Sir Sayyid considered both Hindus and Muslims as one qaum (nation) – arguing that qaum should be used to describe the inhabitants of India even if they have individual characteristics. Explaining further, he wrote, ‘By the word qaum I mean both Hindus and Muslims. That is the way in which I define the word nation (nation).’ This is in contrast to his opinion on the Hindi–Urdu debate and the participation of Muslims in the programmes of the Indian National Congress (INC). To understand the rationale underlying the positions of Sir Sayyid, situating his ideas in the context of the developments of his times is essential.

This chapter aims to understand Sir Sayyid's political thought by examining how Sir Sayyid responded to the political concerns of his times and contributed to a broader conversation about society, democracy, and political participation. The attempt is to investigate his ideas on two important issues: his response to the Hindi–Urdu controversy and his position regarding the INC.

The first part of this chapter discusses the Hindi–Urdu controversy. Through the Hindi movement, we discover an important facet of the growth of Hindu nationalism in north India and see how the Hindi movement was successful in differentiating Hindi from Urdu and making Hindi a symbol of the Hindu culture. It also shows how people like Sir Sayyid had practically no option but to oppose this movement.

The second part addresses the political participation of the Muslims of India. Sir Sayyid regarded the INC as a step towards the creation of a more advanced ‘nation’ of Bengali specifically, not of Hindus in general. Like many others, he considers this a consequence of the asymmetrical impact of colonial policies in different parts of India, which resulted in a significant section of Hindu and Muslim middle classes – including many zamindars and taluqdars – coming together to oppose the INC. Only a short time before this, many of these protesters had been standing against each other on the Hindi–Urdu issue.