What a common Muslim thinks of ISIS Terror?

        Paris attack last week (November 13, 2015) came as a shocker for the Muslims of India, who are already living under watching eyes of their friends and neighbors for their ‘inherent qualities’ of eating beef, ‘love jihad’, ‘intolerant and violent nature’, ‘keeping more than one wife’ and ‘breeding like pigs—which ultimately led to increase in their population growth percentage which is more than that of Hindus’. This attack has further added suspicion and has created a trust deficit among the communities. Many groups organized silent marches in support of Paris all over the country the same day. Everyone was almost more than ready to condemn the barbaric attack in whatever capacity and manner they could have done. Whereas some others, while standing with Parisians in this hour of grief, also questioned the selective pain for Paris as other cities in Lebanon, Iraq and Turkey also suffered such attacks within 36 hours of Paris attack. While all these activities were going on in public spaces, I wanted to understand the common Muslims’ perspective: what they discuss in tea shops, at barber’s place while waiting for their turn for a hairdo or after disassembling from a formal meeting for a protest against the attack. My methodology was just listening to these people without intervening into the discussion so that I may not, unnecessarily, inject my understanding of the events.  Here is what I gathered from the discussions:

1.    Creation of Dayesh (ISIS)

Photo: The Guardian

The so-called Arab Spring was actively supported by the West and French, the former colonial masters of the region were more than active in it. The way the ISIS fighters, as their propaganda videos show, run their tanks and possess all the military skills of handling sophisticated weapons and the weapon itself say it loudly that these fighters have been trained by the West intelligence or the defense departments. The West funded and fuelled the rebels of Syria and Iraq with weapons and training to overthrow the Asad regime, who in turn sought help from Shia fighters. This multiplied the problems of the region and neither the Asad regime was toppled nor the rebels remained in the hands of the West. It is a problem with the West that when they do not find a regime of their choice they seek a violent regime change, especially in the Middle East (read Muslim countries). In Egypt, first they toppled the Mubarak regime and elections were held, what happened then?, Muslim Brotherhood came into power, Morsi (an elected President), who represented nativists and orthodox Muslims was again toppled to suit the West. Morsi could have again created Suez Canal crisis for Britain and France like Iran did with the oil fields contracts after the Islamic Revolution. Osama Bin Laden, Saddam Husein and the Taliban all were creations of Cold War, where their strategy was to invoke the name of religion and jihad to fight their war as foot soldiers.

2.          The Arab Spring could have been dealt with differently: Rise of Arab Spring was hailed by one and all, but nobody was ready to pay any heed to the danger of the rightist political groups such as Banna inspired Muslim Brotherhood. If the people were not happy with their respective governments, they must have been left to protest peacefully, they must have been given moral support. UN must have kept a watch on the situation and it should have taken actions if required, but rebels must not have been armed to match the might of their governments. These groups did not get time to mature their movements, the unparalleled armament and money left them unbridled. They started advancing their own personal ambitions. After all, Burma is on the verge of becoming a democratic country and all these happened with peaceful protests and demands of the people of Burma without any active support from foreign powers. It took time, but this transition would be relatively peaceful. They have some problems, but they have a tradition of mass mobilization and people’s intervention, they will handle these peacefully. What be the need of providing monetary and strategic help to the rebels? They do it for the values of democracy? Why states like North Korea, China, and Saudi Arabia are not visible to them? Why don’t they fund and encourage people from these countries to throw their oppressive regimes? 

                

3.        What ISIS wants :  ISIS is either a group of mindless youths, who have no knowledge of basics of Islam or the reincarnation of the ‘kharjites’ (khariji, a group emerged during the last days of pious caliphates, who were responsible for bringing down the pious caliphate and inciting different violent movements within Islam, killing a number of friends and relatives of the Prophet), who are mindlessly killing innocent people to satisfy their hunger for power in the Levant or beyond that. They bear no morality prescribed in Islam, have no faith in Kaba, they talk of destroying it as for them to revering it is idolatrous. They don’t believe in injunctions of even Quran, where it has been prescribed in bold letters that no innocent person be killed and such killing is like the murder of all humanity. But certainly they have their political motive behind all their barbaric acts. With their act of terror: butchering innocent people in front of public and on camera, killing people in their suicide attacks and enslaving and killing of women and children is well-planned policy. They want to heat the grounds for Muslims who are living their lives peacefully all over the world. These acts of theirs with all kind of propaganda are to make Muslims suspicious in the eyes of their friends and neighbors. It is their strategy to make the Muslims insecure in their own homes. So that they are persecuted everywhere and they have no alternative but to leave their peaceful lives. They want all the Muslims to be pushed towards terrorism. ISIS has a very dangerous plan to destabilize the peaceful existence of the Muslims all over the world.   

4.       Refugees: The people fleeing from the war-torn regions have become a problem for the Europe and now after the Paris carnage, the debate of admitting or not admitting the refugees into their territories has become very harsh. While a number of people are standing in their support but the voices against giving refuge to such a huge number has become very loud and a section of the Europeans are against allowing Muslim refugees since they think that these Muslims are a threat to their national security. Indian Muslims are of opinion that the fleeing from their war-torn region is not the solution. It is their duty to fight and struggle into their own countries. If they live and struggle only then they will reach to a solution. Fleeing from their homes is not the solution at all because they are facing much more problems than they could have faced while remaining and struggling for their rights. How can you expect Europe to help you when other nearby Muslim countries like Saudi Arabia, UAE, Quwait and other Middle East countries are not ready to give refuge to you? The people of Syria, Iraq and other affected region should help each other in the time of crisis rather than seeking help from outside world. The organizations/people you are battling with wants you to become refugees and with these tactics only they have become so powerful. Give them a befitting reply by not leaving your home.

It was quite interesting to know the opinion of common Muslims of an international crisis, nearly all of them blamed the West for the present crisis, but at the same time they had a piece of advice for the people of the war-torn zone to resist the terror of ISIS and their likes. People were very much critical of Saudi Arabia and the Arab world, which have not only been hostile to the victims of the crisis but also been a part of the problem itself. ISIS, for them, is not only a problem for the world but they are particularly the greatest danger for the Muslims.

Read More

Persian Literary Culture in Mughal India (in Hindi)

मुग़ल काल में फारसी साहित्य-संस्कृति *

मुग़लों की भाषा मुख्य रूप से फारसी नहीं थी जिसका ठीक ठाक आंकलन इस बात से भी किया जा सकता है कि बाबर ने अपना स्मृति-ग्रंथ, बाबरनामा  तुर्की में लिखा। राजकुमार बाबर का तुर्की भाषा के कवियों  तथा लेखकों  में अली शेर नवायी (मृ.1526) के बाद सबसे महत्वपूर्ण नाम था। उसके पुत्र तथा उत्तराधिकारी हमायू की मातृभाषा तुर्की ही थी। उसके दरबार में तुर्की कविता को खूब सराहा जाता था। हमायूं जब ईरान से हिंदुस्तान लौटा तो उसके साथ आया बैरम खान भी तुर्की का नामी कवि था। जब गूलबदन बेगम ने हमायूनामा की रचना फारसी में की तो यह बोलचाल वाली कामचलाऊ फारसी थी। हमयूनामा की संपादक तथा अनुवादक एनि एस बेवेरिज का मानना है कि इस ग्रंथ की रचना तुर्की में की गई होगी फिर इसे फ़ारसी में रूपांतरित किया गया होगा। इस समय की अन्य रचनाएँ ठीक इसी प्रकार की सामान्य फ़ारसी में ही लिखी गईं थीं। फिर मुग़लों के समय खासकर अकबर के समय से फ़ारसी साहित्य का इतना बोल बाला कैसे हुआ? मुग़लों के फ़ारसी को दिये गए परश्रय का आखिर कारण क्या था? इस प्रश्न के उत्तर में सहज ही यह कहा जा सकता है कि मुग़लों से पहले ही सल्तनत काल में फ़ारसी ने सारे हिंदुस्तान में अपनी पैठ सरकारी भाषा के रूप में बना ली थी और मुग़लों के पास इसका कोई विकल्प नहीं था। जैसा कि हाफ़िज़ शिराज़ी (मृ.1389) ने अपने एक शेर के माध्यम से कहा है कि हिंदुस्तान में बंगाल तक फ़ारसी एक जन-संपर्क भाषा बन चुकी है। 13वीं-14वीं शताब्दी मसूद साद सलमान, ज़ियाउद्दीन नख्शबी अमीर खुसरो तथा अमीर हसन सीजज़ी जैसे फ़ारसी के विद्वान के लिए जानी जाती है ।  परंतु थोड़ा ध्यान से अध्यन करने पर यह पता चलता है कि लोदी काल तक हिंदवी का प्रचार प्रसार अधिक तेज़ी से हुआ। यह तेज़ी खासकर, 15वीं शताब्दी के सूफ़ी संतों के लेखन तथा उनकी खांनकहों के पराश्रय के कारण संभव हो पाया। जहां पिछली शताब्दी में मुसलमान संभ्रात तथा धार्मिक वर्ग की भाषा फ़ारसी थी इस शताब्दी में हिंदवी ने यह स्थान ले लिया था। मुल्ला दाऊद की चंदायन तथा मालिक मुहम्मद जायसी का पद्मावत  के माध्यम से हिंदुस्तानी लोक कथा तथा हिंदवी को इस्लामी रहस्यवाद को समझाने के लिए चुनना एक प्रकार से हिंदवी कि बढ़ती लोकप्रियता का संकेत है। लोदी सुल्तानों ने सरकारी दस्तावेज़ों में फ़ारसी के साथ साथ हिंदवी को भी जगह दी। यही बात शेर शाह के समय के दस्तावेज़ों से भी ज्ञात होती है। सूर राजतंत्र अपने दस्तावेज़ों में देवनागरी लीपी का प्रयोग करने लगे थे। अफगानों के बहुत बड़े बड़े अमीर फ़ारसी नहीं बोल पाते थे। इस लिए यह कहना कि मुग़लों ने अफगानों से शासन के साथ साथ फ़ारसी भी विरासत में प्राप्त की थी थोड़ा अटपटा सा लगता है।

इबादत खाना में अकबर : (फोटो- स्टंडफोर्ड)  

फारसी और ईरान से मुग़लों का संबंध  

बाबर ने हिंदुस्तान आने से बहुत पहले ही समरकंद पर क़ब्ज़े तथा उज़्बेक नेता शयबानी खान से अपनी करारी हार का बदला लेने और उसके चंगुल से अपनी बड़ी बहन खानज़ादा  बेगम को रिहा कराने के लिए सफ़वी शाह ईस्माइल से मदद ली थी। सफ़वी शाह तथा बाबर का यह संबंध सामरिक गठबंधन मात्र नहीं था। बाबर ने इसके लिए वैचारिक रूप से एक बड़ी क़ीमत चुकाई थी। बाबर सफ़वी शाह इस्माइल का मुरीद बना था तथा उसके किज़िल्बाश मुरीदों की भांति लाल टोप (कुलाह) लगा कर समरकन्द में दाखिल हुआ था। जिसकी उस समय सून्नी उज़्बेकों ने बड़ी भर्त्स्ना की थी। कहने का तात्पर्य यह है कि बाबर तथा ईरान के शाह के बीच का संबंध सांस्कृतिक रूप कहीं महत्वपूर्ण साबित हुआ। शायद यही संबंध हूमायूं के, उसकी शेर शाह के हाथों हार के पश्चात काम आया। हूमायूं ने भी ईरान में शरण ली और अपने पिता के जैसे ही ‘लाल कुलाह’ धारण करने पर मजबूर हुआ और ईरान शाह की मदद से पुनः हिंदुस्तान में अपनी खोई सत्ता वापिस पाने में सफल हो पाया। हूमायूं के साथ बहुत से ईरानी सैनिक अधिकारियों के अलावा फारसी चित्रकार तथा साहित्य के ज्ञाता भी हिंदुस्तान आए। इन सब परिस्थितियों ने फारसी संस्कृति का हिंदुस्तान में पुनः विस्तार किया ।  अकबर ने इस ओर खास तौर से ध्यान दिया। 994 AH/1585-86 में हकीम हूमान (मशहूर हकीम अबुल फतह जिलनी का भाई) को तूरान व ईरान भेजा गया । उसका मिशन था वहाँ के लोगों का मुग़ल साम्राज्य से दोस्तना संबंध बनाना तथा वहाँ के साहित्यकारों की पहचान करना और उनको मुग़ल साम्राज्य में बसने का न्योता देना। 999 AH/1591 में फैज़ी के नेतृत्व में एक कमिटी का गठन किया गया जिसे ईरान में विद्वमंडली के ऊपर एक रिपोर्ट तैयार करनी थी। फैज़ी ने अपनी रिपोर्ट में चलापी बेग नामक एक विद्वान की प्रशंसा की तथा उसे हिंदुस्तान लाने के लिए अकबर से सिफ़ारिश की। अकबर ने इस प्रस्ताव पर तुरंत कारवाई करते हुए चलापी बेग को हिंदुस्तान आने का न्योता भेजा तथा एक ईरानी व्यापारी को चलापी बेग के हिंदुस्तान आने का बंदोबस्त करने के लिए फरमान जारी किया । चलापी बेग को हिंदुस्तान आने पर आगरा के राजकीय मदरसा का प्रधानाध्यापक बनाया गया। इसी साल मीर सदरुद्दीन मुहम्मद नक़ीब ने अकबर की सेवा स्वीकार्य करने की मंशा जतायी जिसके लिए अकबर ने एक ईरानी व्यापारी, ख़्वाजा चलापी कज़्वीनी को 100 ईरानी तुमान (ईरानी मुद्रा) देकर सदरुद्दीन की हिंदुस्तान यात्रा का प्रबंध करने का हुक्म जारी किया। साथ ही यह भी निर्देश दिया गया कि यदि इससे अधिक खर्च होता है तो ख़्वाजा चलापी या ईरान के किसी व्यापारी जो हिंदुस्तान से व्यापार करता हो से सदरुद्दीन पैसे ले सकते हैं।

          सम्राट अकबर की सक्रियता रंग लायी और ईरान के लेखक एवं कवियों की एक बड़ी तादाद हिंदुस्तान आई। कुछ तो अच्छे भविष्य तथा धन के लालच में तो कुछ सफ़वियों की सांप्रदायिक नीतियों के चलते मुग़ल हिंदुस्तान आए वहीं कुछ राजनैतिक उत्पीड़न के कारण। सफवी ईरान की कट्टर शिया धार्मिक नीती के मुक़ाबले अकबर का हिंदुस्तान कहीं सहनशील व सहिष्णु था जो ईरानी साहित्यकारों की आज़ाद सोंच के अधिक अनुकूल था। मीर शरीफ अमूली का हिंदुस्तान आगमन तथा उसके स्वागत को समकालीन इतिहासकर, अब्दुल क़ादिर बदायूनी ने हिंदुस्तान के माहौल का अत्यधिक सहिष्णु होना बताया है। दरअसल, शरीफ अमूली नुकतावी विचार को मानने वाला था, जो एक प्रकार से ईरानी ज्योतिषशास्त्रीय गणनाओं के आधार पर काल-चक्र में विश्वास रखते थे, उनके अनुसार ‘काल’ का अंतिम चक्र ईरानी सत्ता का समय होगा तथा जिसके लिए एक मसीहा अवतरित होगा। कुछ ग्रहों का एक साथ मिलना [conjugation] (जोकि उनके अनुसार 16वीं शताब्दी के अंत तक होना था) एक नए मसीहा के अवतार का समय होगा तथा वही समय इस्लाम के समाप्ती का भी होगा। ऐसे व्यक्ति का हिंदुस्तान आगमन तथा उसके राजकीय स्वागत से बदायूनी की चिंता को समझा जा सकता है। मुज़फ्फर आलम का मानना है कि केवल मुग़ल हिंदुस्तान का सहिष्णु वातावरण ही ऐसे विद्वानो के आगमन का कारण नहीं था बल्कि यह इस लिए भी था क्यूंकि अकबर हिंदुस्तान की दोबारा जीत को सुनिश्चित करने वाले ईरानी लोगों की मदद के ऋण को चुकाना चाहता था। साथ ही वो यह भी कहते हैं कि सफवीयों के अधीन ईरान बहुत ही कट्टर शिया धर्म को परश्रय दे रहा था तथा विरोध के स्वरों को दबाने में कोई कसर नहीं छोड़ी जा रही थी जबकि मुग़ल हिंदुस्तान किसी भी एक संप्रदाय का पक्षधर नहीं था। अकबर सुलह-ए- कुल की नीती के अंतर्गत सभी प्रकार के संप्रदायों के प्रति सहिष्णुता का वातावरण बनाने में सफल रहा था। जिससे ईरान के इन हालात में विरोधी विचारधारा रखने वाले लोगों के लिए मुग़ल भारत प्रकृतिक पनाहगाह बना हुआ था। वहीं अकबर जैसे आक्रामक एवं प्रतिस्पर्धी सम्राट के लिए ऐसी स्थिति का लाभ उठाना स्व्भविक ही था। अकबर इस बहाने अपने प्रभाव को ईरानी साम्राज्य के अंदर तक फैलाना चाहता था, जिससे मुग़लों पर सफवीयों के एहसान का जो प्रभाव था, कम हो। इस संबंध में, मुजफ्फर आलम ने सम्राट अकबर द्वारा अमीर अहमद काशी को लिखे गए एक पत्र का उल्लेख किया है जिसमें उक्त काशी से कहा गया है कि उसके द्वारा अकबर के आध्यात्मिक मार्गदर्शन को स्वीकार करना मुग़ल सम्राट के लिए बड़े हर्ष की बात है तथा भौगोलिक दूरी के बावजूद वह मुग़ल सम्राट के बहुत करीब है। साथ ही सादउद्दीन दरवेश खुसरो (नुक्तावियों के नेता) को कहा गया कि सम्राट उनके विचारों से प्रभावित है तथा उसे भी हिंदुस्तान आना चाहिए। अमीर अहमद काशी को यह भी  निर्देश दिया गया कि वह सम्राट को वहाँ के हालात से पत्र के माध्यम से अवगत करता रहे ।                  

          मुज़फ्फर आलम परिस्थिति का आंकलन बिलकुल सटीक कर रहे है, अकबर की सफ़वियों से प्रतिस्पर्धा जग-ज़ाहिर है परंतु मोइन अज़फ़र अपनी पुस्तक, मिलेनियल सोवेरैन्स: सैक्रैड किंगशिप एंड सैंटहूड़ इन इस्लाम  में इस घटनाक्रम को दूसरे तरीके से देखते हैं। उनका मानना है कि अकबर उन फारसी विद्वानों को प्रश्रय देता है जो उसके स्वयम के मसीहा होने के दावे का प्रत्यक्ष या परोक्ष रूप से समर्थन कर रहे थे। अकबर ने भी इस्लामी सहस्राब्दी (millennium) को इस्लाम के काल का समापन माना तथा कई प्रकार के आडंबर तथा दरबारी संस्कृति का निर्माण किया जिससे उसके मुजद्दीद या महदी या फिर मसीहा होने का दावा साबित हो सके। इस क्रम में वह न केवल इस्लामी दुनिया के मुजद्दीद या महदी होने की चेष्टा की बल्कि कई वैष्णव संस्कृत ग्रन्थों के फारसी अनुवाद के माध्यम से हिंदुओं के लिए भी अवतार होने का परोक्ष दावा किया। महाभारत के फारसी अनुवाद, रज़्मनामा  में जिस प्रकार से अकबर के गुणों को दर्शाया गया है उससे कुछ ऐसा ही प्रतीत होता है।       

राजकीय भाषा के रूप में फारसी

मुग़ल भारत तथा सफवी ईरान के संबंध भले ही प्रतिस्पर्त्धा भरे रहे हों परंतु सम्राट अकबर द्वारा फारसी विद्वानों को दिये जाने वाले परश्रय ने अपना रंग दिखाया। और ईरान के विद्वानों में यह बात कहावत स्वरूप कही जाने लगी कि ‘ईरान में परिपूर्णता प्राप्त करने के साधन नहीं हैं, मेहंदी तो हिंदुस्तान आने के बाद ही रंग लाती है”।

          मुग़ल दरबार में पहली फारसी रचना बाबर रचित बाबरनामा का तुर्की से फारसी अनुवाद था। अब्दुल रहीम खान खाना ने यह काम अंजाम दिया। वहीं गुलबदन बेगम रचित हमयुनामा बोलचाल वाली फारसी भाषा में लिखा गया। तज़किरा ए हुमायूँ व अकबर  और तजकिरात उल वाकियात, जिसके लेखक क्रमशः बायजीद ब्यात व जौहर आफ़ताबची, किसी तरह बोलचाल वाली फारसी से अधिक अच्छी फारसी नहीं लिख पाये। अकबर अपने समय के इतिहास कि रचना फारसी में करवाना चाहता था, परिणामस्वरूप, तारीख ए अलफ़ी  तथा अकबरनामा  जैसे अलंकरित ग्रंथ की रचना हुई, जो फारसी लेखन के लिए आने वाली कई पीढ़ियों तक उदाहरण बना रहा। यह दोनों ग्रंथ इस मायने में भी महत्वपूर्ण है कि इन ग्रन्थों ने लेखन कला तथा आने वाले लेखकों के लिए एक मापदण्ड तय कर दिया।

          अकबर के बारे में कहा जाता है कि भले ही वह पढ़ लिख नहीं सकता था लेकिन उसे साहित्य में बहुत रुचि थी। वह स्वयम हिन्दी तथा फारसी में कविता कर सकता था। नक़ीब खान जो पुस्तकें सम्राट को सुनाता था उनमें सबसे अधिक फारसी ग्रंथ ही होते थे। अर्थात अकबर को फारसी साहित्य की अच्छी समझ थी। अकबर के समय से ही मुग़लों के दरबार में मालिक उस शुरा (कवियों का राजा) का पद सृजित हुआ था। यह पद मुख्य रूप से फारसी विद्वानों खासकर इरानियों द्वारा सुसज्जित रहा। फयज़ी एक मात्र हिंदुस्तानी अपवाद फारसी शायर थे जिसे मालिक उस शुरा की पदवी प्राप्त हुई थी । शाहजहाँ तक के मुग़ल काल में मुख्य रूप से ग़ज़ाली, मशादी, हुसैन सनाई, तालिब अमूली, कलीम काशानी तथा कुदसी मेश्हदी मालिक उस शुरा रहे जो सब के सब ईरानी थे।       

            सबसे बड़ा बदलाव उस समय आया जब मुग़ल सम्राट अकबर ने क्षेत्रीय स्तर पर फारसी को सरकारी काम काज की भाषा घोषित कर दी। अब तक राजस्व संबन्धित निचले स्तर के कार्यालयों में पुराने रीति के अनुसार सारा कार्य हिन्दी में होता था। टोडर मल, अकबर के राजस्व मंत्री ने इस संबंध में अधिसूचना जारी की। राजा टोडर मल ने इस संबंध में नए गूर/कानून ईरानी नविसंदगान  (कलर्क) से सीखे। बहुत सारे नए ईरानी कर्मचारियों को राजस्व संबन्धित दफ्तरों में नौकरियाँ दी गईं। और इस प्रकार बहुत सारे हिंदु—खासकर खात्री  एवं कायस्थ को नई व्यवस्था में रोजगार पाने के लिए फारसी सीखना मजबूरी हो गई। जिसके लिए वे मकतबों/ मदरसों में दाखिल होने लगे। सम्राट ने मकताबों, मदरसों में उपयुक्त पाठ्यक्रम पढ़ाये जाने का इंतेजाम करवाया ताकि प्रशाशन उपयोगी कर्मचारियों को प्रशिक्षण दिया जा सके। मीर फतह उल्लाह शिराजी के नेतृत्व में मदरसों में तार्किक अध्यन को बढ़ावा दिया जाना सर्वविदित है। खत्री एवं कायस्थ छात्रों को ध्यान में रखते हुए, प्राथमिक स्तर पर शब्दों की बनावट पर अधिक धायन दिया जाता था न कि वर्णमाला सीखने पर जैसा कि परंपरा थी। साथ ही कुछ  नैतिक कहावतें एवं छंद याद कराये जाते थे जिससे फारसी भाषा के साथ साथ उसके नैतिक मूल्य भी छत्रों में अंतर्निविष्ट हो सके। उन्हें इन मदरसों में अखलाक (नीतिशास्त्र), हिसाब (गणित), सीयाक़ (अंकगणित), फलात (कृषि), मसाहात (माप), ज्यामिती, ज्योतिषशास्त्र, आकृतिविज्ञान, तदबीर ए मंज़िल (गृह-अर्थशास्त्र?/गृह-विज्ञान), सियासत ए मुदुन (सरकारी नियम), चिकित्सा, तर्कविधा, रियाज़ी (गणित) तथा अभौतिक विज्ञान (metaphysical sciences) इत्यादि की शिक्षा दी जाती थी। जबकि माध्यमिक शिक्षा में छात्रों को फारसी के जाने माने विद्वानों की कृतियाँ पढ़ाई जाती थी, जैसे—शेख सादी की गुलिस्ताँ  और बोस्ताँ , नासीरुद्दीन तूसी की अखलाक ए नासीरी, जलालूद्दीन दव्वानी की अखलाक ए जलाली, मुल्ला हुसैन वाइज़ अल काशीफ़ी की अखलाक ए मुहसिन। साथ ही, इतिहास में हबीब उस सियार, रौजत उस साफा, तारीख ए गुजीदा और जफरनमा पढ़ाया जाता था बाद में अबुल फज़ल कृत अकबरनामा  तथा इनशा इस पाठ्यक्रम का प्रमुख हिस्सा बन गया । माध्यमिक स्तर की शिक्षा के बाद छात्र सरकारी सेवाओं के लिए तैयार हो जाते थे अतः वे अपनी शिक्षा इस स्तर पर छोड़ कर किसी सरकारी दफ्तर में कार्यरत हो जाते थे।           

            उच्च शिक्षा की ओर जाने वाले छात्र वे होते थे जिन्हें मुंशी (सचिव) बनना होता था। जिसके लिए वे विभिन्न फारसी आदाब एवं अखलाक साहित्य का आध्यन करना पड़ता था। हरकरन दास कमबोह रचित इनशा ए हरकरन  तथा चन्द्रभान ब्राहमन द्वारा अपने पुत्र तेजभान को लिखे पत्र में सैकड़ों पुस्तकों का उल्लेख किया है जिससे पता चलता है कि इनशा की पढ़ाई करने वाले विद्यार्थियों को विभिन्न दर्शन में महारत हासिल होती थी। उल्लेख करने योग तथ्य यह है कि फारसी को निचले स्तर के कार्यलयों तक लागू करने के कारण छोटे स्तर के मुग़ल क्रमचरियों जैसे, मुहरीर, बीतीकची, कानूनगो, पटवारी तथा मुतसद्दीयों को फारसी सीखनी पड़ी और परिणामस्वरूप फारसी भाषा तथा साहित्य के रूप में निचले पायदान तक पहुँच गई। यह प्रक्रिया कालांतर में नए वर्गों को जन्म दे गई, कायस्थ, मुंशी तथा कानूनगो जैसे सामाजिक वर्गों का उदय इसी प्रक्रिया का परिणाम है।

          एक प्रकार से देखा जाए तो फारसी भाषा दिल्ली सल्तनत के समय से ही ‘आदेश की भाषा’ से कहीं अधिक थी। सादुद्दीन मुहम्मद औफ़ी (मृ 1252), अमीर खुसरो तथा हसन सीजज़ी जैसे फारसी के विद्वान सल्तनत काल को कहीं समृद्ध बनाते हैं। साथ ही, सूफियों के 14-15वीं शताब्दी में लिखे गए विभिन्न ग्रंथ फारसी को राजकीय दरबार से बाहर भी लोकप्रिय होने का प्रमाण देते हैं। ध्यान देने योग्य बात यह है कि इनमें से कई ऐसे विद्वान ऐसे थे जो क्षेत्रीय भाषाओं में भी अपने विचार कलमबद्ध किए हैं। हालांकि, फारसी राजकीय भाषा के रूप में दिल्ली सल्तनत से ले कर ईस्ट इंडिया कंपनी तक के काल में बनी रही, जिससे पता चलता है कि फारसी से अधिक उपयुक्त राजकीय भाषा और कोई नहीं हो सकती थी। दिल्ली सल्तनत के समय में फारसी को इस्लाम पूर्व ईरानी शाशकों से जोड़ कर देखा जाता था, जिनको तुर्क आदर्श शाशक मानते थे तथा उनकी नक़ल अपने राज्यों में करते थे। बलबन द्वारा राजदरबारीय कर्मकांडों में जो बदलाओ लाये गए थे वे सर्वविदित हैं। तो ऐसे सासानियों की राज संस्कृति तथा भाषा का अपनाना स्व्भविक ही था। अफ़गान सत्ता के समय जो द्विभाषीय कागजात निर्गत किये गए उनमें मात्र देवनागरी लिपि का प्रयोग हुआ है न की भाषा का। और फिर सिकंदर लोदी के समय मदरसों में हिंदुओं को भी फारसी सिखायी जा रही थी ताकि वे अफ़गानो के शाशन का हिस्सा बन सकें। इसलिए यह कहा जा सकता है कि मुग़लों की उपलब्धि फारसी भाषा को निचले पायदान तक पहुंचाना मात्र थी। और वह भी इसलिए कि प्रशासन के काम काज में एकरूपता लायी जा सके। साथ यह भी कहा जा सकता है कि फारसी मुग़लों को भी रास आ रही थी क्यूंकी मुग़ल, खासकर सम्राट अकबर, नसीरुद्दीन तूसी के विचारों से प्रभावित था जिसके अनुसार (अखलाक ए नासिरी ) पादशाह एक विद्वान-पादशाह होना चाहिय जिसकी सोंच किसी संप्रदाय तक सीमित नहीं होनी चाहिए। जो धर्म के प्रति पक्षपात नहीं रखता हो। मुग़ल अपनी ‘आदेश की भाषा’ को सभी प्रकार के पक्षपात से दूर रखना चाहते थे। एक ऐसी भाषा चाहते थे जो हर प्रकार के दर्शन को अपने में समेटे हो। जिसमें धर्म विशेष के लिए किसी प्रकार का पक्षपात न हो। इसी लिए फारसी के पाठ्यक्रम में प्राथमिक स्तर से ही कुछ नैतिक छंदों को याद करवाया जाता था, जिससे कि प्रारम्भ से ही फारसी की गैर-पक्षपातपूर्ण मूल्यों का निर्माण विद्यार्थियों में हो सके। फारसी के उपयोग से शिक्षा का झुकाओ माकूलात (तर्क) की ओर हुआ। फलस्वरूप कालांतर में विभिन्न वास्तुकला के नायाब उदाहरणो का निर्माण संभव हो पाया।

          संक्षेप में कहा जा सकता है कि मुग़लों ने फारसी का चुनाव अन्य विकल्प के होते हुए भी पहले प्रशासनिक सुविधा के लिए किया जबकि बाद में यह भाषा उनके राजकीय नीती तथा राजत्व के सिद्धान्त के अनुसार सबसे उपयुक्त भाषा होने कारण। मुग़लों ने संस्कृत का विकल्प इस लिए नहीं चुना क्यूंकी यह एक ‘देव भाषा’ थी तथा मुग़लों द्वारा इसका प्रयोग हिंदुओं के लिए दुखदायी हो सकता था जबकि प्राकृत ‘पाताल भाषा’ थी, मुग़ल इस भाषा का प्रयोग कर स्वयं को नीचा नहीं दिखाना चाहते थे। भाखा (भाषा) अर्थात, हिन्दी-हिंदवी एक क्षेत्रीय अपभ्रंश मात्र थी, इसका प्रयोग साम्राज्य के लिए नहीं किया जा सकता था, साथ ही मुग़ल ब्रज को संगीत की भाषा मानते थे। मुग़लों ने संस्कृत तथा ब्रज भाषाओं को भी पराश्रय दिया जिसका प्रमाण है कि मुग़लों को संस्कृत न आने के बावजूद वे संस्कृत प्रशास्तियों के श्रोता बने रहे। उदाहरणस्वरूप, जैन मुनि शांतिचन्द्र द्वारा रचित कृपारसकोश  अकबर को संबोधित करता हुआ एक ‘प्रशास्ति इतिहास’ तथा कश्मीर में रचित असफविलास  जहाँगीर के वज़ीर असफजहां के सम्मान में लिखा गया संस्कृत ग्रंथ प्रस्तुत किया जा सकता है । ब्रज एवं हिंदवी/हिन्दी के अनेक विद्वान अकबर के अनुवाद कार्यक्रम से जुड़े हुए थे। जिनमें अबदूर रहीम खान ए खानां (रहीमन) का नाम प्रमुख रूप से लिया जाता है। इसके अलावा भी कुछ क्षेत्रीय राजाओं/ अमीरों ने ब्रज में मुग़ल सम्राटों के लिए प्रशास्तियां लिखी, जैसे, केसवदास द्वारा रचित जहाँगीरजसचन्द्रचंद्रिका जहाँगीर के सम्मान में लिखी गई। कहने का तात्पर्य यह है कि मुग़ल हर उस कला, साहित्य तथा सांस्कृतिक रीती रिवाजों को बढ़ावा देते थे जिससे उनके राजत्व को उच्च दर्जा मिल पाये। फारसी या फिर अन्य भाषाओं को पराश्रय भी इन्हीं कारणों से दिया जाता था।      

(typographical errors may kindly be ignored) 

-------------

    * दिल्ली विश्वविधालय के इतिहास (प्रतिष्ठा) तृतीय वर्ष के छत्रों के लिए

Read More

Sufi visions of Lord Rama and Krishna

In a discussion with one of my senior colleagues on growing intolerance between Hindus and Muslims recently, it was almost a consensus concluding point that this has begun since the Emperor Aurangzeb seated himself on Mughal throne.  It was agreed that Emperors Akbar, Jahangir and Shahjahan had engaged themselves in interacting culturally with the Hindus. Arguments of patronage to different shrines, Hindu sciences, Sanskrit and Hindavi were surfaced. Though, I pointed out Shahjahan’s orthodox attitude and his demolition of Bundela temple but that was swept under the carpet since he was a romantic person and had a sense for aesthetics. It was Aurangzeb who did all wrongs and divided the Hindus and the Muslims. I don’t know why, I felt uncomfortable with the opinion. First of all, Akbar’s idea of tolerance was not monolithic and had shades and phases into it. Mughals were very much a believer in the ideas of Hellenistic philosophical ideals of kingship (as represented by Akhlaq-i Nasiri and Akhlaq-i Humayuni), which required them to be a philosopher king, who had to create harmony and cooperation among his subject communities (ta'aif). As recent researches show, Akbar believed himself to be the Promised Messiah (Mehdi) not only for Muslims but he considered himself to be ‘final embodiment of King Manu’ (as explained in Razmnama, the Persian translation of Mahabharata) and an incarnation of god Rama. However, at times Akbar too used intolerant languages against idolatry and the 'kafirs' and how one can forget his butchering of common masses during the battle of Chittor (1567-8).

Lord Rama killing Ravana: Persian Ramayana

               We have evidences that Aurangzeb too had good relations with several akharas of Saivites in Punjab, Banaras and Bihar. He advised his sons to take care of the Rajputs since they are valiant and loyal supporters of the house. However, no one can deny the bigotry and orthodox attitude of Aurangzeb, his some of the orders unprecedented in the history of the Mughals, of excluding Hindus from madad-i ma‘ash grants. But at the same time the grants of Saivites of Jangambari and Bodh Gaya were allowed after the very period.  If we see political history of the time, it appears that it was a period of suffocation for the Hindus. Did this period really draw a thick line between the two communities? Then how one should interpret the event narrated by Bernier? He says that one of his Muslim servants killed a peacock for consumption and a local Hindu reported the matter to the shihna of the locality (Bengal). Killer of the peacock was arrested and was reminded of the rule of the Mughals that killing a peacock since Hindus consider it to be holy is a crime. Bernier argued with the shihna that Islam does allow eating a peacock, but the officer did not pay any heed to him since the crime was of hurting the sentiments of a Hindu neighbor.  How should one see the administration of Aurangzeb? Seeing the bigotry of the emperor that Muslim shihna should have acted like an orthodox Muslim and released the accused since it is no sin to eat peacock in Islamic sharia?

Silver Medallion of Jahāngīr depicting Ram and Sita [1610 AD]

 Let us now see away from the power circle of the time. The domains of sufis and bhaktas, though not completely free from the politics, can be explored for having an idea of the Hindu-Muslim relations during late seventeen and early eighteenth century. It is an Islamic belief that no land has been left without a prophet of Allah and Lords Rama, Krishna and Buddha were Prophets of India. It would be proper to note here that when Mohammad bin Qasim occupied Sindh, the Umayyad caliphate recognized Hindus as ahl-e kitab (the people of  the book) considering the four Vedas to be the divine books like Quran.  Mrigawati, Padmavat and Madhumalti based on the Hindu folklores taught nuances of Sufic love not only in khanqahs of different sufis, but Muslim theologians also quoted verses from these texts from the pulpits of the mosque, exclusively meant for the Muslim audience.  Abdul Wahid Bilgrami (Haqaiq-i Hindi) sees Prophet Muhammad in Lord Krishna; gopis are the angels to him; Braj and Gokul his ‘alam (the world); while the Yamuna and the Ganga rivers are the sea of wahidiyat (unity). Abdur Rahman Chishti, writing in the mid-seventeenth century, says that he read most of the Hindu history books written in the era of the ‘jinns’ (used for devatas) but he did not find mention of Adam anywhere. Finally, he found malfuzat (collection of table talk of a sufi/prophet) of Bashisht (Rishi Vashisht) where he found mention of Mahadev, rasul-i mursal (greatest prophet), who was the Abu’l jinn (the progenitor or Adam). (Here I have left most known characters like Syed Ibrahim Raskhan)

               With this kind of religious understanding of earlier centuries let us now move to the next century, i.e. the eighteenth century. Abdur Razzaq Banswi (spiritual master of Mullah Nizamuddin of Dars-i Nizami fame) had two Bairagi friends, Chait Ram, and Paras Ram. Banswi used to attend the dance-drama party of Krishna bhakti. Once, while in a similar party to celebrate the appointment of the successor of Chait Ram at his place Banswi fell into trance. Banswi claimed that Lord Krishna was present there. After the play was over, Banswi retired to rest. Some of the chelas then asked their bairagi guru, if they too could have the vision of the Lord. The guru replied that the person who just has left, if wishes, can you have the Lord’s darshan. The chelas then approached Banswi, who managed them a vision of the Lord. Even theologians like Mullah Nizamuddin was blessed by his pir to see  Lord Krishna and the gopis. Mulla Nizamuddin, his brother Mulla Muhammad Raz, and their nephew Mulla Kamaluddin saw the Lord in their way from Lucknow to Bansa. Initially, the mullahs mistook Lord Krishna and his gopis for an ordinary man and his womenfolk. But as they approached near the Lord, who said: Convey my salam to your pir. In another case Banswi had a vision of Lord Rama and Lakshman in a jungle of Deccan when he lost his way; it was Lord Rama and his brother, who showed him the way since Banswi was from Lord’s “Own Lachhnau”. (Shahjahanpuri, Muhammad Khan, Malfuz-i Razzaqi and Manaqib-i Razzaqiya of Mullah Nizamuddin Farangimahalli)

It is highly unlikely that Banswi’s vision of Lord Krishna and Rama was a personal spiritual experience. These visions were the tools used for communicating his world view to his disciples as well as to a wider audience of Awadh region. The sufi functioned within the inclusive spiritual geography of the region and was like any other spiritual gosain guru, who acted on the stage of spirituality.  It seems even during the eighteenth century, even though the political landscape appears divided, the contact-cooperation between the two communities were intact. It seems the divide permeated into the masses from above at a later stage.  I propose to see this in changing notions of ‘proprietary rights’ and processes of individualization.   

Read More

Bringing up a Terrorist?

The flashing news of Talha Almas, 17 of being the youngest Briton suicide bomber in Syria gave shivers to me. His photographs in IS (Islamic State) black dress with a smile on his face and IS flag in the background was saying something louder. His calm face was really disturbing as if it was saying that the boy was very much convinced of the ‘sacrifice’ he was going to make for his religion. It is really difficult to say how he got himself dehumanized in such a way that he was happily ready to kill himself with several others. The family and neighborhood of the boy in Dewsbury, UK were shocked. They were only saying that they had no idea that a simpleton like Almas could become a suicide bomber. The family was of view that Almas must have been ‘radicalized’ online. Almas is not alone, a number of youngsters from Britain reported to have joined IS. It would not be a surprise, if we hear of some more cases like this.

Pic: dailystar.com

To tackle radicalization of Muslim youths, the British government has taken several policy level decisions. They have started several de-radicalization programmes and MI5 (the British intelligence) has come out with a report on radicalization. But these are ‘classified’ activities of the British security agencies. General public in UK or elsewhere tries to dig into the upbringings of a Muslim child. They start questioning the family for radicalizing young minds. BBC Radio Asian network today asked a question to its listeners: Does radicalisation start with the family? The responses were mix, but a majority of them considered family to be responsible for the radicalization of their child. This reminded me of a debate followed by the Boston bombings two years ago (April 2013). The discussion revolved around how the bomber-brothers got radicalized. Newsmen were discussing how Tamerlane had changed radically during his last visit to his native town in North Caucuses (Russia). During an interview with his aunt it was asked whether he had started going to mosques. It appeared from the discussion that the accused used to visit local mosque and a change was noticed by his father and his aunt on his last visit to North Caucuses six months ago and it was understood that the guy was actually radicalized in US itself. It also appeared that the family of the man was not religious at all and they seldom visit a mosque. Though, it is not difficult to understand the situation of ethnic Chechans in North Caucuses (Russia), which is passing through a clash between the separatists and the Russian Federation. However, what troubled me is that how the West understands the process of ‘radicalization’ of a person. If someone is a practicing his religion, going to churches or a temple or for that matter a mosque, how can it be understood that the person is being ‘radicalized’ to become a terrorist? I understand this could be one of the processes. But when we cast a glance at the cases of terrorism and their executers, we can easily see a trend that most of them are those who did not study Islam at their primary level (they did not read Quran and have no basic knowledge about their religion), which was a mandatory atleast, in South Asia.

  A child begins his/her education in a traditional Muslim household with bismillah-khwani (reading of bismillah), which is administered by an elder in the family or an imam of a nearby mosque who also takes care of basic education in the maktab attached to the mosque. In my family like others of my village, every child attended a maktab attached to the local mosque, where we learnt reading Arabic (basically, Quran), reading and writing Urdu, Persian and Hindi and did basics of mathematics (jama, ghatao, zarab &  taqseem). Interestingly, while learning Urdu, we were instructed into basics of Islam, which included Islamic history and a blend of basic dos and don’ts of Islamic way of life. We had a series of Urdu books called Urdu ki Pehli (First book of Urdu), Urdu ki Doosri (Second Book of Urdu), Urdu ki Teesri (third book of Urdu), Urdu ki Chauthi (Fourth book of Urdu) and Urdu ki Panchvi (Fifth Book of Urdu). I remember a couple of stories from the series through which I think, one can peep into the content of the syllabus:

The story begins with a header: ‘One should honor his guest whether he is a Muslim or not’

    Prophet Mohammad always emphasized on giving respects to the visiting guests. Once a group of Jews visited the Prophet, since the number of guests was large and he had limited resources, he asked his sahabi (companions) to distribute one person each among themselves and honor them in fitting manners. One of them was known for his mischievous activities, therefore none from among the companions of the Prophet agreed to host him and he stayed with the Prophet himself. The Prophet got prepared all kinds of good food for the guest. A well-known mischief like him ate all the food and did not think of other people whose guest he was! The prophet did not say him anything and made his bed for his comfortable stay.  After such an over-eating, he fell ill and he kept running to the toilet whole night. By the dawn, he even soiled the bed and left home without informing anyone, when the Prophet came looking for him, he did not find his guest. He enquired about the guest but no one had any clue about him. The companions of the Prophet could not bear the insult inflicted on the Prophet of Allah and started fuming at the Jew, the Prophet of Allah said, ‘do not say anything to the man, he was my guest and it is my duty to be respectful to him’. The Prophet then started washing the bed-sheet with his own hand. In the meantime, the Jew came back to take his jewel studded sword, which he had left in the room and he saw that Prophet Muhammad is washing his clothes which he had soiled with his feces. Seeing this he felt ashamed and offered his apologies to the Prophet.

Now the narrator of the story says, dear children! Be alert! Always take care of your guest by offering him good food, with your gentle smile and good behavior, it doesn’t matter if he is a non-Muslim, he is equally honorable and your duties towards your guests are the same.      

The story is from the first book (Urdu ki Pehli), which means the student has just learned how to read Urdu therefore, the story is small and uses very simple words which can easily be read by a beginner. However, the text becomes richer with every step and it can be found in subsequent books of the series.

I remember one more story which was perhaps from a higher volume of the series. The story belongs to the Hijra era of the Prophet, it is like this:

It is said that there was only one well in Medina, which was the property of a Jew, who used to sell its water. The Prophet considered water among God’s bounties to His creatures and it should not be bought or sold, therefore, he asked the Jew to sell his well, known as Bir Ruma to the Muslims. The Jew demanded a very hefty price, which Muslims were unable to pay. Then the Prophet asked him to sell half of his possession and the deal got struck at a very inflated price. Uthman b Affan paid the price and Muslims became owner of half of the well. It was agreed that the Muslims and the Jew shall draw water every alternate day. On the day reserved for Muslims, general public, Muslims as well as Jews used to store water for the next day. Hence, the demand for his (Jew’s) water completely ceased. The Jew, now, requested the prophet to purchase his share of the well too and the Muslims, after paying some more money dedicated it for the use of general public, Muslims as well as Jews. This way the Prophet allowed the creature of God to enjoy His bounty for free. Dear children, the Prophet not only belong to the Muslims, he is rahmat ul lil aalamin (grace for the worlds); he belongs to the entire creature.   

This story, in fact, is taken from Muslim Sharif, the Hadith (Traditions of the Prophet), which is a source of Islamic history. I found this very recently while writing a paper on waqf.  In the above stories, the young minds are being taught coexistence not on the basis of fictional stories rather the compiler of the texts uses history of the Islamic past, which no one can deny, particularly the so called ‘revivalists’ or the orthodox, those who are called radicals like salafis or wahabis.  The education of maktab can provide a Muslim child with substantial knowledge of Islamic history giving them a necessary knowledge-backup to decide what is right for them and what is politically motivated and they will not become canon-fodder to those who do their destructive identity politics. 

Read More

The question of Islam, ‘Islamists’ and Resistance in the backdrop of Nigerian Crisis

Islam is most often invoked for justifying acts of terror by certain political outfits drawing a picture as if they are the only ‘true’ followers of Islam and those who are against their acts of violence have abandoned their path. In fact, these groups for their goals try to create an atmosphere of terror, which ultimately help them in realising their goal. Most of these groups claim to be the revivalists. The present essay tries to question their idea of revivalism; to which Islam they try to restore; the one which was nourished by the Rashidun Caliphs or the one which Kharajites wanted or the one of Ummaiyyads or the Abbasids. This essay also seeks to show historically, that whatever the political Islam or the orthodoxy preached or expected from the umma, they always faced stiff resistance from an individual or a group from within the community. 

Abduction of Nigerian schoolgirls by Boko Haram and developments since then has shocked the world. World leaders have pledged to help the Nigerian government in locating and liberating them. Recently a tape was released by the Islamist terror outfit, Boko Haram which says that they might sell the girls in slave market. What is shocking is that they invoked names and symbols of religion for justifying their inhuman action. They said that the Western education is sin and the girls should get married as soon they turn twelve.

Since insurgency began, the Boko Haram has carried out attacks on schools, students and teachers in a bid to create a strict Islamic state in the Muslim north of Nigeria. Their targets are mostly schools imparting Western education, which they think is a hurdle in their aim of making the Nigerian north an Islamic state. The group leads a nativist movement based on tribal alignments and rivalries. The group has been responsible for several killings in the region including government officials, students, teachers and Muslim clerics who oppose their activities.  Similar Christian militant group, Niger Delta is active in oil rich Niger delta (Southern Nigeria) and demanding an independent South Nigeria. Clash between these two have claimed several lives in the past. Whatever their political movement means to achieve is not our concern, our concern is their way of realising their goals. 

Photo: thejournal.ie

Islamic God, whatever He had to say has already revealed in His Book, the Holy Quran and He is not in contact with any Boko Haram leader (as the recent video sent by their leader claims) and ordering him to stop people from going to schools or condemning the girls to death or slavery. Islamic politics (I would prefer, Arab politics of different shades), one may argue, have always been aggressive and this very aggression had led the Arabs successfully conquer regions upto Spain. But the voices of dissent from within the community (umma) have always been there against Arbo-Islamic politics.

The third Caliph, Othman (r.644-656) was murdered by a dissenting group. He was charged with favouring people of his own clan in political and government appointments. He was also blamed for not properly distributing the income from Swat region among the people of Medina. It was said that Othman’s rule was not according to the Quranic principle of governance and hence his murder/killing was justified and needed no revenge. This argument convinced Ali (d. 661) the fourth Caliph, who was raised to the post by these dissenting groups. Later on, Ali waged war against the Prophet’s youngest wife, Ayesha and captured her for her opposition to his elevation as Caliph. When Ali agreed to resolve the dispute between him and Muawiya by a treaty, he too was charged with incompetence and later murdered by a group of people known as Kharajites. All these political events made a large number of ordinary Muslims uneasy and though, they accepted Muawiya as the political authority; at the same time they rejected the religious leadership of Muawiya and his successors. Murders of Husayn and his associates at Karbala was a shattering event for the common Muslims. Frustrated commoners turned towards the people who preached love and advocated personal relations to God, the Sufis, who raised their voices individually. But with the dynastic and autocratic evolution of Caliphate these individuals started gaining influence among the masses. Mansur al Hallaj (858-922 CE) preached personal relations with God above any religious rituals; in doing so he said that the ultimate goal is to dissolve oneself into the presence of God. He used to say that, “If you do not recognize God, at least recognize His sign, I am the creative truth —Ana al-Haqq—, because through the truth, I am eternal truth.” He represented the stage of baqa of Sufism as propounded by Ali Hajveri. For Al Hallaj, "Love means to stand next to the Beloved, renouncing oneself entirely and transforming oneself in accordance to Him." (Massignon, 74) He spoke of God as his "Beloved", "Friend" "You," and felt that "his only self was God," to the point that he could not even remember his own name." (Mason, 26) His ideas were against the Caliphal state and for them it represented chaos against the order of God. Therefore, he was accused of heresy and after a trial of 11 years, he was executed. The martyrdom of Mansur al Hallaj was held in high esteem by the contemporary and near contemporary poets and sufis. Farid ud Din Attar (1145-1221 CE) says that when they were taking al Hallaj to court, a Sufi asked him, “Whati is love?” He answered, “You will see it today, tomorrow and the day after tomorrow." They killed him that day, burned him the next day and threw his ashes to the wind the day after that. "This is love," Attar says. His legs were cut off, he smiled and said, "I used to walk the earth with these legs, now there's only one step to heaven, cut that if you can." For Muslims, Al Hallaj, even today is a celebrated Martyr. His martyrdom is exemplary for spiritual masters as well as common Muslims even today. Faiz Ahmad Faiz (d.1984) exploits that sentiment when he says:

Bas Naam rahay ga Allah ka 
Jo Ghayab Bhi hai Hazir Bhi

Jo nazir bhi hai manzar bhi

(Then only God's name will remain

Who is both absent and present 

Who is both the observer and the view itself)

Uthay ga Analhaq ka Naara

Jo Main bhi Hun aur Tumbhi ho

(When the anthem of ‘I am the Truth’ will be raised

Who I am and you are as well)

Aur Raaj karay gi khalq-e-Khuda
Jo main bhi hun aur tum bhi ho

(And the people of God will reign 

Who I am and you are as well)

Faiz invoked the utterance of Anal Haque (I am the Truth/God) by Mansur al Hallaj, which had become a symbol of revolt/resistance in Muslim societies to remind that it is not new for us to revolt against the established orders (in his other poem na unki rasm nayee hai na apni reet nayee). 

Islam was understood to be a religion of Arabs and they treated their subjects, even if they were Muslims, differently. The non-Arabs were organized in patron-client relationship with the existing Arab tribes. These non-Arabs were called the maula (pl. mawali) or slave of the Arab tribe which they were tied to for politico-social reasons. Dissenting Arab groups such as the Kharajites (khariji) were against this system in their early phase of existence and talked of unity of the ‘umma. But later on they too changed their position with the beginning of Mawali Movement, which is well-known for their opposition to the Arab supremacy. Abbas Saffa exploited the mawali sentiment against the Arabs and with their help the Ummaiyad rule thrown out and the ‘Abbasid Revolution’ took place, which introduced completely a new system of state modeled on erstwhile Sassanid’s with some modifications. The Abbasids too betrayed the non-Arab cause and introduced regressive Arabisation of society, state and culture. The non-Arab Muslims, particularly Persians resisted this move with full vigor and they started Shubbiya Movement (shubbiya derived from shub, Arab., nation) to keep their Persian language and identity intact. The movement extolled the “Wisdom” of non-Arabs, the Indians, the Greeks, and especially the Iranians in contrast to the lack of culture of the Arabs. The psyche of the Persians can be understood in the words of a Persian commander as related to by Firdausi (c. 1010) of Shahnama fame:

From mere drinkers of camel’s milk and lizard-eaters,

The Arabs have reached such a state

That they are aiming at the Iranian imperial throne

Fie upon thee, fie, O ever-turning Fortune!

In response to the Persian criticism of Arab racism in Islam and politics, the Arabs emphasized that they were the ‘first to produce Islam’ (Irfan Habib 2013). This kind of common Arab attitude and their notion of Islam, which emphasized on the reward in afterlife for obeying God in this world, did not impress more cultured Persians; to them it was a selfish motive. The response to this notion, Rabia of Basra (d.801 CE) gave the idea of ‘disinterested love’ for God. She is reported to have said that, “I am going to light a fire in paradise and pour water in hell, so that the servants of God can see him without any object of Hope or motive of fear.” Rabia is much celebrated women sufi, who has been referred to by several sufis as example for their own teachings. One such example is narrated by Shaikh Nasiruddin Chiragh of Delhi (d. 1356) about her:

“Rabia of Basra possessed much beauty and grace. The principal men of Basra, consisting of scholars and mystics resolved unanimously that this woman, while traversing the path of God, was not to behave like men; it might not happen that Satan led her astray. Thereupon they assembled together and went to Rabia. They told her, a woman however pious must have a husband. She asked the most learned of them to come forward. Upon Khwaja Hasan Basri doing so, she asked him: How was wisdom (aql) divided, at Creation? He replied, “Nine parts were given to men, one to women”. And how, she went on, was lust (shahwat) divided. He said, contrary to that, nine parts of it were given to women, and just one to men. Rabia thereupon countered: One-tenth of wisdom that I possess prevails over nine-tenth of lust that I have got, while the nine-tenths of wisdom that you people have cannot prevail over just one-tenth of lust!” (Hamid Qalandar. 1959, 200-201 c.f. Irfan Habib. 2013)

Rabia’s story, here, became the voice for challenging inherent patriarchy in the Muslim societies, perhaps, of Delhi if not of Basra. Although, Razia Sultan almost a century ago had challenged the patriarchal nobility by becoming an independent Sultan with the help of common Muslims, to whom she requested for help after Friday prayers in Delhi, but unfortunately, she could not hold her position in a hostile environment for long. It was perhaps Razia, who caused the beginning of the debate around patriarchy among the Muslim elites of Delhi.     

Exposition of Sharia law in itself is a story of different politico-intellectual conflicts prevalent in the early umma (Muslim brotherhood).  The succession of early caliphs depended on claimant’s nearness to the Prophet and his piety as described by the companions (of the Prophet). By the time Marwanid Ummaiyads came to power, no one from the companions was alive, therefore the caliphs started patronizing writing of Hadith (traditions), which was related through a chain of proofs. The Quran and the Hadith became the basis of Islamic law and its interpretation became a leading science to be studied. Intellectual pursuit of this kind was also accompanied with philosophical studies. Soon after the conquest of Syria the Arabs started translating Hellenistic literatures into Arabic. These translations crept into the philosophical understanding of the Arabs and influenced religious thought as well. Mutazallite movement is an example of these influences on Islamic thought, which not only tried to understand the cosmology of Islam with reasons but also challenged very basic belief system. They said that the Quran is a part of creature and like any other creature of God has a life-span, thus the Quran can also become irrelevant in future. For some time the Mutazallites had a great influence over some of the caliphs who also unleashed mihna (inquisition) on the people who refused to accept the Mutazallite view.

These influences were not restricted to religious philosophy and theology but it influenced many individuals who did not hesitate in recording their dissent against established orders. Muqaddasi, one of great geographers of Islam, while writing in c. 985 wonders, whether it would not ‘have been better if the vast sums of money spent on mosques had been spent on roads and carvanserais (rest-houses) and frontier fortresses’ (Irfan Habib. 2013).  Abu Raihan Alberuni, the writer of Kitab ul Hind (c. 1035) is well-known for his open mindedness and liberal attitude is very frank in asserting that “To offer to him who has beaten your cheek, the other cheek, also to bless your enemy and to pray for him: Upon my life, this is a noble philosophy.” It is impossible that Alberuni was unaware of that this is not what Muslim theology preaches. His admiration of Bhagvatgita and Vyasa is an exemplary in itself.

The brief survey of history, which I intentionally kept restricted to first five centuries of Islam, narrates the stories of Arabo-Islamic politics and commoners’ response to it. The driving force of Islam, as it is preached, was its emphasis on egalitarianism atleast, among the umma. But, throughout the period of caliphate one notices, the principle hardly been followed. However, it is quite interesting to see that the orthodoxy always faced challenge from one quarter or the other. In the present scenario of Nigerian crisis and their likes, one has to resist and come out against their design to take the society backward. The history remembers those who resist against tyranny.

Na unki rasm nayee hai na apni reet nayee!     

         

References

Massignon, Louis  (1983). "Perspective Transhistorique sur la vie de Hallaj". Parole donnée (Paris: Seuil): 73–97. 

Mason, Herbert (1983). Memoir of a Friend: Louis Massignon. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press

IRFAN HABIB (2013). “Questionings within Religious Thought:

The Experience of Islam”, K. M. Ashraf Memorial Lecture at Kirori Mal College, University of Delhi in 2013.

HAMID QALANDAR (1959), Khairul Majalis, ed. Khaliq Ahmad Nizami. Aligarh 

Read More