense of Islam and reinterpretation of Jihād. He has reformist agenda in his mind while writing the aforementioned books that ensure that Islam is not only flexible but also compatible with science, progress and modernity in order to secure position of Muslims under the British rule.

2. Discourse on Islamic Law (Sharī‘ah)

Fig. 1 portrays the grounds and principles upon which Chiragh Ali transformed the Islamic Law (Sharī‘ah).

Level 1 of the figure deconstructs Sharī‘ah. He distinguishes between eternal Qur’ānic principles (or Divine laws) and the historical juristic rulings (Fiqh).³⁷ Chiragh Ali maintained that the latter is man-made not revealed.³⁸ He has specifically critiqued taqlid of the four Sunni schools of jurisprudence (Hanbali, Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi).³⁹ According to him, Fiqh is in fact produced by multiple medieval scholars; hence it is historically contingent and can be open to reforms.

The Muhammadan Common Law is not to be confounded with the Muhammadan Revealed Law. The Muhammadan Common Law is the unwritten law that has been compiled from a very few verses of the Qur’ān, as well as from the customs and usages of the country, supported by traditions contradictory in themselves, and based on the ljma, or the unanimous consent of the Moslems. It is impossible to trace the origin of these early rulings, for they are based chiefly on the analogy of some admitted or acknowledged casuistry, and thus it is but a simple truth to say that such decisions or rulings can in no wise [sic] be essentially and eternally unchangeable.⁴⁰

In addition, he delved deeper into hadith, explaining that the authenticity and credibility of hadith are questionable since they were compiled in the 3rd century AH without any critical and rational framework where the sole criteria of credibility rely on the reputation of the narrator and its link to the Prophet (PBUH lifetime).⁴¹ Hadith can convey essence of Muhammad (PBUH) teachings, but they cannot be his exact words so they are likely to alter the meaning. Therefore, to consider the status of Hadith as binding as Qur’ān; and to implement them in order to make fixed Islamic laws is erroneous. It is here that Chiragh Ali departed from the traditional perspective.⁴²

In his A Critical Exposition of the Popular “Jihád, he claimed that:

It is only the Mohammadan Common Law, with all its traditions or oral sayings of the Prophet,—very few of which are genuine reports, and the supposed chimerical concurrence of the learned Moslem Doctors and mostly their analogical reasoning (called Hadees, Ijma, and Kias), passed under the name of Figah or Shariat, that has blended together the spiritual and the secular, and has become a barrier in some respects regarding certain social and political innovations for the higher civilization and progress of the nation. But the Koran is not responsible for this all.⁴³

The first four period of Caliphate are Republican in nature; and theocracy is not ordained by Islamic teachings.⁴⁴ Likewise, in spite of deriving laws from traditions and ijma, they cannot be considered immutable because they lack a firm and indisputable foundation. To elucidate it further, Muhammad (PBUH) and his Companions never commanded the compilation of oral traditions; this entails those Islamic laws are subject to change and reinterpretation with changing times and circumstances.⁴⁵

Figure 1. Transforming Discourse on Islamic Law

Even Muhammad (PBUH) encouraged utilizing independent reasoning along with Qur’ān when facing novel situations or circumstances.⁴⁶ Level 2 (of the figure 1) explains that Islam justifies adaptation and progress and encourages independent reasoning (Ijtihād).⁴⁷

… the fact that Muhammad did not compile a law, civil or canonical, for the conduct of the believers, nor did he enjoin them to do so, shows that he left to the believers in general to frame any code, civil or canon law, and to found systems which would harmonize with the times, and suit the political and social changes going on around them.⁴⁸

This entails that instead of considering Sharī‘ah as a rigid legal code, it should be considered as moral ethical system where ijtihad is permissible in accordance with changing times. This was necessary in those times as traditional scholars discourage Muslims to acquire education; encouraging them to refrain from scientific pursuits and modernity. They were ingraining in Muslims that if they pursue such ventures they are in fact betraying Islam.

Amidst this opposition, the Aligarh Movement, encourage Muslims to seek education.⁴⁹ The scholars like Chiragh Ali and his contemporary Sir Syed A. Khan urged Muslims to adopt modern education, science and political systems without feeling that they are violating core principles of Islam. He logically and chronologically explained that the Islamic laws were neither made by the prophet Muhammad (PBUH), nor compiled by him or even in 1st Hijri.⁵⁰ The Qur’ānic teachings are adaptable and it does not provide any rigid code of law to be applied on political affairs.⁵¹ Instead it taught humanity regarding certain religious doctrines and generic moral rules.⁵² “These moral rules enumerate civil institutions of ancient Arabs such as infanticide, polygamy, arbitrary divorce, concubinage, degradation of women, drunkenness, gambling, extortionate usury…and gross idolatry. All of these are either condemned or ameliorated and reformed.”⁵³

Level 3 illustrates that by maintaining that there are no fixed political or legal orders ordained by Islam; Chiragh Ali made a breathing space for Muslims to coexist on equal grounds under the administration of British. Therefore, Ijtihād became the key to revival and modernity.

It is noteworthy that his discourse on Islamic law had three functions (mentioned in Level 4 of the above figure):

Reformative function_ i.e., encourage Muslims of sub-continent to break free from medieval jurisprudence and to adopt modern values;

Political function_ challenging Ulama’s authority over law in an attempt to prove that Muslims are loyal subjects of British authority; and

Identity function_ portraying Islam as rational, ethical, peaceful, progressive and modern instead

3. Discourse on War (Jihād)

Figure 2 is the graphic representation of Chiragh Ali’s attempt at redefining the concept of War (Jihād).

British adopted the Orientalist representation of Jihād where Muslims wars were depicted as aggressive in nature; and are done for the sole reason of expansion. Chiragh Ali rejected this notion and tends to redefine wars as ‘moral and intellectual struggle’ that were defensive in nature (Level 1 of fig. 2). He went to great lengths in explaining that Muslim wars specifically in the times of prophet Muhammad (PBUH) were fought in defense against oppression.⁵⁴

Level 2 explains how Chiragh Ali constructed Jihād on ethical principles associating terms like ‘justice,’ ‘self-defense,’ and ‘moral improvement.’ In fact, Islam forbids attacking non-Muslims without provocation and in offense.⁵⁵ The only time it is incumbent on believers to indulge in the act of war is when:

…where there is a general summons (that is, where the infidels invade a Mussulman territory, and the Imam for the time being issues a general proclamation, requiring all persons to stand forth to fight) for in this case war becomes a positive injunction with respect to the whole of the inhabitants.⁵⁶

There are only two verses in the Qur’ān that absolute indication to wage war on unbelievers;⁵⁷ but there are multiple verses in other Surah’s that forbids Muslims to wage war without provocation.⁵⁸ Furthermore, Chiragh Ali points at the rule of interpretation in Qur’ān that there are two types of verses in the Qur’ān: a) conditional or limited; b) absolute or general. If there is a subject matter that involves both conditional verses as well as generic. The rule of interpretation is to always precede conditional verse over generic one.

The rule is: Where a passage which is ambiguous, or which contains any unusual expression, or in which a doctrine is slightly treated, or is in general terms, must be interpreted agreeably to what is revealed more clearly in other parts, or where a subject is more clearly discussed. A single or general passage is not to be explained in contradiction to many others restricted, conditional, and limited consistently with them, and with proper reservations.⁵⁹

Figure 2. Redefining Discourse on War (Jihād)

This rule was avoided by traditional Ulamas (like Ibn Hajar al-Haytami (1503-1566), Muhammad b. Ahmad b. Abi Sahl Abu Bakr al-Sarakhsi (d. 1090 CE), Badar al-Din al-Ayni (1361-1451), Nuruddin Ali b. Burhanuddin Halabi Shafii (975-1044 CE) to make a sort of provision for Muslim rulers who were invading and conquering territories for the sake of expansion.⁶⁰ He further supported his arguments that jurists of the first and second hijri [like abū ʿAbd Allāh Sufyān ibn Saʿīd ibn Masrūq ibn Ḥamza al-Thawrī (d. 778 CE), Ata ibn Rabah (653-732 AD) and Amar-ibn-Dinar (666-744 CE)] upheld that war was not obligatory; and it ought to be accepted as a voluntary act if and only if the combatant attacked Muslims first.⁶¹

Chiragh Ali proved British scholars wrong in their assertion that Prophet Muhammad waged wars in aggression giving only three alternatives to his enemies, i.e., conversion to Islam, ransom or persecution.⁶² This was a great feat to nullify these accusations because even by modern standards they were extreme, disrespectful and blasphemous. Instead, Chiragh gracefully narrates all the atrocities done by people of Mecca against prophet and yet he endured them with patience, tolerance and perseverance. They’ve many instances where acting hostile towards non-believers was justified yet they did not wage war in aggression.⁶³ The first Battle of Badar was initiated by non-believers where Muslims were outnumbered both in numbers and resources, yet upon the command of Allah they led their army of 305 against 1000.⁶⁴ In similar vein, he explained each and every battle and their circumstances that refute British missionaries’ claims that Islam is a violent religion and its adherents are militants. Moreover, even after winning battles, instead of taking revenge: Prophet abolished slavery⁶⁵ and he pardoned majority (even Abu Sufiyan and his wife who had slain Prophet’s Uncle Hamza (RA)) with or without ransom.⁶⁶ “Nor were the wars of Mohammad to exact tribute from the unbelievers. The tribute was only imposed upon those who had sought his protection, and even then, they were exempted from other regular taxes which the Moslems paid to their Commonwealth.”⁶⁷

In addition, had the prophet Muhammad (PBUH) neglected to defend himself and Muslims in self-preservation and for their moral and religious liberties, there was a higher probability of being exterminated.⁶⁸ Level 3 of the figure 2 explores the strategic aim of his thought. By explaining that the military campaigns of Prophet (PBUH) were defensive, Chiragh deflated British accusations of Islamic militancy. He targeted two birds with one stone by establishing defensive nature of wars:

i) By making Islam compatible with liberal notions of peace and co-existence he ensured that Muslims can prove to be loyal subjects under British administration; and

ii) By re-educating Muslims regarding true nature of Jihād, he counters British accusations of portraying Muslims as fanatics.

Furthermore, he refuted the criticism of British that derives from the Qur’ānic distinction between dar-ul harb (country of enemy) and dar-ul-Islam (country of Islam). Chiragh Ali explains that in British India, Muslims are subjects that are protected by the government so instead it is dar al-aman (home of security) or dar al-zimma (home of protection) for Muslims.⁶⁹

It is self-evident from his discourse on war that Chiragh had three functions or goals in mind:

Political function_ trying to project Muslims as peace-loving and rational;

Identity function_ reconciling Islam with colonial governance so that Muslims of sub-continent had equal chance to flourish (like Hindus); and

Defensive or Apologetic function_ defending Islam against the criticism of being regressive and violent.

4. Positive and Negative Impact of Chiragh Ali’s Thought

In previous sections, we have seen positive impact of Chiragh Ali thought on Society. Now we shall analyze his weaknesses in detail. Following table has briefly comprised the strengths and weakness of his work.

Table 2. Comparative Chart of Strength vs. Weaknesses of Chiragh Ali’s Thought

Despite being admired for his courage and vision, Chiragh Ali’s discourse faced multiple backlashes from traditional Ulama’s, conservative Muslims, and modern-day scholars:

Undermining Tradition through Reductionism: Traditional Ulama argued that Chiragh has over-rationalized Islam undermining centuries of jurisprudence. Many criticized of him being a reductionist for over simplifying Jihād as purely defensive and portraying Sharī‘ah as merely ethical. By sidelining traditional scholarship, his discourse alienated large part of Muslim community.

Over-Westernization: Many Muslims believed that his thought (particularly regarding Islamic law and War) as a whole appears to be apologetic⁷⁰ and overly accommodating western liberalism and colonial approval.

Lack of Practical Framework: Modern scholars criticized Chiragh that even by oversimplifying complex historical realities and selective interpretation; he failed to provide a concrete legal framework for reforms for restructuring laws and governance.

Practical Limitations: There are certain limitations to Chiragh Ali’s thought as his discourse remained limited to the intellectual circle of Aligarh. Many critics claim that his view is elite-centric with a limited impact on ordinary Muslim population as a whole.

5 Later Influences and Modern-day Relevance

Following the footsteps of Chiragh Ali, many thinkers after him used Ijtihad and tend to bring religious and social reforms. In The Spirit of Islam, Syed Ameer Ali (1849-1928), portrayed Islam as a progressive religion with great emphasis on women rights, rational laws and social justice. Muhammad Iqbal (1877-1938), in his Reconstruction of Religious Though in Islam, took the idea of Ijtihad further proving Islamic dynamism and its adaptability to modernity. Like Chiragh, he also argued that Sharī‘ah should evolve with history. Fazlur Rahman’s (1919-1988) ‘Double Movement Theory’ paralleled Chiragh Ali’s thought of contextual reinterpretation of the Qur’ān. Even in the 21st century, modern thinkers are nurturing and expanding his reformist seed into a global movement of Islamic modernism. Likewise, reformists in Egypt, Indonesia, Iran and Turkey echoed similar ideas that Islam is compatible with modernity, science and human rights

Despite these modernist endeavors, Hindus were ahead of Muslims by decades in terms of Education owing to their fear of learning English as an un-Islamic endeavor According to the post-partition survey of 1947, “There were 100 colleges and about 1000 higher secondary schools under Muslim management as against 1500 colleges and 8000 higher secondary schools in the country.”⁷¹

5.1. Significance of Chiragh Ali in Modern Era

Chiragh Ali theological debate was a strategic intervention within a colonial and intellectual context. By his endeavor of redefining Sharī‘ah as flexible; and Jihād as defensive and moral he tends to not only defend Islamic image and redefine Muslim identity, but also sought to empower reform. His thought faced excessive criticism due to excessive accommodation to British expectations and marginalizing traditional scholarship. Nonetheless, his works laid the foundation for modernist thinkers like Muhammad Iqbal (1877-1938), Fazlur Rehman, Syed Ameer Ali (1849-1928).; therefore, enumerating him among the pivotal figures in the genealogy of Islamic reforms. It is also believed that between 1947 and 1969, the power elites of Pakistan adopted similar approach to modernism in order to institutionalize Islamic modernism in Pakistan.⁷²

Despite being his ideas deemed as controversial in his time, but they had strong relevance for Muslims today. I attributes his ideas as bold not because he said something which traditionalist Muslims doesn’t wanted to hear at that time; but because he defended and refuted false stereotypes created by British missionaries and historians.⁷³ Chiragh Ali was bold because he was in no position to do it when the ruling authority is British itself. The Muslim world needed this sort of bold move to this day. The conditions of Muslims, the accusations of fundamentalism and Islamic militancy have become more pronounced than it was in the colonial rule.⁷⁴ After 9/11, majority of west wing have become Islamophobic; and Muslim nations till date are trying to counter these accusations and evade genocide.⁷⁵ Innocent Muslims of Syria, Gaza, Palestine, Kashmir are all persecuted in the name of Islamic militancy and terrorism. Muslims are the victims of virtuous war⁷⁶ created by the political hegemony of Israelites and Americans. Muslim world need the courageousness writers and mentors like Chiragh Ali. The world has become a scary place for Muslims to live freely. Chiragh Ali and other commemorates of Aligarh movement defended Muslim identity against missionaries and Orientalists. However, Muslim scholars nowadays have to battle on three-fronts, i.e., still defending against conservative orientalist and Islamophobics; and simultaneously proving that we are Muslims to conservatives who bespeak of us as modernist, feminists, western liberals, anti-Muslims etc.

The debates regarding ijtihad (independent reasoning) and taqlīd (blind following) are still of great importance in 21st century where reforms resonates with active issues like gender justice, human rights, honor killings and democratic government in Muslim countries etc.

Militant groups justify violence and distort Islamic teachings to fulfill their personal agendas. Chiragh Ali’s reinterpretation for Jihād provides a strong intellectual counter to extremism.

While, the conservative Ulamas keep creating a rift between Islam verses science and modernity; Chiragh Ali’s stance eradicate such conflicts.

His model correlates with acquiring modern education system along with religious learning, specifically amidst low literacy rates and hesitancy in opting STEM subjects in the Muslim societies.

He provided a progressive reinterpretation of Islam without abandoning its essence to accommodate issues like freedom of speech, women rights; and above all to fight the identity crisis between tradition and modernity.

It is true that certain portion of his thought seems apologetic, but considering the times where the conditions of Indian Muslims were deplorable, his thought is justified. He wrote this in 19th century that still rings true: “No doubt Muslim jurisprudence was well-suited to early Muslim society, but now ‘there are certain points in which the Mohammedan Common Law is irreconcilable with the modem needs of Islam and requires modification.”⁷⁷

Therefore, we may criticize and reject some aspects of his thought, but not the essence of his work. Current crisis faced by the Muslims have spiked to an alarming level where both religious reforms and tolerance towards non-believers is required to clear the negative image of Islam stereotyped by the West.⁷⁸ Combating Islamophobia is not easy for modern thinkers with ongoing terrorist activities. “Today's Islamophobia feeds on history to fill out its stereotypes, but it also has features that stem from more recent narratives such as colonialism, immigration and racism.”⁷⁹

Contemporary reformers can use Ijtihad to fill the gap wherever adherents of the Aligarh Movement have lagged. Javed Ahmed Ghamidi (b.1952) and Tariq Ramadan (b. 1962) are Islamic modernist reformers who tend to fill the lagging gap.

6. Closing Remarks

To assert that whether Chiragh Ali’s thought is defensive or apologetic, I am of the view that his thought was indeed defensive against Islamophobic British historians and writers who had their personal agenda to defame Islam. His thought turned a bit apologetic when he tried to over-rationalize concepts of jinn, miracles and women (which were unrelated to and beyond the scope of the current paper). But as far as current themes of Islamic law and his concept of War are concerned, his thought is clearly progressive and reformist. Scholars can do critique on him and may amend his thought wherever deemed necessary (as clearly was his mandate that man-made laws are changeable). What is essential in this time for Muslims is to amend their conservative ways and interpret new challenges in the light of Qur’ān. According to me, we can’t just abandon his views altogether because they are entirely relevant even in the twenty first century. Even if Muslims are for and against his thought, it is an undeniable fact that addressing both Islamophobia created by the Western lobbies; and accepting conservative and fundamentalist role in the sustenance of that image are crucial debates. Without solving them, Muslim nations cannot ensure the safety of their country (land and property), their rights as humans, and their Muslim identity. Clearing the image of Islam on a global level has never been more imperative for Muslims as compared to the past era.