Skip to main content

Recalling secular-egalitarian ideology of Kakori martyrs amidst Hindutva 'onslaught'

By Shamsul Islam*

On August 9, 1925 a group of Indian revolutionaries affiliated to the Hindustan Republican Association (HRA) which included Chandrashekhar Azad, Ashfaqullah Khan, Ram Prasad Bismil, Rajender Lahiri, Roshan Singh, Manmath Nath Gupta and others waylaid the British Government treasury loaded on a passenger train at Kakori railway station (approximately 20 kilometers from Lucknow) and captured the same.
The then British rulers and their henchmen branded these revolutionaries as terrorists who were hot-headed adventure loving young men indulging in robberies for buying guns and fire-arms in order to create anarchy. However, the truth was that this revolutionary group seized the government treasury not for purchasing/manufacturing arms and ammunition but for publishing socialist literature to be circulated among youth, peasantry and workers so that they were politicized and join the anti-colonial struggle.
This group had left behind the terrorist legacy and matured into a revolutionary political group which believed in involving larger masses in the struggle to overthrow the British rule. It could be seen in changing the name of HRA in 1928 to Hindustan Socialist Republican Association.
In what came to be known as Kakori Conspiracy Case, four of the revolutionaries, namely Ram Prasad Bismil (June 11, 1897-December 19, 1927), Ashfaqullah Khan ( October 22, 1900-December 19, 1927), Thakur Roshan Singh (January 22, 1892-December 19, 1927), Rajendra Nath Lahiri (June 23, 1901-December 17, 1927) were awarded death sentences. Ramprasad Bismil was hanged in Gorakhpur, Ashfaqullah Khan in Faizabad, Rajinder Nath Lahiri in Gonda and Roshan Singh in Allahabad between December 17 and 19, 1927.
These martyrs represented the youth of the country (the eldest, Thakur Roshan Singh being 35 years old, and the youngest, Rajendra Nath Lahiri, was 26 years old) but also pan-Indian character not only in the Kakori action but as a whole. The revolutionary group consisted of Bhagat Singh, Sukhdev (Punjabi), Rajguru (Marathi), Jyotish Chandra Pal (Oriya), to name few. These revolutionaries were also committed to overthrow the colonial rule and establish an egalitarian and secular society.
We can see this commitment concretely in the writings of the martyr Ashfaqullah Khan. He wanted a socialist liberated India. In a ‘Message to Countrymen’ which was smuggled out of Faizabad Jail few days prior to his martyrdom on December 19, 1927, while addressing the Indian Communists, he said:
“I am greatly in agreement with you and want to tell you that my heart always weeps for the poor peasants and helpless workers. While on the run I stayed with them and after seeing their condition I often wept…This is absolutely true that whatever they grow or produce, they have no share, they always remain sad and in bad shape. I do agree that for all these things our white Masters and their agents are responsible…
"I have deep regards for you in my heart and while dying, I fully agree with your political aims. I want that kind of freedom for Hindustan where poor should live happily and with ease. I pray to God that after my death, that day should come at the earliest when Abdullah mechanic of loco workshop, Dhaniya cobbler and common peasants are seen sitting on chairs in front of Mr. Khaliq-uz-Zaman, Jagat Narain Mulla and Raja Saheb Mehmoodabad in Lucknow’s Chhaatter Manzil.
"My comrades, my revolutionary brothers—what I can tell you and what I can write to you, it will be a matter of great pride to you when you will hear that one of your brothers went to the gallows smiling and was happy while dying. I know very well about the spirit which your group has and I was proud of it, and now I am more proud that I am dying as a true revolutionary.”

Ashfaqullah Khan like his other comrades was highly conscious of damage communal polarization was causing to anti-British liberation struggle
Ashfaqullah Khan like his other comrades was highly conscious of the damage communal polarization was causing to the anti-British liberation struggle. It was his firm opinion that communal divides would only help the White master. Exposing the nefarious game communal forces were playing in league with the British masters, he wrote:
“Oh! How can we appreciate the present day life when our political leadership is going through internal strife? If one is fond of Tableegh [the propagation of Islam for which an all India organization was formed in 1926] the other believes that dying for Shuddhi [conversion of Muslims and Christians to Sanatan Dharma for which Arya Samaj+Hindu Mahasabha started aggressive campaign from early 20th century] only will lead to emancipation. Government secret service agents finance the spread of religious propaganda. Their aim is not to defend religion or help it to flourish but to create obstacles in the path of the moving train [of the freedom struggle].”
While pouring out his heart for his countrymen both Hindus and Muslims he went on to warn them:
“Brothers! Your civil war, your internal bickering will not be useful for any of you. This is impossible that 7 crores Muslims can be converted to Hinduism [through Shuddhi] and likewise it is futile to believe that 22 crores Hindus can be turned into Muslims. However, [if they continue fighting with each other] it is easy and very easy that all of them together will continue to be in chains.”
It was not surprising that martyr Ram Prasad Bismil expressed the identical views in his last message before his hanging at Gorakhpur Jail on December 19. He declared that he was sacrificing life for a country and the world where there would be no slavery:
“The time of execution is fixed for 6.30 am on 19 December. Nothing to worry, I shall be reborn again and again due to God’s grace and my aim will be to ensure complete freedom for the world. That nature’s gifts should be equally shared by all and no one shall rule others. Everywhere people should have their democratic institutions."
Bismil though a prominent Arya Samajist made it clear like his Ashfaqullah Khan that to defeat the British masters the unity of Hindus and Muslims was a pre-requisite: 
“I am not disappointed at this time of giving up my life that this is wasted. Sacrifices never go to waste. Maybe because of our sighs that the idea of sending royal commission came to the mind of Lord Birkenhead [Secretary of State for India (1924-8)], for whose boycott Hindu-Muslims got together again. God may give some wisdom to them fast and they become united again. I had told advocate Mohan Lal Saxena, after our appeal was dismissed, that at least to commemorate us this time Hindu-Muslim leaders should be united.
“Government had mentioned that Sh Ashfaqullah Khan is the right-hand man of Ram Prasad. If a devoted Muslim like Ashfaq could be right-hand man of Arya Samaji like Ram Prasad in the revolutionary movement, then why can’t other Hindus and Muslims unite forgetting their petty interests?"

Bismil reminded the flag-bearers of the Hindu and Islamic brands of nationalism who were causing communal polarizing:
“Government had mentioned that Sh Ashfaqullah Khan is the right-hand man of Ram Prasad. If a devoted Muslim like Ashfaq could be right-hand man of Arya Samaji like Ram Prasad in the revolutionary movement, then why can’t other Hindus and Muslims unite forgetting their petty interests?”
His appeal from the depth of his heart ended with the following amazing words:
“Now my only request to countrymen is that if they had even an iota of sorrow at our death, then, with whatever means, they must establish Hindu-Muslim unity; that was our last wish and this only can be our memorial. All religions and all parties should consider Congress as a representative. Then the day is not far, when Britishers have to bow before Indians."
Unfortunately India’s current rulers, the mainstream academia and the media have consciously seceded from this great philosophical heritage of the Kakori martyrs. The Hindutva onslaught today is the outcome of our ignorance about the sacrifices of the Kakori martyrs and ideals for which they laid down their lives. If we are able to revive our memories of this glorious phase of the unity of Indians fighting for a society based on justice, the anti-egalitarian and religious polarizing agenda of the RSS-BJP rulers is bound to fizzle out.
---
Formerly with the Delhi University, click here for Perof Islam's writings and video interviews/debates. Facebook: https://facebook.com/shamsul.islam.332; Twitter: @shamsforjustice; blog: http://shamsforpeace.blogspot.com/

Comments

TRENDING

Sardar made up his mind on Pakistan in Dec 1946 "before" Mountbatten's Partition Plan

By Hari Desai* One has to be extra cautious while dealing with the history of towering personalities of the Indian freedom struggle, especially that of Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel (October 31, 1875 - December 15, 1950). Present-day politicians prefer to "pronounce” on his life and quote him according to their convenience like a blind person describing an elephant.

Beyond the Ayodhya theft: A tainted system, a crisis of trust

By Martin Macwan*   Recently, the issue of "theft of offerings at the Ayodhya Ram temple" has taken centre stage on social media. Whether "no theft occurred," or "this is the first such incident," or "the theft was limited only to cash" are now secondary questions, because the evidence has come not from the opposition, from people of other faiths, or from foreigners, but from ordinary devout believers, from saints and monks, and from sincere workers of the ruling party itself.

The Guardian controversy and the moral question of 12 years of Modi's leadership

By Mohd Ziyauallah Khan    A recent opinion article published in The Guardian , titled "Can Narendra Modi Accept Any Medal?", reignited a fierce debate about Prime Minister Narendra Modi's international recognition and the moral legacy of his leadership. The article argued that while Modi has received numerous state honours and awards from foreign governments, a more fundamental question remains unanswered: Can a leader be celebrated internationally while presiding over growing concerns about democratic decline, social polarization , and civil liberties at home? The controversy quickly spread across political and media circles. Supporters dismissed the article as biased, while critics argued that it reflected concerns already expressed by international democracy watchdogs , human rights organizations, and sections of the global press. Yet beyond political loyalties lies a deeper question: How should the success of a government be measured, especially when it...