Ahl-e-Hadith (Salafi) and their Loyalty to the British Government
Introduction
It is often claimed that the Ahmadiyya Movement in Islam had ties with the British but what is ironic is that the Ahle Hadith movement arguably had stronger ties towards the British. We will start by quoting Abū Sayyid Muḥammad Ḥusayn Baṭālvī who was a leading Ahle-Hadith scholar in Punjab. If there was a list of opponents of Mirza Sahib, Batalvi’s name would be at the top surpassing Sanaullah Armitsari as it was Batalvi who gathered the fatawa of 200 ulema takfiring Mirza Ghulam Ahmad and it was Batalvi who was the one who continually responded to his books. Deobandi Shaykh Mumtaz ul Haq saluted him for his efforts for “Khatme Nabuwaat”.
Maulvi Muhammad Husayn Batalwi
Some of our Muslim brothers believe that the present misfortunes of the followers of Islam cannot be removed without the sword. It is no use acquiring worldly education. However, looking at the present condition of the Muslims, this belief appears improbable.”
“Brethren! the age of the sword is no more. Now instead of the sword it is necessary to wield the pen. How can the sword come into the hands of the Muslims when they have no hands. They have no national identity or existence. In such a useless and weak condition, to consider them as a nation is to exceed the imagination of Shaikh Chilli (a proverbial, comical figure in Urdu fiction).”
In our Ahle-Hadith Madhab, the ruler under which we live under in peace, doing jihad is haram
Living Under British is preferable to living under Islamic Government
ہندوستان کے تمام طبقات رعایا سے صرف یہی ایک فرقہ اہلحدیث (؟) ہے۔ جو اس سلطنت کے زیر سایہ رہنے کو بلحاظ امن و آزادی، اسلامی سلطنتوں کے زیر سایہ رہنے سے بھی بہتر جانتا ہے، کیونکہ اس فرقہ کو بجز اس سلطنت کے کسی اور سلطنت میں (اسلامی کیوں نہ ہو ) پوری آزادی حاصل نہیں ۔
(اشاعۃ السنہ ج ۹، ص۱۹۶، ۱۹۵)
Among all the subjects of India, the Ahl-al-hadith are the only sect of Muslims (?) who know living under the shadow of this empire in terms of peace and freedom is better than living under the shadow of Islamic empires, because this sect does not have full freedom in any other empire (even if it is Islamic) except in this empire.
This makes sense as there was extreme bad blood between the Ahnaaf and the Ahle Hadith in India. For example, if an Ahle Hadith did Rafa Yadain in a Hanafi Mosque he could be beaten and kicked out of the mosque. Ahmad Raza Khan, who defended traditional Hanafi Orthodoxy, in India said that Wahabis are not only Kafir but also Wajib ul Qatl and that they are followers of Satan.
“The King of Turkey is a Muslim King but so far as law and order and administration are concerned (leaving aside the religious aspect) the British Government is also of no less pride for us, the Muslims more so for the people who are known as Ahl-i-Hadees, this Government is of a greater pride for peace and freedom of conscience (as compared with Turkey, Iran and Khurasan)”
Maulana Muhammad Hussain Batalawi ) condemned severely the 1857 mutineers who rebelled against the British. He writes:
“Uninformed Muslims should examine this implication and bear it in mind, and not consider fighting with every rival faith on account of its unbelief to be legal jihad. To fight with peaceful or covenanted people most definitely cannot be legal jihad, whether national or religious, but is rebellion and sedition. The Muslims who took part in the 1857 rebellion were serious sinners, and according to the Quran and Hadith they were rebels, mischief makers and wicked *(BAGHI Aur BAD KIRDAR). Most of the ordinary people among them were like beasts. Those known as the prominent and the Ulama were unacquainted with true faith, or lacking in understanding. Knowledgable Ulema did not participate in the rebellion nor did they sign the Fatawa for Jihad.”
Source: Al-Iqtisad fi masa’il al-Jihad, P. 49 – Rebels are Beasts
“To fight against this government [i.e. British rule of India] or to aid those who fight against it, even though they
(Al-Iqtisad fi masa’il al-jihad, p. 49)
be one’s Muslim brothers, is clear treachery and haram.”
Maulvi Muhammad Hussain Batalvi sent his said ruling in relation to Jihad against the British:
‘to all the ulama of Punjab and other parts of India and well publicized it. He obtained the seal and signatures of approval of all the ulama of Punjab and India in support of the ruling that the taking up of arms by Indian Muslims and Jihad by them against the British Government of India was opposed to the Sunnah and the faith of monotheists.
[Tajaman e Wahabiyyah, pg 61]
Battalvi lies that he does not believe in the Mahdi and Messiah that fights the non-Muslims using the sword. As per him, Mahdi will only use heavenly signs in support of his claim as the Bukhari has the hadith that the war will be abolished at the time of the Messiah.
This contradicts the “Sunni” view which claims that the Mahdi and Messiah will have armies and fight governments using the sword and kill all disbelievers. No non-Muslim will be left alive until they are done with their mission. Everyone will either accept Islam or will be killed.
He could not put forth this belief in front of the government so he lied to the public and wrote lengthy articles on his magazine and the English Magzine like below:
It is also untrue to say that the belief in the coming of Masih and Mahdi is dangerous, for the learned Muhammadans do not believe that the Promised Masih and Mahdi will propagate Islam by the sword. According to Sahih Bukhari, a book unanimously believed to be an authority by Sunnis, the promised Masih will put an end to all fighting and will propagate Islam simply by means of heavenly signs and spiritual powers. Imam Mahdi will also come at the same time and there shall be no bloodshed and no Jehad. Islam will be spread by peaceful methods. I have written a lengthy article on the subject and it is about to be published shortly, so I need not go into details here, but I may declare it most emphatically that the Muhammedan belief in the coming of Masih and Mahdi does in no way constitute a danger to the country’s peace.
[Civil & Military Gazette (Lahore) – 19 July 1907]
![[Civil & Military Gazette (Lahore) – 19 July 1907]](https://whiteminaret.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/britishagent-mirzaghulamahmadisdangerous-civilmilitarygazatte.png){kind=link}
Maulana Sayyid Nadhir Hussain of Delhi – Founder of Ahle Hadith in India
Maulana Sayyid Nadhir Hussain of Delhi (1805-1902) was a very prominent and influential Salafi (Ahlul Hadith) scholar in British India. Today’s Ahlul Hadith of the Indian subcontinent look up to him as a very important scholarly figure. He was the highest Ahl-i hadith theologian.He made it explicitly clear that Jihad against the British government was prohibited:
پس جب کہ شرط جہاد کی اس دیار میں معدوم ہوئی، تو جہاد کرنا یہاں سبب ہلاکت اور معصیت کا ہوگا۔
“Since the criterion of Jihad is absent from this land, to conduct Jihad here would be a means of destruction and a sin.” (Fatawa Naziriya; v. 3, p. 275)
Nazir Husayn Delawi says this after putting four conditions of Jihad and says that there is no reason to do. Jihad in British India. Here is more context.
Shaikhul Kul Maulana Syed Muhammad Nazeer Hussain Muhaddis Dehlavi (Rh.) Likhte Hain: “Toh Main Kehta Hun Iss Zamane Me In Chaar Shaarton Mese Koi Shaarat Bhi Maujood Nahi Hai Toh KYUN JIHAD HOGA. HARGIZ NAHI HOGA…”
[Fatawa Nazeeriya, Jild: 3, Safa: 284]
![[Fatawa Nazeeriya, Jild: 3, Safa: 284]](https://whiteminaret.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/fatawa-nazeeriya-jild-3-safa-284.webp){kind=link}
ہندوستان میں اس وقت انگریزی حکومت ہے وہاں ہر مذہب والا آزادی کے ساتھ اپنے شعار مذہب کے ادا کرنے کا مجاز ہے۔ کوئی مسلمان نہ جمعہ سے روکا جاتا ہے نہ جماعت سے اور یہاں اسلامی سرزمین اور مسلمانوں کی حکومت میں ہم لوگ طواف کعبہ اور جمعہ و جماعت سے مجبور ہیں۔
At present there is British rule in India where every religious person is allowed to freely practice the tenets of their faith. No Muslim is barred from Jummah or Jamaat, yet in this Islamic land and under a Muslim government, we are prevented from Tawaaf e Kaaba and Jummah and Jamaat.
We are but helpless to say that the English Government is God’s Mercy (Khuda Ki Rehmat) for Muslims of Hindustan.
[Sawaneh Hayat (Nazir), p. 112]
It is noted about him by Muhammad Husayn Batalvi:
“In terms of the true meaning of jihad, Sayyid Nazir Husain of Delhi did not consider the1857 rebellion to be Islamic legal jihad. He thought it to be faithlessness, breach of covenant, and mischief, and declared it to be a sin to take part or help in it.”
[Ishatus-Sunna, vol. vi, no. 10, October 1883, p. 288]
“Maulavi Nuzir Husein is a leading Moulavi in Dehli who in difficult times has proved his loyalty to the British Government and in his pilgrimage to Mecca Thope any British Officer whose help or protection he may need will afford it to him as he most fully deserves it.”
(Signed) J.D.Tremlett BCS. Commissioner & Sup Delhi Division.
AUGUST 10, 1883.
[Ishatus Sunnah, vol. 6, no. 10, pg. 294]
[Al Hayat Baad Al Mamat, pg. 83]
![[Ishatus Sunnah, vol. 6, no. 10, pg. 294]](https://whiteminaret.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/britishagemt-nazeerhussainloyaltousbritish-meccaletterofprotection-ishatussunnah.png){kind=link}
![[Al Hayat Baad Al Mamat, pg. 83]](https://whiteminaret.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/britishagemt-nazeerhussainloyaltousbritish-meccaletterofprotection-sawnehnazeerhussain.png){kind=link}
Maulvi Nawab Sideeq Hasan Khan Bhopali – Co-founder of Ahle Hadith in India
He was an eminent Ahl-i hadith religious scholar as well as a political leader. In his book Tarjuman-i Wahhabiyyat, he wrote:
“No Muslim subject of India and the Indian states bears malice towards this great power….This book has been written to inform the British government that no Muslim subject of India and the Indian states
(Edition published in Lahore, 1895, Tarjuman-i Wahhabiyyat, p. 6)
bears malice towards this great power.”
“Be concerned about those people who are ignorant of their religious teachings, in that they wish to efface the British government, and to end the current peace and tranquility by disorder under the name of jihad. This is sheer stupidity and foolishness.” (p. 7)
Tarjuman-i Wahhabiyyat, p. 10
“During the mutiny [of 1857], some rajas and so-called nawabs and men of means interfered in the peace and calm of India under the name of jihad, and they fanned the flames of battle till their disorder and hostility reached such a level that women and children, who cannot be killed under any law, were thoughtlessly slaughtered. … If anyone lets loose such mischief today, he would also be the same kind of trouble-maker, and from beginning to end he would stain the name of Islam.”
Tarjaman e Wahabiyyah pages 22-26
‘If anyone lets loose such mischief today, he would also be the same kind of trouble maker, and from the beginning to the end, he would stain the name of Islam.(5 or 15)
The Nawab of Bhopal also declared that whosoever acted against the British Raj in India, he:
‘is not only a mischief maker in the eyes of the rulers but he shall be the farthest from what Islam requires and from the way of the believers, and he shall be regarded as a violator of the covenant, unfaithful to his religion, and a perpetrator of the greatest sin. What his condition will be on the Day of Judgment will become evident there. (17)
‘all religious wars against the British Government of India and against the authority which has granted religious freedom, is forbidden by and contrary to the law of Islam and those people who take up weapons against the British Government of India or against any sovereign who has granted religious freedom, and wish to conduct Jihad against them are all rebels and deserve punishment(Khan, Nawab Siddiq Hasan. Tarjuman e Wahabiyya, p.61)
48 References from Tarjaman e Wahabiyyah can be found at this Link where Nawab Sideeq Hasan Khan calls the rebels “stupid”, that jihad against the British is haram, that the British give religious Freedom, and that the rebels were creators of fasad and traitors and tried to ruin the peace established by the British – The full book can be read at this link
Shah Ismail Shaheed Delawi(RH) – Respected by Deobandis, Ahle Hadith, and Ahmadis
He was the deputy of Sayyid Ahmad Barelvi, and died in a battle against the Sikhs. It is written about him:
“A man asked, ‘Why do you not give a pronouncement of jihad against the British?’ He replied: In no way is it obligatory to fight jihad against them. Firstly, we are their subjects. Secondly, they do not interfere in our performance of our religious duties. We have every kind of
[Hayyat Tayyiba, biography on Shah Ismail Shaheed by Mirza Hairat of Delhi, pg 462]
freedom under their rule. In fact, if someone attacks them, Muslims must fight the attacker and let not their government be harmed a whit.” ()
![[Hayyat Tayyiba, biography on Shah Ismail Shaheed by Mirza Hairat of Delhi, pg 462]](https://whiteminaret.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/Hayyat-Tayyiba-biography-by-Mirza-Hairat-of-Delhi-462.png){kind=link}
It should be remembered that Mirza Hairat of Delhi was an opponent of Promised Messiah AS and would mock him.
“This was the reason why Maulavi Ismail of Delhi, who knew the Quran and Hadith, and acted upon them, did not fight in his country India against the British, under whose peace and protection he lived, nor did he fight the states of this country. Outside this country, he fought the Sikhs who interfered in the religious practices of the Muslims, prohibiting the loud sounding of the Azan.”
(Al-Iqtisad fi masa’il al-jihad, by Maulavi Muhammad Husain Batalvi, published 1876, pp. 49–50)
Shaykh Muhammad Husayn Batalvi also writes:
Maulana Isma’eel Shaheed waged Jehad against the Sikhs on account of their intervention in the religion of Islam. He composed that particular sermon to motivate others for Jehad. He neither declared Jehad against the British Government, nor does this sermon contain any explicit, or inplicit, reference to waging Jehad against this Government. As a matter of fact, he did not consider it legitimate to wage Jehad against this Government.”
[Isha’at-us-Sunnah, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 11 dated 1886]
![[Isha’at-us-Sunnah, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 11 dated 1886]](https://whiteminaret.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/Ishaat-us-Sunnah-vol.-9-no.-1-pp.-11.png){kind=link}
A leading follower of the famous Maulavi Muhammad Ismail Shaheed, he wrote:
“War is not jihad. War is called qital, and it only arises now and then. Jihad is to strive to proclaim the word of God, and this goes on for a long period. It is only your misconception that you term qital as jihad.”
[Swaaneh Ahmadi, by Maulvi Muhammad Ja’afar Thanesari, p. 108]
More references for Maulana Shah Ismail Delawi RH
Sayyid Ahmad Barelvi (d. 1831) – Respected by Ahle Hadith, Deobandis, and Ahmadis
He was a Muslim military and religious leader who fought against Sikh rule in the North West of India, and is regarded as a mujaddid of the thirteenth century Hijrah. It is recorded about him:
When he was going forth to conduct jihad against the Sikhs, a man asked him: ‘Why do you go so far to fight jihad against the Sikhs, when the British are ruling the country and they are deniers of Islam. Conduct jihad against them in every house and wrest India from them; millions of people will support and help you’
The British Government—although a disbeliever in Islam—does not treat the Muslims with any cruelty or high-handedness, nor does it prevent them from attending to their religious obligations or observing the obligatory acts of worship. I preach and propagate (the Faith) in their kingdom but they never impede or oppose it. Rather, if someone commits any excess against us, they are ready to punish him. Our real task is the propagation of Tauheed—the Unity of God—and the renaissance of the Sunnah—precepts—of the Chief of all the Messengers—which we perform without let or hindrance in this country. So why should we wage a Jehad against the British Government and, contrary to the principles of our Faith, needlessly shed blood on either side.”
[Swaaneh Ahmadi, by Maulvi Muhammad Ja’afar Thanesari, p. 71]
![[Swaaneh Ahmadi, by Maulvi Muhammad Ja’afar Thanesari, p. 71]](https://whiteminaret.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/Swaaneh-Ahmadi-by-Maulvi-Muhammad-Jaafar-Thanesari-p.-71.png){kind=link}
1) Syed Ahmad Barelvi Angraiz Dost Ya Angraiz Dushman By Inayat Ullah Chishti Chakralavi – Article