the islamic prism 75Revolt by Sharif Hussein of Mecca against the Ottoman Empire had “en-
dangered the future of our holy places.” In underscoring loyalty to the
crown, the Muslim League had its priorities straight:
We are loyal subjects of the rulers, and are prepared to prove our loy-
alty in actual practice by making sacrifi ces. But this temporal loyalty is
subject to the limitation imposed by our undoubted loyalty to our faith...
we need hardly emphasize that in case there is a confl ict between Divine
Laws and the mandates of our rulers, every true Mussalman will allow
the Divine Commandments to prevail over human laws, even at the risk
of laying down his life.^21Disappointed by the British failure to honor its commitments over
Khilafat and Jazirat al- Arab, the following December the League hard-
ened its position. It warned that “no settlement contemplating the dis-
memberment of Turkey would ever satisfy the Indian Mussalmans, but
keep them in a state of perpetual dissatisfaction and discontent.”^22 It de-
clared that the Muslims of India would pursue all “constitutional agita-
tion open to them, including a boycott of the British army, if it is likely to
be used outside India for Imperial and anti- Islamic purpose.”
Articulating the basic demands of the Muslims in December 1921,
Mau lana Hasrat Mohani appea led t hat as per an inju nc t ion of t he Prophet
on his deathbed, Jazirat al- Arab, including Palestine, “should be free
from all non- Muslim infl uence and not be under British mandate.”^23
Mohani also indirectly rebuked the Ali brothers for cooperating with
Mahatma Gandhi over the Khilafat issue and declared that the Muslim
community did not need non- Muslim advice or assistance. However, the
offi ce of the caliph, which for centuries preoccupied Sunni Muslims,
could not keep pace with changing times. The title of “caliph” was insuf-
fi cient to provide the Ottoman emperor with a human face or guarantee
his ac cep tance by his Arab subjects. Its abolition by Mustafa Kemal
Ataturk, a Muslim, made the Khilafat struggle irrelevant.
In subsequent years, domestic concerns temporarily kept the Muslim
League from pursuing an external Islamic agenda. It was left to a break-
away faction led by Hafi z Hidayat Husain to return to the Palestine ques-
tion and make the fi rst formal demand for the withdrawal of the Balfour
Declaration. In November 1933, he warned that no Arab would tolerate
the “creation of a Jewish National State at his expense, come what may.”
Demanding an end to Jewish immigration, he felt that imperial interests