Hindu–Muslim unity

Hindu–Muslim unity is a religiopolitical concept in the Indian subcontinent which stresses members of the two largest faith groups there, Hindus and Muslims, working together for the common good. The concept was championed by various persons, such as leaders in the Indian independence movement, namely Mahatma Gandhi and Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan, as well as by political parties and movements in British India, such as the Indian National Congress, Khudai Khidmatgar and All India Azad Muslim Conference. Those who opposed the partition of India often adhered to the doctrine of composite nationalism.
In Mughal India, the emperor Akbar advocated for Hindu–Muslim unity, appointing both Hindus and Muslims as officials in his court. Akbar participated and promoted festivals of both Hinduism and Islam. He also created feasts, such as Phool Walon Ki Sair (although this festival is said to have been started much later in the nineteenth century under Akbar II) to be celebrated by citizens of all faiths. During the Mughal era, Indian art and culture thrived, with the construction of grand monuments such as the Taj Mahal and the Red Fort. The Mughals fostered religious harmony and cultural advancements and nurtured Hindu scholars, poets, and artists, facilitating a dynamic cultural interchange that enriched both Islamic and Hindu traditions.
Chhatrapati Shivaji also promoted Hindu–Muslim unity. Maratha Hindavi Swarajya had many Muslims in high posts. Shivaji's personal security, his most trusted courtiers, were Muslims. A Muslim general had led the Maratha troops in the third battle of Panipat and sacrificed for the cause.
Sayyid Jamal al-Din al-Afghani Asadabadi advocated for Hindu–Muslim unity, maintaining that it would help the Indian independence movement in their goal to establish an independent India.
During the 17th to 19th centuries, India was ruled by the British, who introduced a policy of divide and rule to maintain their control over the country. In the Indian Rebellion of 1857, many Hindus and Muslims of India mobilized together to fight against the East India Company. Reflecting on this in 2007, Manmohan Singh stated that these events "stood as a great testimony to the traditions of Hindu–Muslim unity that held out as an example for subsequent generations".
The Lucknow Pact of 1916 was seen as an "important step forward in achieving Hindu–Muslim unity" during the era of the Indian independence movement. Muhammad Ali Jinnah advocated Hindu–Muslim unity in early years of his political career. Gopal Krishna Gokhale stated that Jinnah "has true stuff in him, and that freedom from all sectarian prejudice which will make him the best ambassador of Hindu–Muslim Unity".
Ram Prasad Bismil and Ashfaqulla Khan emphasized the importance of Hindu-Muslim unity for India's progress and independence. Bismil urged Indians to rise above religious and communal divisions, recognizing unity as the foundation for building a strong and free nation. His vision highlighted the need for collective harmony to achieve the common goal of liberation and prosperity for all communities. Hindu-Muslim unity and amity were last wishes of Kakori martyrs.
Muslim scholars of the Deoband school of thought, such as Qari Muhammad Tayyib and Kifayatullah Dihlawi, championed Hindu–Muslim unity, composite nationalism, and called for a united India. Maulana Sayyid Hussain Ahmad Madani, the leader of the Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind, stated:
Malik Khizar Hayat Tiwana, the Premier of Punjab in colonial India, advocated for amity between the religious communities of undivided India, proclaiming 1 March as Communal Harmony Day and aiding in the establishment of a Communal Harmony Committee in Lahore, in which Raja Narendra Nath served as president and Maulvi Mahomed Ilyas as secretary.
In 1940, Maghfoor Ahmad Ajazi established the All-India Jamhur Muslim League to support a united India and to counter the Two nation theory. He served as the first General Secretary of the All India Jamhur Muslim League.
Both Pakistani-American historian Ayesha Jalal and Indian Army officer and politician Jaswant Singh have noted that Muhammad Ali Jinnah did not want the partition of India and instead favored a united India. However, certain political factors, including the strategies of Jawaharlal Nehru, compelled him to accept partition. Jinnah used the demand for Pakistan as a "bargaining chip" to secure rights for Muslims in Hindu-dominated, British-ruled India, where Muslims feared oppression and felt a sense of marginalization (especially after the conflicts like Hindi-Urdu controversy, which occurred in 1867, just a decade after the 1857 independence war, in which both Muslims and Hindus fought against the British colonialism). The Lahore Resolution, later referred to as the "Pakistan Resolution," did not explicitly demand a separate state, according to Jalal. The term 'Pakistan Resolution' is used for the Lahore Resolution, mostly in Pakistani studies textbooks, which have taught that it was the resolution that passed the demand for Pakistan as a separate state. However, this is not entirely true.
In the Indian Rebellion of 1857, many Hindus and Muslims in India joined together as Indians to fight against the British East India Company. The British introduced a system of separate electorates, which exacerbated the divide between the Hindu and Muslim communities. The British government became concerned about this rise in Indian nationalism therefore; according to some writers, they tried to stir up communalistic feelings among Hindus and Muslims so that they might not again unite to try and overthrow crown rule. For example, Theodore Beck, the principal of Muhammadan Anglo-Oriental College, had told Syed Ahmad Khan that Muslims should have no sympathy with the objectives of the Indian National Congress and that "Anglo-Muslim unity was possible, but Hindu–Muslim unity was impossible".
The author of Composite Nationalism and Islam, Hussain Ahmad Madani, a Deobandi Muslim scholar and proponent of a united India, argued that the British government were attempting to "scare Muslims into imagining that in a free India, Muslims would lose their separate identity, and be absorbed into the Hindu fold", a threat that "aim[ed] at depoliticizing the Muslims, weaning them away from struggle for independence." In the eyes of Madani, support for a two-nation theory resulted in the entrenchment of British imperialism.
In the same vein, Kashmiri Indian politician and Supreme Court judge Markandey Katju wrote in The Nation: