"Aligarh movement", some confusions.
 

AOA
hope u all are fine and doing well:)

i face problem while preparing Aligarh movement and want help

according to past past papers question of 1999 paper

[B][SIZE="4"][FONT="Comic Sans MS"] "Make a critical appraisal of the Aligarh movement specifying its significance in the freedom movement"[/FONT][/SIZE][/B]

2008 question
[B][FONT="Comic Sans MS"][SIZE="4"]Aligarh movement injected a new life in the dead body of the Muslim nation and helped to regain its lost glory and prestige. discus[/SIZE][/FONT][/B]

2004 question
[B][FONT="Comic Sans MS"][SIZE="4"]Aligarh is arsenal of Muslim india. narrate briefly the role of Aligarh for the cause of the Muslims of the subcontinent with special reference to the final phase of their independence?[/SIZE][/FONT][/B]

my main headings for all above question is
Introduction+ historical back ground
British attitude after war
Muslim attitude after war
sir Syed struggle for Muslim
objective of Aligarh movement
efforts of sir Syed Aligarh movement

A; political reforms
1 pamphlet the cause of Indian revolt
2 British Indian association

B educational reforms
1 schools
2 Defence of urdu
3 Aligarh colege
4 scientific society
muhamaden educational conference

C religious reforms,
1 essay on the life of Muhammad(P B U H)
commentary on Quran

D social reforms
1 journal tahdhib al Akhlak
2 orphan house
criticism

[SIZE="3"][FONT="Comic Sans MS"]now the problem is
in aligarh movement, educational, political, social and religious reforms i write above in my ans is right or wrong? i read these all points in 1 book under Aligarh movement.................
because these are sir syed works ...........so please members give your comments about it ....whether i include these [FONT="Comic Sans MS"][SIZE="4"]points [/SIZE][/FONT]or not?
waiting for your reply:waiting:waiting:waiting:waiting:
regards[/FONT][/SIZE]

you have not mention Aligarh's role in Freedom movement...let look at following points..

sir sayyid asked muslim to stay away from congress as well as from POLITICS
..concentrate on education....
NOW
after death of Sayyid sb in 1898 muslims were in confused state whether they should take part in politics or adhere with sir sayyid's policy.


as the british rule was about to increase local representation in Lagislation,muslims thought for separate electorate.....
HERE COMES ALIGARH'S ROLE
nawab muhsin ul mulk (secretary aligarh) thought about putting demands of muslims before viceroy.
Mr.Archbold(principal Aligarh) contacted MR. D. Smith (sec. to viceroy) and arranged for SIMLA DEPUTATION
....this became the basis of SEPARATE ELECTORATES (1909 minto-morley reforms)..

Due to urdu hindi controversy,Bal gangadhar tilak's agitation against Muslims,Congress attitude towards muslims,severe opposition of partition of bengal and a possibility of getting separate electorate right were the points which demanded for a separate poilitical plateform for muslims...

FORMATION OF AIML

the founders nawab waqar ul mulk,maulana muhammad ali,nawab muhsin ul mulk all belonged to ALIGARH MOVEMENT

and muslim league became the force for partition of INDIA....

you must have included these points

regards

[QUOTE=sajjad sadique;382314]you have not mention Aligarh's role in Freedom movement...let look at following points..

sir sayyid asked muslim to stay away from congress as well as from POLITICS
..concentrate on education....
NOW
after death of Sayyid sb in 1898 muslims were in confused state whether they should take part in politics or adhere with sir sayyid's policy.


as the british rule was about to increase local representation in Lagislation,muslims thought for separate electorate.....
HERE COMES ALIGARH'S ROLE
nawab muhsin ul mulk (secretary aligarh) thought about putting demands of muslims before viceroy.
Mr.Archbold(principal Aligarh) contacted MR. D. Smith (sec. to viceroy) and arranged for SIMLA DEPUTATION
....this became the basis of SEPARATE ELECTORATES (1909 minto-morley reforms)..

Due to urdu hindi controversy,Bal gangadhar tilak's agitation against Muslims,Congress attitude towards muslims,severe opposition of partition of bengal and a possibility of getting separate electorate right were the points which demanded for a separate poilitical plateform for muslims...

FORMATION OF AIML

the founders nawab waqar ul mulk,maulana muhammad ali,nawab muhsin ul mulk all belonged to ALIGARH MOVEMENT

and muslim league became the force for partition of INDIA....

you must have included these points

regards[/QUOTE]
@sajjad sadique

thanks soo much ...........ur points are really good which i must include

plz explain this also that all that reforms i mention in my above post are they relevant to aligarh? i think that are works of sir syed and no need to mention those all in aligarh........

regards

no doubt the points you have mentioned are related to aligarh but you can use them as reference...i mean as background you can refer these points but these are specifically sir sayyid or aligarh's educational,literary services etc....but keep in mind sir sayyid was not in favour of participation in politics....so if anyone asks about political services of aligarh you must focus on the era after sayyid sb i.e 1898 AD. and further you can add the services of aligarh students in khilafat movement, roundtable conferences,AIML campaigns etc etc.

regards

[QUOTE=sajjad sadique;383256]no doubt the points you have mentioned are related to aligarh but you can use them as reference...i mean as background you can refer these points but these are specifically sir sayyid or aligarh's educational,literary services etc....but keep in mind sir sayyid was not in favour of participation in politics....so if anyone asks about political services of aligarh you must focus on the era after sayyid sb i.e 1898 AD. and further you can add the services of aligarh students in khilafat movement, roundtable conferences,AIML campaigns etc etc.

regards[/QUOTE]

you are wrong here .. aligarh movement was not against politics it was against jumping into politics without the proper training and education. to prove my view point i will quote a passage from an article in dawn.

This approach can be best illustrated through a statement of Muhammad Ali Jauhar about the birth of the Muslim League itself. Jauhar said (ironically while presiding over an annual session of Congress), “In obedience, as it were, to a law of nature, once more after nearly 30 years of the foundation of the college, there came into being a political institution of Muslims.”

Curiously enough, the college mentioned was the MAO College, Aligarh, whose founder Sir Syed Ahmad Khan had advised his followers to stay away from politics. From the perspective of a western academic, it would appear as if either Sir Syed was not farsighted enough to foresee that his community was going to need a political institution very soon, or that his followers left his path when they founded this political institution. Yet, not only in this statement but on every other occasion, Jauhar insisted that Syed was the pioneer of Muslim political activity.

In other words, our identity is not defined by our ideas but by our ideals, goals and the means we leave behind for achieving those goals. In terms of specific ideas, Jauhar and the group of leaders represented by him were the apparent antithesis of Sir Syed`s thought but in terms of ideals and goals they continued the initiative started by him. Sikhaya tha tumhin ne hum ko yeh shore-o-shaghab sara/ Jo is ki inteha hum hain to is ki ibtida tum ho

Hence Jauhar addressed Syed ecstatically in a famous poem, (“You taught us this rabble rousing/ If we are the height of it, you were its genesis”).



source : [url=http://www.dawn.com/2010/10/01/the-long-term-goal-by-khurram-ali-shafique.html]The long-term goal | Newspaper | DAWN.COM[/url]


regards

@Soloflyer
 

Soloflyer, your analysis is bang on target!

i fully agree and endorse your argument. infact i want to add my little contribution to this argument also:
All the leaders of Aligarh Movement collectively and sagaciously entered politics, when the British Govt (Lord Minto the Viceroy of India and the then Secretary of State for India) announced in the House of Commons that His Majesty's Govt would give more representation in all Councils in India and would soon take steps for constitutional reforms, in 1906.
My arguement is "Could Sir Syed himself have avoided politics in 1906 after the announcement for increase in representation and constitution reforms, had he been alive?"
I think he could have led the Muslim himself announcing that Now the time is ripe to launch a political struggle for safeguarding Muslim interests in India.
Moreover, it is also pertinent to add that Simla Deputation included some 35 Muslim leaders across Punjab who agreed to the idea that time had come for Muslims to take steps to protect their rights and interests.
Secondly, at the annual session of AIMEC in late Dec 1906, Aligarh leaders deliberated for days alongwith other Muslim leaders who had come to participate in the AIMEC across India, for founding a proper political party (AIML) to represent Muslim of India.
So Aligarh Movement was not against politics infact its leaders wanted to train Muslims educationally and politically so they could understand "BRITISH AND HINDU REAL POLITIK" purely based on protection and promotion of interests.

(Comments await criticism, if any from all)
Regards.

yup that is the main thing ...sir syed was a visionary , he knew that to protect the interests of muslims against the british raj and educated hindus , the muslims too needed education. he knew once they were educated enough they would automatically make the sane decision of entering the politics...that is why aligarh movement was never devoid of political motive. ..in fact most of the people associated with aligarh movement became actively invloved in politics

my dear friends i think you have not read my first post...i said tht sir sayyid asked muslims to concentrate on education....
sayyid sb was a visionary i agree but muslims started participating in politics after sayyis sb's death.


if u think its wrong..no problem its your opinion..i welcome it

sir sayid forbade Muslims not to take part for the reason that muslims were then in no position to project them because they were educationally ,weaker.British were hostile to them . they were financially bereft ed of their ownership.once muslims were in position to fight for themselves there was no reason not to lead their cause for rights.