Famine of 1802 - Loss of India to British

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 2.5 India License.

Following is the description of great Famine of 1802 in India by one of the earlier Marathi poets of modern era, Anant Fandi (1744-1817). This is his description of the second great famine in India in late Maratha era (first was 1790-92 - Doji Bara famine) of 1802. Anant Fandi  composed this poem in 1802 and named it Dushkaal (Famine).

This poem gives several pointers at the extent of deaths, poverty and inflation which was caused due to the consecutive famines in India. This famine coincides with downfall of Maratha Empire. Prior to this event, Maratha Empire was in its full zenith, with Mughal emperor living as their pensioner. They practically controlled the Judicial-political-economic policies of most of India (except Bengal, Deep south and Punjab). They had decisively defeated Nizam of Hyderabad and Tipu Sultan and were poised to reclaim Bengal from British East India Company, when this famine struck.

The map below shows the extent of Maratha empire from 1760 onwards until 1805. Third battle of Panipat lead to temporary loss of India over Haryana and Delhi, which Marathas reclaimed in 1772 until 1805.

Similar famine had sapped their strength in 1790s. It is indeed almost miraculous how a pan Indian empire commanding 4-5 armies all over India almost quarter-million strong, finest artillery in India and revenue of 25-30 Crore rupees (these are revenue figures from Maratha sources, inflation not adjusted). Economy of India further faltered and stumbled after exploits of Aurangzeb century ago. After Maratha-Mughal wars ended with Maratha victory, stability slowly started returning to war-ravaged Deccan, Central and North India. It was indeed stupendous bad-luck of India that this famine broke the back of Marathas. With defeat of Marathas in Battle of Delhi and Assaye in 1802-03, practically entire India was won over by EIC. Until 1802, EIC was limited to Bengal and some parts around Chennai, rest of India was controlled by Marathas and Sikhs (Ranjit Singh of Punjab).

वृक्षास न राहे एक पर्ण। मग अपक्व राहतील कोठून ।
सोतरोठे बरबडे भक्षून । तरी वांचले नाहींत ।। 1

वृषभ धेनु सूकर श्वाने । मज्र मंडूक गणपतीवाहने ।
सर्वही भक्षिले भिकार्याने । शेवटी प्राण गेले हो ।। 2

असे जे भक्षू नये ते भक्षिले । शेवटी ईश्वरी उपेक्षिले ।
त्यातून चवथाई रक्षिले ! तीन हिस्से गतप्राण ।। 3

हाताने तोलावे सुवर्ण । धान्य मोजावे ताजव्याने ।
अच्छेर दीडपाव दाणे । रुपयाचे ते ही न मिळे ।। 4

कोण प्रेताला ओढितो । येथे अवघ्यांचा प्राण जातो।
कोण कोणाचा समाचार घेतो । यात वांचतो कोणता ।। 5

सरी सर्वत्रलागी जाणा । एकसारख्याची वेदना।। 
धनाढ्यासी न मिळे दाणा। मग निर्धन कैसा वाचतो ।। 6

Crude Translation:

1. All trees are leaf-less, from where shall fruit remain?
People have consumed leafless branches, roots, seeds, everything...

2. Oxen, pigs, dogs, cats, frogs, rats
People ate everything that lived, and in the end they perished as well

3. What one should not consume, was consumed (referring to cows), yet Gods forsake us,
Only one-fourth of us live, three-fourths have perished

4. A gram of cereals became as expensive as handful of gold coins,
Grains which were available for one and half paisas, now even a Rupee cannot fetch

5. Who will burn whom? Everyone is going to perish here
Who cares for whom? Who is going to survive this anyways?

6. Everywhere, the pain is similar,
Even the rich have nothing to eat, what will happen to poor?

 

One of the finest and thoroughly researched articles on this topic can be read here on Jambudvipa's blog. Jambudvipa focuses on famine deaths happened in India during the time British East India Company started occupying India and messing up with the internal trade-dynamics of India.

Internal trade of India has always been crucial. Deccan is comparatively less fertile than Gangetic valley region and Indo-Gangetic plain has been grain basket of India (it still is). Punjab was slowly recovering from 700 years of Islamic occupation when Sikhs were consolidating.

I recommend everyone to go through this blog cited above. And Jambudvipa, this is one the internal references (although not quantitative one) from an Indian eye-witness of that era.

From point of view of history lover, the Maratha debacle of 1802 was unexpected and all to sudden. Arthur Wellesley, the British general who defeated Marathas in 1802, went on to be known as Archduke of Wellington and defeated Napoleon in 1815 on Waterloo. He, in own admission, considered this war toughest of his career which he least expected to win and survive. We now refer to this war which lasted for 3 years (1802-05) as Second Anglo-Maratha War.

The Tale of Two Butchers - A lesson on Satya and Ahimsa

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 2.5 India License.

Some times, best of the lessons are learnt and taught, not in classrooms but in times and places where the distinction between life and death, is murkiest. Consider the example of Bhagvad Geeta - Who would have thought that the sublime song would be sung on the battlefield which saw death of forty lakh soldiers? Yet it did. This post today, will recount a tale of two such unlikely teachers who taught the characters in the story (and us, the readers and onlookers) the quintessential lesson of Dharma and Duty. 

Tale One - Dharma Vyadha (धर्मव्याध) - From Mahabharata (Book three, chapters 206-216)

As a typical Indian story begins, once upon a time there was a poor Brahmin named "Kaushika". He learnt all that was to learn from Vedas and decided to do a "Tapas" to sharpen his Yogic prowess and gain knowledge and Siddhis. He began his Tapas. Years passed by. The glow of the penance started showing on his face and his very aura started becoming radiant. One day, while he was meditating under a tree, his concentration was disturbed when a sparrow started making noise while trying to build a nest on the tree. Angry, Kaushika glanced at the sparrow causing nuisance and lo! sparrow turned to ashes that very instant. 

Pleased by his progress, he went to a town nearby to ask for Bhiksha. While asking for alms on one door, the lady of the house took long time to answer his call and give the alms. This angered our Kaushika who threatened to curse the lady and burn her down with his Yogic Powers. But to his surprise, the lady replied that she was neither a crow nor a sparrow, to be burnt. Kaushika is amazed to see that an average housewife had such sophisticated Yogic powers without having to do the stringent austerities. The Lady replied that by doing one's duty, one can achieve all that is to be achieved. She redirected Kaushika to a butcher living in the city of Mithila who, according to lady, would impart knowledge unto this learned Brahmin. 

Curioser and curioser, Kaushika decides to check out this Butcher whom the lady referred to as "Dharma-Vyaadha". He reaches Mithila, tracks down the meat-shop of the said butcher and is horrified at the sight of blood and meat and death around. He gives up the expectation of gaining any knowledge, but now that he had come this far, he decides to atleast meet and talk with this butcher. The Butcher, however, guesses the intent of this brahmin and requests him to wait until his shop is closed, so that he can instruct the brahmin about the intricacies of Dharma as told by the housewife in another city. Kaushika gets second surprise of his life and his arrogance is thoroughly grounded and replaced by genuine curiosity, befitting an ideal student. 

DharmaVyaadha starts his instruction,"Oh tapasvi, I will instruct you upon the nature of Dharma and Ahimsa by my own example. I am in this business because my family has been in this business for generations. Upon careful thinking, I found out that this business suits me well. I devote all my time to ensure that my customers are satisfied with my service. Furthermore, it allows me to take care of my old parents as well as family while ability to have a decent life in this good city. Do not judge an act as good OR bad. No act is of higher OR lower stature. It is higher OR lower based on the driving force behind that act. Right action is achieved by the means of coordinated efforts in two directions - Controlling the six enemies (Kaama/Krodha/Lobha/Moha/Mada/Matsara) and strengthening Dharmik intent of the mind. Any action under influence of these six enemies is bad action. 

Ahimsaa (nonviolence) and Satya (truth) are the two main pillars of Dharma. A decision on what is truth, under difficult circumstances, should be made by choosing that course of action which would lead to highest good of all that is (Bhuta). And Ahimsa is when person wishes and acts for benefit of all keeping the true understanding of Justice (Nyaya) and virtues (GuNa)." 

Knowledge and bliss dawns upon Kaushika who thanks the Butcher and bid him farewell. Butcher gives him final lesson,"Oh learned Brahmana, in quest of mastering Vedas and acquiring Yogic Siddhis, you have neglected your duties towards your parents, your family and have become ascetic. You learned from me, but you also have to learn from the housewife who sent you here. Dharma and knowledge can be achieved perfectly by staying in the society and fulfilling all the duties and earning all the Purusharthas. You have to pay back the dues to parents, to society before you are liberated (Mukta). Quit Sannyasa, go back home, take care of your parents, start family. You have my blessing, knowledge will shine upon you."

It is both interesting and humbling that one of the finest lesson on Non-violence given to a brahmin, not by some enlightened mahatma, but by a Butcher who's occupation is to kill animals. There is an elaborate story where the butcher tells Kaushika about is past life and how Shudras and brahmins are defined. They arrive upon a conclusion that good conduct alone determines who is brahmin and who is not. And good or bad is, is determined by the bold part in quote above. Possession of qualities like Purity, Discipline and adherence to truth alone makes one a brahmin, irrespective of the caste a person is born into and not the birth.

Tale Two - The story of Gopalchandra Mukhopadhyay aka Gopal Patha

Gopal `Patha' Mukherjee, Gopal the Goat was among the most feared of Calcutta's musclemen, with 800 boys at his command. He was an emperor and they were his army. Gopal Patha he got the name because his family ran a meat shop on College Street was, at the time of partition, a protector of his community.  

When Direct Action Day unleashed communal rioting in Calcutta, Gopal Patha assembled his force. In his words, "It was a very critical time for the country. We thought if the whole area became Pakistan, there would be more torture and repression. So I called all my boys together and said it was time to retaliate. If you come to know that one murder has taken place, you commit 10 murders. That was the order to my boys.'' 

The words are uttered so softly, it takes a while for their import to sink in. Calcutta was in flames and Gopal Patha, in effect, took the opportunity to douse the city in kerosene. "It was basically duty,'' he said. "I had to help those in distress." Patha ripostes that his boys were always selective. "We only fought and killed our attackers. But why should we kill an ordinary rickshaw-wallah or hawker who happens to be a Muslim?" 

"An year later when Mahatma Gandhi came to city appealing for peace, people came with their weapons and placed them at the feet of Gandhiji. Shabbily-dressed people came with swords, daggers and country-made guns. However not me. Gandhi called me twice, but I didn't go. The third time, some local Congress leaders told me that I should at least deposit some of my arms. I went there. I saw people coming and depositing weapons which were of no use to anyone out-of-order pistols, that sort of thing. 

Then Gandhi's secretary said to me: "Gopal, why don't you surrender your arms to Gandhiji?" I replied, "With these arms I saved the women of my area, I saved the people. I will not surrender them. Where was Gandhiji during the Great Calcutta Killing? Where was he then? Even if I've used a nail to kill someone, I won't surrender even that nail.'' - click to view source of this story

I find a strange connection in these two stories. I think Gopal Patha understood the crux of Satya and Ahimsa in far better proportions than Gandhiji during those difficult times. The more I think about it, the more I realized that the words of Dharma-Vyaadha resonated in essence from words and actions of criminals and butchers like Gopalchandra Mukherjee. 

As Dharmavyadha said in first tale, it is the driving force behind the action which determines its moral position. Satya is choosing a course of action which would lead to higher good in long term of living beings in the frame of reference. And Ahimsa is acting for benefit of all with true sense of Justice and Virtues. 

What eventually happened to Hindus in Pakistan and Bangladesh? And What has happened to Muslims in India? This is the frame of reference to judge the higher an long-term good of humans. And this should be frame of reference while using the terms like Satya and Ahimsa in context of socio-politico-economic events happening in Indian subcontinent.

Parshuraam ki Pratiksha - Ramdhaari Singh "Dinkar"

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 2.5 India License.

हे वीर बन्धु ! दायी है कौन विपद का ?

हम दोषी किसको कहें तुम्हारे वध का ?

यह गहन प्रश्न; कैसे रहस्य समझायें ?

दस-बीस अधिक हों तो हम नाम गिनायें।

पर, कदम-कदम पर यहाँ खड़ा पातक है,

हर तरफ लगाये घात खड़ा घातक है।

घातक है, जो देवता-सदृश दिखता है,

लेकिन, कमरे में गलत हुक्म लिखता है,

जिस पापी को गुण नहीं; गोत्र प्यारा है,

समझो, उसने ही हमें यहाँ मारा है।

जो सत्य जान कर भी न सत्य कहता है,

या किसी लोभ के विवश मूक रहता है,

उस कुटिल राजतन्त्री कदर्य को धिक् है,

यह मूक सत्यहन्ता कम नहीं वधिक है।

चोरों के हैं जो हितू, ठगों के बल हैं,

जिनके प्रताप से पलते पाप सकल हैं,

जो छल-प्रपंच, सब को प्रश्रय देते हैं,

या चाटुकार जन से सेवा लेते हैं;

यह पाप उन्हीं का हमको मार गया है,

भारत अपने घर में ही हार गया है।

है कौन यहाँ, कारण जो नहीं विपद् का ?

किस पर जिम्मा है नहीं हमारे वध का ?

जो चरम पाप है, हमें उसी की लत है,

दैहिक बल को रहता यह देश ग़लत है।

नेता निमग्न दिन-रात शान्ति-चिन्तन में,

कवि-कलाकार ऊपर उड़ रहे गगन में।

यज्ञाग्नि हिन्द में समिध नहीं पाती है,

पौरुष की ज्वाला रोज बुझी जाती है।

ओ बदनसीब अन्धो ! कमजोर अभागो ?

अब भी तो खोलो नयन, नींद से जागो।

वह अघी, बाहुबल का जो अपलापी है,

जिसकी ज्वाला बुझ गयी, वही पापी है।

जब तक प्रसन्न यह अनल, सुगुण हँसते है;

है जहाँ खड्ग, सब पुण्य वहीं बसते हैं।

वीरता जहाँ पर नहीं, पुण्य का क्षय है,

वीरता जहाँ पर नहीं, स्वार्थ की जय है।

तलवार पुण्य की सखी, धर्मपालक है,

लालच पर अंकुश कठिन, लोभ-सालक है।

असि छोड़, भीरु बन जहाँ धर्म सोता है,

पातक प्रचण्डतम वहीं प्रकट होता है।

तलवारें सोतीं जहाँ बन्द म्यानों में,

किस्मतें वहाँ सड़ती है तहखानों में।

बलिवेदी पर बालियाँ-नथें चढ़ती हैं,

सोने की ईंटें, मगर, नहीं कढ़ती हैं।

पूछो कुबेर से, कब सुवर्ण वे देंगे ?

यदि आज नहीं तो सुयश और कब लेंगे ?

तूफान उठेगा, प्रलय-वाण छूटेगा,है

जहाँ स्वर्ण, बम वहीं, स्यात्, फूटेगा।

जो करें, किन्तु, कंचन यह नहीं बचेगा,

शायद, सुवर्ण पर ही संहार मचेगा।

हम पर अपने पापों का बोझ न डालें,

कह दो सब से, अपना दायित्व सँभालें।

कह दो प्रपंचकारी, कपटी, जाली से,

आलसी, अकर्मठ, काहिल, हड़ताली से,

सी लें जबान, चुपचाप काम पर जायें,

हम यहाँ रक्त, वे घर में स्वेद बहायें।

हम दें उस को विजय, हमें तुम बल दो,

दो शस्त्र और अपना संकल्प अटल दो।

हों खड़े लोग कटिबद्ध वहाँ यदि घर में,

है कौन हमें जीते जो यहाँ समर में ?

हो जहाँ कहीं भी अनय, उसे रोको रे !

जो करें पाप शशि-सूर्य, उन्हें टोको रे !

जा कहो, पुण्य यदि बढ़ा नहीं शासन में,

या आग सुलगती रही प्रजा के मन में;

तामस बढ़ता यदि गया ढकेल प्रभा को,

निर्बन्ध पन्थ यदि मिला नहीं प्रतिभा को,

रिपु नहीं, यही अन्याय हमें मारेगा,

अपने घर में ही फिर स्वदेश हारेगा ?

Dvija - Rescuing Varna from Jaati

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 2.5 India License.

Thoughts continued from these previous posts.

1. India - A civilizationial state

2. Parashuraama - Metaphor bridging Varna and Caste system

3. Few thoughts on Varnashrama Dharma

4. Engineered language of Sanskrit

My Priya Bandhujan,

Upanishad Ganga has begun churning minds. Here is a snapshot of this ongoing manthana in my mind after watching the episode of Chanakya and Varna-Vyavastha. More than the episode itself, this bharatvaakya of the episode had a lasting impact.

जन्मना जायते शूद्रः. संस्कारात् द्विजं उच्यते |

वेद-पाठात् भवेत् विप्रः ब्रह्म जानाति ब्राह्मणः| स्कंदपुराण ६.२३९.३१

Everyone is Shudra by birth. With Sanskaras (the system of 16 sanskaras in dharma) makes a person "Dvija". Mastering Vedas (knowledge) makes one "Vipra". One becomes a "Brahmana" as he attains "Brahma-Jnana".

applying modern context - 

Everyone is Shudra by birth. After enrolling in school (Upanayana sanskara) and graduation (Samaavartana) one becomes Dvija (twice born). After becoming a "master" of a particular stream of knowledge, one becomes a "Vipra". And after attaining "Brahma-Jnaana" one becomes Brahmana.

If one looks at most of the Smriti verses dealing with "dharmaarthik" theories pertaining to Purushaartha-trayi (Dharma-artha-kaama i.e. politics and economy, jurisprudence, personal lifestyle), the most frequent term used is "Dvija". 

Dvija is one who has initiated his formal education in an institution which is recognized by sociopolity of given space and time. Initiation of education is marked by Upanayana Sanskaara (admission to primary school in modern context) and Samaavartana sanskaara (graduation - HSC OR Bachelor's degree). All scriptures are unanimous at giving these two sanskaras to three varnas. In modern context, we have amended it to include all 4 Varnas (a welcome decision). 

In days of current dharma-shaastra (constitution of India and Hindu civil code suite), all those who have completed formal education up to at the least HSC and at the most Bachelor's level is a "Dvija". 

As far as Brahmanas are concerned, well, that is subjective. But all know such Brahmanas in and around our lives and times. That is "Adhyatmika" aspect and falls outside the scope of my capability and experience. Hence I respectfully tiptoe and desist speaking about it, until I have credible "Pratyaksha Pramaana".

Those who choose to specialize and become authorities in a particular field of knowledge (PhD, Post-Doctoral researcher, associate/assistant/ full professor, having published the fruits of his/her deliberations in a peer-reviewed platform) can be called as a "Vipra" (vip + ra - vaguely translated as praiseworthy brightness). In all these, categories, a person is expected to live on donations by parents, society, King and Vaishyas. And even in modern times, these guys do live off the donations (we call is grants). Ironically, the fact that most of our "vipras" now a days are busy applying for grants here and there, instead of spreading their luminescence (research), shows that this system too has begun its decline and will shed and evolve into something else shortly. 

In none of the above categories, does (rather SHOULD) one really care about "Jaati". One beautiful sentence from TV series Upanishad ganga - 

जो सत्य कह सके, सत्य सून सके, सत्य धारण कर सके, श्रेष्ठ ज्ञान का अधिकारी वही होता है   One who can speak truth, listen to truth, bear the truth, only he can attained greater knowledge.

This actually gives us platform to serially dismantle this distorted system. Jaati-System is here to stay. One has to dissociate the word "brahmana" from various jaatis like "Muhiyal", "Bhumihar", "Chitpavan", "Deshastha", "Vaidiki", "Niyogi", "Iyer", "Aiyangar", "Namboothiri" so on and so forth. All these are merely "jaatis" and should have no right to place the word "Brahmana" after them, unless they really follow the "dharma of brahmana varna". Of course, thanks to Britishers  the words Brahmana and Kshatriya are perhaps tainted permanently, we may need to find a new word which imply the meaning depicted in the opening Shloka of this post.

Varnashrama functions on ratio of Varnas in society. With onslaught of Saif-ud-Deen (sword of faith), this ratio was disturbed. The specialized Kshatriya classes of India either fell fighting OR migrated after defeat OR converted to newer faith OR retained their way of life by compromising on their Dharma and living to see next day. Same applies for other specialized classes, one of which is Brahmana Varna.

Looking logically, none of these responses are illogical and condemnable. All of us have had ancestors who compromised on Dharma and lived on (hence we exist) and some other ancestors who chose one of the other three options. 

The word "compromise" elicits a strong emotion, so does the word "selfish". But are these really "bad" words? What would one call of a "Jaati-dhaari Brahmin" (not varna), who took decisions which resulted in great troubles for some people of lower castes in his vicinity, but also preserved a rare manuscript(s) at the cost of his life, his property and even his honor from predatory hands of invader? What about those Veda-shaalas who kept the oral tradition of vedas alive, by gulping up the resources from local vaishya OR king instead of helping farmers in famine, probably by threatening him of religious excommunication and at times blackmailing the traders OR at times even legitimizing the deeds of a "Muslim ruler" committed against his fellow Hindu bretheren?

There are many such complex points in history where choices of individuals arose out of the "cost-benefit ratio" calculations being played out in his mind and he taking the decision based on his understanding of this equation and grasp over situation. In fact, this entire domain of history wherein the flame of Dharma was kept burning (at least the memory and resources required to resurrect it when time is ripe) at "ALL COSTS" is full of such instances. Hence it makes it difficult to categorize them as "good" or "bad".

Dharma sustained due to these so called compromisers. Dharma also sustained due to so called "Aakramana-Kaari". There is space-time for "compromise" and there is space-time for "Aakramana". Those who keep on compromising (or advocate doing so) in space and time of "Aakramana" are real Dhimmis. Those who advocate Aakramana in space and time of "compromising" are real "Martyrs". And both "Dhimmis" and "Martyrs" are necessary as "examples" so that the message of Dharma is delivered and wheel of Dharma starts rotating (Dharma Chakra Pravartana).

The moral of the story is, we need to dismantle this distorted understanding of varna and "brahmin" and need to rebuild the cadre by drawing and training individuals from wide spectrum of Jaatis. May be a new word, but the connection between Jaati and Brahmin should and will severe.

Purva-Paksha analysis of Islam using Tarkashastra of Saankhya-Yoga

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 2.5 India License.

I have previously written three essays on similar topic. I would request gentle readers to go through them before you read on this essay.

1. Memetics and Islam

2. Brief story of Islamic Socio-political power structure and its expansion

3. Islam and Communism - Comparing the fundamentals

Offering my Pranaama to Mahakaala, I now begin this essay. In essay no. 2 cited above, I arrived at a conclusion quoted below.

The power-structure in Islam is inherently linked with the nature and Chitta-Vritti of Prophet Muhammad himself. Belief in Allah is not enough to ensure the place in heaven. One has to depend upon Muhammad's favours and his influence on god to go to heaven. Thus, Muhammad made himself more powerful than Allah. Thus, in Islam for all practical purposes, Muhammad, the Rasool, is supremely powerful figure. This is as perfect and complete as it can get. Muhammad will only talk to Allah about you if you were a true Muslim. 

But who determines who the true-Muslim is and who is not, herein lies the real crux of the issue. A Qazi or a Mullah controls the social matters and ascertains the "report-card" of spiritual progress of ordinary Abdul. And sad part is ordinary Abdul in India can't even think of rebelling because if he does, he will be branded as "enemy of Islam" by power-establishment and will bring "Islam in danger". 

Islam, when initiated, introduced sort of standardization of ideas in otherwise free-thinking and dispersed Arabs. Standardization perhaps helped in efficient survival where resources are scarce and cost of living in terms of energy is high. Civilizations like India where resources are abundant and cost of living in terms of energy is ridiculously low, are better off being free-thinking and non-standardized. Violent suppression of critical faculties lead to conflict between free-thinkers (Indic people) and standardised products (Muslims in general and those from Deobandi and Wahabi schools in particular).

Re-reading above analysis it seems that the Wahabi/Deobandi groups are like regression in the progression of Islam. Study of history from this perspective, seems to give out a signal of future decay/demise when fundamentalists/conservatives take over as it halts the progress or linear march of a movement. But is this movement of Wahabandi (Wahabi+Deobandi) groups to the center-stage really a regression?

My attempt at Purva-Paksha of Islam from Point of view of Saankhya-Yoga epistemology. 

I have numbered the "Purva-Paksha Sutras" and "Teeka (commentary)" follows. For those who are not aware of Indian Tarka-Shaastra OR dialectics, please follow this wiki link.

1. Any meme which wishes to survive beyond era of its inception has to have an infallible core.

2. Muslims are caught between "drive to live/evolve/excel" and "drive to be righteous (according to book)".

In Dharmik system, these two drives are not at loggerheads with each other. In fact, in Dharmik systems, we have separate "shastras" to deal with both these drives. (Artha and Dharma respectively. I am not even bothering to use the word Moksha and Adhyatma for Islam). The inherent "separateness" of these two Purusharthas (They are linked and move in parallel, not completely severed like in Secularism) makes it difficult for a dharmik to comprehend the nature and magnitude of churning which goes on in Muslim mind. Unlike Dharma, Deen and Daulat cannot be separated in Islam (as in all abrahmic faiths). 

3. In Islam, their "infallible" (Qur'an and hadith) is almost a universal set. Shruti, which is Indic infallible core, is not.

Furthermore, Shruti is a work of thousands of seers, criticized and peer-reviewed by thousands of other seers, all this process being extended over thousands of years of continuous composition, has enough material which can very effortlessly sustain and hold together vastly contradictory ideas and memes. There is plenty of "digestion time" spent in the process. Something which did not happen and is impossible to happen in one man's life-time (no matter how talented he is). Even if we see Islam as continuity of Judaic tradition extending over millennium and half prior to birth of Muhammad, it still does not pass the crucial criteria of "rigorous peer review" by multiple composers. This peer-review is missing in Judaic tradition.

4. In Saankhya-Yoga, there are at the least three acceptable "Pramaanas" - Pratyaksha (direct experience/observation), Anumaana (logical inference/interpretation from observed data) and Shabda (word in literature). 

While examining Shruti, a Dhaarmik is expected to give importance to Pratyaksha Pramaana, but here "pratyaksha", means direct experience. Then comes Anumaana and then one has to test what Shruti (Shabda) has to say about a question.

There are no tools OR permissions to "examine" Deen, per se. But if one wishes to do so, one is supposed to give primary importance to Shabda (words written in good book). Second is Anumaana (various Firqas and sects and their interpretation of the infallible core) and last is Pratyaksha (the qalandars, sufis, who are detested by all good muslims who believe in supremacy of "Shabda-Praamanya" (word in Qur'an)).  

So, when this conflict between drive to live and drive to be righteous arises, a Muslim who has understood the "essence" of dharma simply deletes (in his mind) those parts of "Deen" which comes in way of his "drive to live/evolve/excel". This is what we call as "Swadharma" in Sanskrit - the drive which made us utter "Tamaso Maa Jyotir gamaya". 

For most muslims, Deen being infallible is beyond question - they follow orders/interpretations of Mullah in matters of religion. Those who do question these interpretations, are caught in dilemma - Whether to give primary importance to Pratyaksha pramaana and have courage to delete those ideas in Deen which do not conform with one's "Anubhava" OR to give primary importance to "Shabda praamanya" as Mullah and Deen recommends.

5. Dharmik individuals give importance to Pratyaksha Pramana and then Anumaana while testing the efficacy of Shabda.

Rest who cannot muster courage to test Deen with their experience and rely on Shabda (for which they have to depend upon a mullah who understands Arabic) have to undergo one further test. The qualitative difference in "shabda" (the infallible core) as discussed in commentary of sutra 3, is to be applied here. When testing efficacy of Shabda alone, Dharmikness of individual depends upon dharmikness of Shabda under consideration. Shruti is inherently "Dharmik" in character due to its limited scope and robustness in accommodating multiplicity of opinions in that narrow scope of human experience. Deen, on the other hand, is monopolistic with universal scope covering entire spectrum of human experience and hence Aasurik.

6. How to prioritize Anumaana pramaana (various interpertations) is the next test.

Wahabis are those Muslims who eliminate this second Pramana as well (to highest extent) and rely only and solely on "Shabda Pramaana". No interpretations, only to take literal meaning, and one gets what the shabda really means and wishes to say. 

From Deen's perspective, those giving primary importance to Pratyaksha Pramanas are Kafirs 1.0. Later, once these are removed, those relying on Anumaana Pramaana (which is subjective and determined by demographic factors in given "desha") are kafirs 2.0. This is a the crunch situation when expansion-based sociopolity of Deen cannot be continued. What remains thereafter, is utopia of true believers.  

Thus the phenomenon of Wahabism taking center-stage is in fact progression and not regression when we view Deen from Saankhya point of view. Wahabism a logical conclusion to Deen.

Phalashruti - Vast majority of Muslims in Indian subcontinent are like stones lying in Ganga river. For millennia, they have been surrounded by Dharma and Dhaarmiks just like water surrounds these pebbles all the time. Yet when we break these pebbles, we see that the core is still dry. Similarly this sense of Dharma has not percolated in Indian Muslims. They have remained "dry" in spite of being in water.

One look at the typical Sufi argument:

This argument is typically put forth by those who are either genuine travelers of Tasawwuf OR are Islamists hiding under Sufi garb. 

Here's an interesting ayat, often quoted by Sufis which goes somewhat near to Indic concept of Pramaana. Qur'an 17:36 

"And do not pursue that of which you have no knowledge. Indeed, the hearing, the sight and the core of the heart - about all those [one] will be questioned."

The Ibn Katheer commentary mentions that the order of pramanas here is significant - hearing, sight, and core of the heart. Therefore the sufi will proceed accordingly. However, "popular theologians" for the masses always emphasize on "faith over reason". In Islam, this is by far the predominant view, since it is a cult engineered for social control and mobilization.

So even among most Sufis who take a view of pramanas that is somewhat like Indic philosophy, their orientation is such that it ultimately reinforces doctrinal affiliation and communal identification over other human dynamics. We see this a lot with many Indic people who pursue their spiritual effort within the context of a particular school or maTha. They ultimately come around to affirming their maTha. But because of the long and variegated traditions that are woven to make up Indic traditions, a stable context is available in which these statements can be evaluated neutrally - i.e. separate from group-identifications. But Islam lacks that.

Ibn Katheer in fact corroborates what I said above. Relying on what one hears (shabda from Qur'an) is more important than one's pratyaksha anubhava in "core of your heart". Popular theologians, too basically say the same thing  - To rely on Shabda (Qur'an). 

This again underlines the natural progression of Islamic society towards Wahabism.