Bhavyansh Mathur, University of Delhi
‘’Almighty god! What a profound thought and glorious idea it is that the subtle apprehendors of truth, whose bright minds are like the breath of morning , and who are keen sighted students of schedules of creation and drawers of diagrams on the tablet of wisdom and perception, have not, with exception speech which is but a vagrant breeze and fluctuating gale found in the combination of a the elements or in material form, everything so sublime , or a jewel so rare that it come not with the mould of price, that reasons balance cannot weigh it that language’s measure cannot contain it, and that it be beyond the scale of thought ; and yet, how should it be otherwise? Without help of speech, the inner world’s capital could not be built, nor this evil outer world civilisation to be conceived.’’[1]
Allah Akbar
Allah Akbar (Arabic- Allahu Akbar), God is very great. This
expression is called takbir- the magnifying- and is often used at commencement
of undertakings. Abul Fazl uses this at the beginning of the Akbarnama and also
Ain-I akbari. Blochmann has argued that the word Allah Akbar is ambiguous; they
may mean the ‘God is Great’ or ‘Akbar is God. There is no doubt that Akbar was
fond of this phrase particularly for its ambiguity; for it was used on coins,
imperial seals and headings of books and farmans. Badaoni writes in his
Tawarikh-i- Akbari-
“It was during this days (AH.983=1575-6 ) That his majesty once
asked people how would they like if he ordered the word Allah Akbar be
inscribed on coins and farmans, most said that people would like it very much
but Haji Ibrahim objected and said, that the phrase had an ambiguous meaning
and it could be replaced with Koran verse- Lazikaru Allahi Akbaru- to think
of god as the greatest thing- because it involved no ambiguity. But
His majesty got displeased and said that it was surely sufficient that no man
who felt his weakness would claim divinity; he merely looked to the sounds of
the words. There could have been a problem while translating the term khwud
mu’aiyan thus instead of the term sufficient, self-evident could have been
used’’.
Akbar though argues that the aim was not to put out such an
interpretation but this ambiguity which occurs as a result of manasabat (coincidence)
helped Akbar in cementing a legitimacy cult. What is clearly visible from
Fazl’s account is that the holy manifestations of Akbar toom place before his
birth, he writes-
“A man of experience knows that many years must elapse before a
ruby develop in the embryonic sac of the mine and arrive at a maturity, so as
to be fit for royal diadem. It is incomprehensible to imagine as to what time
does it take for such a messiah to arrive(?) How could all the intellect that
God has to run the world be summed up in a human entity, in order to separate
inner and outer worlds. In this regard the god bestowed upon his blessings on
her Majesty Alanqua, who would conceive in her a world illuminating light,
which is the interpretation of anthromorphic sun called shamsa-i- peshtaq.
The shamsa of arch of royalty is a divine light which god transfers to
kings without the assistance of men. We can trace back this expression- shamsa-i-
peshtaq or shamsa- i-shahstaq to ancient Persian tradition of
akasdiya or Gynaeccum Regium of Palace at Isaphan[2].
It is believed that the continuous usage of sun could point to the its Buddhist
or Christian influence largely due to the mystique birth of Jesus Christ from
womb of ‘Virgin’ Mother Mary. The reference is also made as to how God appeared
in dreams of his Majesty Jahanbani Jannat- ashiyani Humayun –
“A sleep which tore the veil from before the eyes of the soul,
Cannot be called a sleep; it was heart awakening”[3]
Fazl gives a vivid account of as to how the divine light was
disseminating even through the eyebrows of Marriyam- Makani and it illuminated
the dark regions of thought, opinion and lighted up the fields with’ Glory of
Justice’ and even entered the bosom of Khan Azam Mirza who was to be Akbar’s
nurse-
“Fortune is what comes to our bosom without trouble”[4]
The accession of Akbar has been portrayed as beginning of a new
era- illahi and the world assumed splendour from the
justice-illuminating sovereignty of this nursling of divine light and
terrestrials uttered rejoicing with the tongue of speech and ecstasy and the
world received a new lustre. In words of Fazl-
“The visible and invisible kingdoms harmonised and heaped radiance
upon radiance”
Cult of personality has been a common phenomenon in historic past
what here I would like to emphasize upon is the continuation of the model of
tolerance that was surrounded around an individual personality- particularly
Emperor. If we peep into Timurid tradition, we find the principle of Yasa-i-
Chingezi which continued to exist from the period of Chingez Khan. According to
Allauddin’Ata Juwaini , the yasa – I – chingezi required the ruler to consider
all the sects equal. The Timurid tradition undoubtedly provides a demarcation
from the from post- Abassids Turkish Sultanates- where the persecution of so-
called heretics was prominent. All contemporary sources-Indian and foreign
courtiers and travellers are unanimous in their assessment of Akbar’s
personality as being magnetic- “He could be easily recognised even in first
glance as a king[5]”.
Jahangir saw in his father- “the glory of god manifesting in itself”[6].
The sparkle in Akbar’s eyes not only attracted the attention of poets like
Faizi and Kahi, but drew from Monserrate the remark that his eyes are so bright
that they seem like sea shimmering in sunlight. His voice was stentorian but
with a peculiar richness[7] .Behind
this attractive exterior burned an awesome and restless soul eager to unravel
mysteries of nature. It was his manners and elegance which saved him from
assassination for his religious heterodoxy[8].
When we go through the reading of primary sources where there is an elaborate
mention of Akbar’s conversation with Abul Fazl, we find the omnipresence of
conflict of personality and with time this tafriqa multiplied. Ironically it is
with internal disunion he went out to integrate Indian religions. Thus, the
self of psychology is historically and socially conditioned[9].
An analysis of psycho- historical forces, can considerably help us in
identifying factors that conditioned the thought and determined complexion of
Akbar’s personality- the innate contradictions and intricacies. In Faizi’s
words-
“Though his face stemmed so simple and plain, his eyes gave an impression of kaleidoscopic variations inside him”[10]
Fazl looks upon Akbar as a divinely inspired leader of men whose
religious behaviour deserved to be respected and emulated. Badauni considered
him an apostate whose religious whimsicalities called for condemnation and
spite. The judgement of Akbar’s personality revolves around these two extreme
positions with various theories been propounded on his religious attitudes – he
has been called a Parsi, a Jain, a Christian, an atheist, agnostic and sceptic.
Thus, Akbar never gave control over his inmost sentiments.
We have already discussed in our introductory part regarding the
divine light that was recomprehended by Abul Fazl who made an attempt to adhere
to the Chagtiyad tradition of Alanqawa and ancestral connections with Chengiz
Khan. There are six distinct traits of Mongol character and tradition
discernible in thought and personality of Akbar-
1.
Faith in
supreme power controlling human destiny and actions
2.
Belief in Sun
as source of life
3.
Conviction that
spiritual and temporal authority should be combined as in person of Alanqawa.
4.
Aversion
towards discrimination in human dealings.
5.
Sometimes
reference is made to epileptic fits of Akbar similar to that of Chengiz
6. The duodenary cycle of animal protection prescribed in Akbarnama had a a Mongolian background.
Intellectual Background
Contemporary chronicles help us to deduce Akbar’s academic interest and his deeply inquisitive nature, his knowledge of Persian Sufi or mystic tradition such as Ghazzali, Sanai, Auhadi and Rumi. He had knowledge of Geometry, arithmetic, mensuration and had a poetic sensibility. He keenly initiated the study of Sanskrit but there is no mention of Arabic which makes it peculiar source of controversy. His ingenuity of mind and unusual aptitude for mechanical art attracted the attention of foreign visitors and he could be compared to Peter the Great in this aspect[11]. KA Nizami has vividly described his relation with the contemporary movements and their implication in fermenting an ideology such as Shattaris, Mahadavis- who believed in appearance of Mujahhid( reformer) who would remove the abuses and inject new life into Islam, Bhakti poets- such as Kabir who would reject of orthodox worship and sectarian divergences, the role of Irani poets such as Badakhshani, Kahi, Kasahani, Haravi and Nishapuri, who derided Islamic practices and launched attacks on the ulamas, the Hurufis who were a sect of agnostic and cabalistic tendencies, the Nuqtawis who countered accepted tenets of Islam through mystification, Roshaniyas who were a source of constant political trouble in the frontier region and Zikris who rejected basic tenets of Islam such as- Namaz, Zakat and hajj. The most prominent influence has been played by the Ikhawan-u’s- safa who rejected denominationalism and regarded religious sects as an expression of human deficiency and ignorance and even anticipated evolutionary concepts of Darwin[12].
Moreover, we also shall look for development of individual
personality of Akbar as constructed by the principles of society and polity.
The traditions of tolerance in Indian polity arguably cannot remain ignored by Akbar
tracing back to Brahmanabad declaration of Muhammad Bin Qasim-
“Do, therefore, permit them to build the temples of those they
worship”[13]
The sultanate was also secular in its character- Allaudin Khilji
and Muhammad Bin Tughluq had thrown all offices open to talent, irrespective of
caste, creed or colour. In provincial kingdoms of 15th century such
as Kashmir, role of Zain-ul- Abidin, also called Akbar of Kashmir cannot be
ignored-ban on cow slaughter, Arabic translation of Mahabharata, abolition of
cremation tax and Jaziya, patronage for study of Gita, Puranas and Upanishadas,
thus in terms of Abul Fazl they were ‘precursors of unity and integration’
although the credit was never originally given to them by Fazl. Thus, we here
can make a strong argument regarding continuity of the secular traditions under
Akbar.
In the early years of Akbar, we have documented evidence of him
being a deeply religious, he performed his duties meticulously- offered prayers
for 5 times, cleaned mosque and sometimes even gave a call for prayer at azan.
This excessive interest in and expression of religiosity was bound to be
challenged soon which could have resulted in a turbulent reaction. Ibadat Khana
was devised out of the need felt by Akbar during his Gujarat campaign to
resolve the disputes between Muslim community through dialogue and discussion.
In terms of Shaikh Mubarak, he had to fill in the void of the spiritual and
moral guide of the Muslim community. The discontentment with the ulamas
regarding their stubbornness and lack of ideas led to Akbar’s disillusionment with
the Muslim leadership and subsequently the proceddings of Ibadat Khana were
opened for other religious sects as well. By 1578 Akbar was well versed with
knowledge about Indian religions, particularly Jainism and Buddhism and this is
evident in form of his spiritual experiences, the Qamargha episode has clear
Jain and Bhira incident a Buddhist influence. The event has been highly
mystified by Fazl as if Akbar had met some mysterious spirits ( rijal-i-ghaib)
but we cannot ignore one more dimension of the episode that it may have been an
epileptic fit which had constantly appeared.[14]
The execution of Brahman on insistence of Abdun Nabi and Akbar’s reaction to
it, which was corresponding to his personality i.e. disarrayed, but surely the
cracks in Akbar’s belief were now visible on surface. Moreover, the debates at
Ibadat Khana posed one more difficulty for Akbar as there were variety of
opinions, one example elaborated by Fazl is on the question of number of muqta
(legal) marriages(?). Akbar subsequent decisions would be path breaking. He in
June 1579, decided to read Khutba in Mosque and lead congregational prayer.
What was the intention is ambiguous, as Nizamuddin Bakshi argues that this
might have been attempt on part of Akbar to emulate traditions of Pious
Caliphs, the Abassids and the Timurids particularly, Timur and Ulugh Beg[15].
He stammered while reading the Khutba which led to a public reaction and
aroused suspicion about his loyalty towards Islam.
The cult of personality on which Fazl had worked extensively was
consolidated by Mahzarnama which was drafted by Shaikh Mubarak and signed by
‘great ulamas’. Fazl has summarised the document in the best possible way-
“..said that if the rank of Ijtihad which is lower than the dignity
of a pure soul (nafs-i- qudsi) be a dispeller of the darkness, a wise sovereign
shall by choice institutions become the pacifier of disturbed hearts- The
medicine suitable to address the king by the style of ijtihad and then to
represent to him the confusion of religions and creeds to beg him to untie the
knot[16]’’
Apart from declaring that the rank of a Sultan-i- adil (just king)
is greater than the rank of Mujtahid (interpreter of Islamic law), the mazhar
lays down both appellate and the original powers of Akbar. The criticism had to
come from the orthodox elements but according to Imam Shafi’I Mazhar remained a
legitimate document which was not against the hadith or nas. The debate whether
it was a symbol of Akbar’s complete renunciation of Islam or was it his attempt
to portray himself as a good musalman(?). Though anachronistically
placed, this observation makes it clear that when Akbar gave up visiting the shrines,
he did it out of conviction not due to any heavy preoccupation. This was
natural as he was himself on the way to become a religious leader and surely it
was below his dignity to accept anyone as superior to himself. The visit to the
shrines continued on behalf of the emperor as they were a method to connect
with common population. IN 1579 Akbar got rid of Abdun Nabi and Makhdum’ul
Mulkand sent them to hajj.
Moreover, he made an attempt to broaden his scope of sovereignity
as being a mujhatid would only allow him to interpret Islamic laws, his polity
was moving from limited Indo- Islamic character to a broader polity based on
being a spiritual leader of men and women of all religion. Religion ceased to
be an area of intellectual inquiry and became an instrument for realisation of
his political ambitions[17].
In 1582 formal debates on religion stopped in Ibadat Khana and Din-i-illahi was
promulgated. In 1584 Illahi era began which not only marked an ideological and
structural process of drifting away from Islam but its consolidated Akbar’s
cult.
Tauhid-i-Allahi or Din-i- Illahi
Abul Fazl introduced Akbar as the spiritual guide of the people, he
who had no choice but to reveal himself. The earlier phase of concealment which
has been described by Fazl was necessary to complete Akbar’s claim to
prophethood as Prophets are born, not made. In contrast to the eulogising
opinion. Nizami argues that Din-i- illahi had no metaphysical or even ethical
foundations. It was haphazard agglomeration of certain rituals whimsically
visualised and pompously demonstrated. Von Boer totally demolishes its
foundations as a creed when he observes that Din-i-illahi was merely a
political fraternity that aimed to create a consolidated nobility loyal to the
emperor. It can be contested that the use of religious medium for realisation
of political objectives might have weakened secular institutions. Sunday was
fixed for initiation of disciples to the fold of new religion, because on that
day ‘the world illuminating the sun was believed to be in high splendour’. The
religion manifested in itself the idea of nurturing the cult of Akbar, the task
on which Fazl had worked relentlessly. The emperor gave the new entrant a shast
upon which the term Allah-o Akbar was engraved. Shast could be seen as
symbolically similar to sacred thread of Hindus and Zoroastrians. Every entrant
had to surrender property, life, religion and honour to the founder of the
faith i.e. Akbar. The practice of sijda (prostration) was introduced which not
an innovation rather continuation of Sassanid traditions. Prostration combined
with deification shocked public and aroused suspicion, but it was all part of
the personality cult that arguably Akbar had designed for himself. The new
illahi era was introduced on 10 March 1584, the move was considered as an
attempt to degrade hijri era.
Now the question that arises is that who were the entrants in the
new religion? Major chunk of people attracted by Akbar’s experiment were the
freelancers such as- Jogis, qalandars, downtrodden people who believed in Akbar
magical ability as a healer of disease, as a rain maker but we shall avoid to
overestimates these beliefs as acceptance of Akbar as propounder of ‘New
faith’. But Akbar failed considerably in attracting Hindu and Muslim elite to
Din-i-illahi apart from his chelas[18].
Akbar, who had relentlessly criticised conventional religions was now portrayed
by Fazl as man of miracles whose breath cured eye aliment, thus was
stabilisation of new religion based on miracles. He was now not merely a
reformer but a prophet himself-
“There is no god but God and Akbar
are Allah’s Khalifa”
Thus, the argument that the state ceased to be secular remains
particularly strong as the artificial aura of religious authority eroded all
such dimensions. To take up views of the liberal historians , the history of
medieval India from the advent of Turks to the establishment of Mughal Empire
is surveyed as being secular where religious views remained strictly personal
and the state ran on zawabit (state laws). But under Akbar what we have seen
was an Indianized form of inter-relationship between church and state. Akbar
was so conscious about his persona that if any incident seemed to lower his
dignity in any way, Akbar diverted public attention by performing some dramatic
act. The Bhira incident was probably an epileptic fit which was given entirely
different colour by distribution of charity, shaving of head, construction of
building etc. Akbar relished the idea of bestowing upon himself with the divine
attributes, God in human form if God not himself. He went beyond the conception
of presenting rulers as shadow of god on earth (for ex. Balban’s theory of
Kingship) to being God on Earth. Akbar had realised the magnitude of hold od
religion on human mind, Akbar thought that that access to conscience of people
would help consolidation of his political authority. For this purpose, a
universal religion was required which would imbibe the features of different
communities, create an ambiguity which would henceforth require an interpreter
or central figure and the emperor would assume that position.
There have been instances of Akbar’s anti -Islamic feelings and the
claims have been made by Badaouni and Sirhindi that Akbar had adopted
repressive attitudes towards practitioners of Islam discouraging namaz and
closing down mosques and khanqas. These claims have been contested by A. Ali
but here through reference of this example I would like to argue that Akbar’s
aspiration to be accepted as the ruler of all religions was a driving factor
behind these actions. He had realised that a great sense of affinity and
attraction was to be provided to Hindus and this could be done through dilution
of Muslim complexion and character of the government by a calculated policy of
distance. The result was almost constructing Akbar’s cult as reincarnation of
Krishna[19].
While analysing the grant of madad ma’ash department we can
conclude that Akbar wanted to create a class of religious people beholden to
him personally and closer to him ideologically. Furthermore, he decided to
broaden the base of these grants and bestow them to Hindus, Parsis, Jainas and
others, most prominent of them being Jogis of Jakhbar.
The policy of Tauhid-i-illahi was buttressed with the idea of
Suhl-i-kuhl i.e. Universal peace and brotherhood. But the set of policies
initiated by Akbar couldn’t keep up for long and the reversal would come under
the reign of Jahangir, whose accession has been defined by Sirhindi as ‘ceasing
of withering of flowers’ and restoration of piousness on the throne. The
reaction to Akbar’s policy had to be hostile and this is manifested by Badaoni
and Sirhindi’s critical commentary and the religio-political development Post-
Akbar period are inexplicable without reference to Akbar’s religious
experiment. The analysis of post Akbar period would surely set up an exciting
example of subtle psychological conflict between sentiments of family devotion
and loyalty to the religion. Akbar undoubtedly was the glory of the Mughal dynasty;
his religious experiments were anathematic to Islam and a sort of embarrassment
to his successors. The tools used by the Akbar to consolidate his political
authority would be reversed by his successors, particularly Shahjahan, who
would be called as Badshah-a-din-panah (Protector of the religion). Under
Aurangzeb the experiments of Akbar would be challenged and the term
Allah-o-Akbar was banned on farmans.
The paper has tried to analyse the policy of creation of cult of
personality under Akbar. The experiments of Akbar in such a creation were based
exclusively in a religious premise. Thus, we have carefully analysed the
literary work of Abul Fazl and Akbar’s religious policy from this emerges a
major debate whether the secular traditions of Indian polity were compromised
for such an experimentation? Was this the initiation of integrating polity with
religion whose tremors could be felt even in the contemporary Indian history
and from where there has been no turning back in Indian history? These questions
remain open to interpretations.
[1]
Abul Fazl translated by Beveridge, Akbarnama Vol.1 pg1-2
[2]
Hydo , Quintus Curitus(eds), Religions of Ancient Persians, chap.7. III
[3]
A.Fazl, Akbarnama, pg.29
[4]
Ibid, pg.113
[6]
Tuzuk -i- Jahangiri,pg.14
[7]
Ibid, pg.14
[8]
JS Hoyland, Commentary of Father Monserrate, OUP, 1922,,pg 196-199
[9]
R.MacDoughal, “The Social Basis of Individuality”, American Journal of
Sociology, Vol 18,pg.12
[10]
Kulliyat-i-Faizi, pg.274
[11]
VA Smith, The Great Mogul, pg.337
[12]
L.E. Goodman, The case of the Animals versus Man before the King of Jinn, pg.43
[13]
Chachnama,(t) Frendunbeg, pg.166
[14]
KA Nizami, Akbar and his religion,
pg.129
[15] A.Fazl, Akbarnama,
Vol 3, pg.271
[16]
Ibid pg.333
[18]
KA Nizami, Akbar and his religion, pg. 148-149
[19]
Allahopanishad
Post a Comment