Thus, Babur’s reputation was that of a very liberal ruler amongst Sanskrit scholars.
(4) Babur’s visit to Gwalior temples
That Babur was not a fanatical ruler is testified to by the following observation which he made in the year 935 A.H., the very year when he is alleged to have demolished the Rāma Janma-bhūmi temple at Ayodhyā. He writes in his diary recorded on 27th September, 1528:
“To the west of the tank is a lofty idol temple. Sultan Shemsuddin Altemsh built a grand mosque close upon it. The idol temple is very high; indeed it is the highest building in the fort. From the hill of Dhulpur, the fort of Gualiar and this idol temple are distinctly seen. They say that all the stones were dug out of the great tank.” (Erskine’s translation, p. 384)
Thackston’s translation of Babur’s description of the Hindu temple is equally good:
“To the west of the reservoir is a tall temple, next to which Sultan Iltutmish had a congregational mosque built. The temple is extremely tall – the tallest structure in the fortress – and both the Gwalior fortress and the temple can be plainly seen from the hill in Dholpur. They say that the stones of this temple were cut and transported from the large reservoir.” (pp. 405-06)
Babur’s visit to Gwalior temples became so famous and such a landmark that subsequent artists in Akbar’s atelier made a painting of this historic visit which is kept in the British Museum miniatures. Its no. is Add.16623 Bl.f. 2646/Qr. 3714 BL.f. 478 a. This portrayal of Babur’s visit to Gwalior temples is produced here to convince the readers that there was a Muslim monarch who visited a temple complex not to demolish it but to appreciate it. Then how could he demolish a temple at Ayodhyā and build a masjid at the Janma-sthāna of Lord Ramchandraji?
Babur’s visit to Gwalior temples (Mughal Illustrations
in Baburnama made in 1590-1593 A.D.)
The beautiful temple seen and appreciated by Babur was Teli Temple which was built in the 8th-9th century A.D. It is placed below:
Teli Temple at Gwalior visited
and appreciated by Babur.
When Babur did not demolish this grand temple at Gwalior, which was just beside the mosque built by Iltutmish and which was taller than the mosque, how could he raze the Janma-bhūmi temple at Ayodhyā which was never visited by him? The Janma-sthāna temple is alleged to have been demolished in 935 A.H. which started on September 15, 1528. Babur is writing this diary on 29th September, 1528, i.e. in close proximity to the said period of the demolition of the Ayodhyā temple. An emperor like Babur, who could enjoy a visit to the idol houses of Gwalior, had no reason to demolish the temple at Ayodhyā. Similarly, in March, 1529, Babur was in the vicinity of Benaras for many days. Had he any iconoclastic ideas, he would have demolished temples at Benaras. When he spared them at Benaras there was no reason for him to demolish any temple at Ayodhyā.
Mutilation of the Jain idols in the Urwa valley near Gwalior is cited as an example of his iconoclasm but it had nothing to do with his religious bigotry. The nakedness of idols hurt his sentiment. When he visited the valley on 28th September, 1528, he wrote:
“On these sides people have cut out idol-statues, large and small, one large statute on the south side being perhaps 20 qari (yds) high. These idols are shown quite naked without covering for their privities.”
Babur further writes: “Urwa is not a bad place, it is shut in (Turkish. tûr); the idols are its defect; I, for my part, ordered them destroyed.”
This action of Babur emanated from his disgust at the public display of naked idols and should not be ascribed to his iconoclastic zeal.
(5) Babur visits Jogis at Gur-khattri
While giving the account of his first incursion in India in 1505 A.D. Babur writes about the well known cave of Gur Khattri near Bigram (Peshawar) along with its banyan tree which was then equally famous:
“Tales had been told us about Gur-Khattri; it was said to be a holy place of the Jogis and Hindus who come from long distances to shave their heads and beards there. I rode out at once from Jam to visit Bigram, saw its great tree, and all the country round, but, much as we enquired about Gur-khattri, our guide, one Malik Bu-said Kamari, would say nothing about it. When we were almost back in camp, however, he told Khwaja Muhammad-amin that it was in Bigram and that he had said nothing about it because of its confined cells and narrow passages. The Khwaja, having there and then abused him, repeated to us what he had said, but we could not go back because the road was long and the day far spent.”(p. 230)
It was a holy place for the Hindus, particularly for the jogis. They used to come from faraway places to cut their hair and beards there. At that time Babur could not visit the place but during his second invasion in 1519 A.D. he ensured his visit to the sacred Hindu place and candidly wrote:
“(March 26th) Marching on next day, we reached Bigram and went to see Gur-khattri. This is a smallish abode, after the fashion of a hermitage (sauma’at), rather confined and dark. After entering at the door and going down a few steps, one must lie full length to get beyond. There is no getting in without a lamp. All round near the building there is let lie an enormous quantity of hair of the head and beard which men have shaved off there. There are a great many retreats (hujra) near Gur-khattri like those of a rest-house or college. In the year we came into Kabul (910 AH.) and over-ran Kohat, Bannu and the plain, we made an excursion to Bigram, saw its great tree and were consumed with regret at not seeing Gur-khattri, but it does not seem a place to regret not-seeing.” (p. 394)
If Babur would have been adversely disposed against the Hindus, he would not have been keen to see this holy place. Babur’s gesture should be appreciated more because the jogis were allowing even Muslims as their followers. Ibn Battuta, who travelled in many parts of India during the reign of Muhammad bin Tughlaq, writes in his immortal travelogue ‘The Rehla’ about the jogis in the following words:
“These people work wonders. For instance, one of them remains for months without food and drink; many of them dig a pit under the earth which is closed over them leaving therein no opening except one through which the air might enter. There one remains for months and I have heard that some jogis hold out in this manner for a year.
In the city of Mangalore (Manjarur) I saw a Musalman who used to take lessons from the jogis. A small stand had been set up for him on which he held himself for twenty-five days without food and drink. I left him in that state and do not know how long, after my departure, he remained there in that state.
People relate that the jogis prepare pills of which they take one for a specified number of days or months, and that during this period they need neither food nor drink. They give information about hidden things and the sultan honours them and takes them into his company.” (p. 164)
Babur’s description of Gur-khattri is corroborated by Mahmud bin Amir Wali Balkhi who came to India in A.D. 1624-25 from Balkh in Afghanistan during the reign of Jahangir. He visited many places in India which included Peshawar, Lahore, Sirhind, Delhi, Mathura, Allahabad, Benaras, Patna, Raj Mahal, Midenapur, Hyderabad, Mangalore and Cape Comorin. In his book named “Bah-rul Asrār” which has been published by the Institute of Central and West Asian Studies of the University of Karachi Balkhi has described the buildings and Jogi practices at Gor Khatri and his description is not at variance with that of Baburnama. Gur Khattri was an important centre which attracted not only Babur and central Asian traveller Balkhi but Abul Fazl and Akbar also in the 40th regnal year of the Emperor. Abul Fazl describes Akbar’s visit vividly in the following words:
“On the 14th he encamped near Bigram. He spent some time in Gorkhattri, which is a shrine of the Jogis. There is a great cave in this place. Babblers say that no one knows how deep (long ?) it is. In the midst of it is the way to the secret chamber of the saints of old times. On account of the difficulty and darkness of the way, and its tortuousness, one cannot get there. As it was the prayer-spot of the great ones of God he entered it alone by the light of wisdom, and s
ome of his servants, one after the other, also had this blessing. This least of men was one of them. The road was very long. It was necessary to sit down and to lie down and to trust to God. Many brave men had not the courage to do so, and turned back when half-way. After that he rested at the fort of Bigram.”
(Akbarnama III, Chapter 61, Expedition to Kabul)
A copy of the Mughal painting on Babur’s visit to jogis at Gur-khatri (1519) is kept in British Museum Miniatures as filename c13657-17 Source Or. 3714 Vol.3 f.320v. This painting was made by Kesu Khurd. The image has been produced here. It shows the liberal attitude of Babur.
Fig. 3.3: Babur’s visit to Hindu jogis at Gur-khatri (Mughal
Illustrations in Baburnama made in 1590-1593 A.D.).
Beveridge further writes:
“Babur was familiar with the interaction of two creeds, witness his ‘apostates’, mostly Muhammadans following Hindu customs.”
(6) Testimony of Bāburnāma
Babur’s attitude towards the Hindus can be gauged from the following observation of the Emperor in his diary:
“Most of the natives are the Hindus. They call the Pagan inhabitants of Hindustan, Hindus. Most of the Hindus hold the doctrine of transmigration. The officers of revenue, merchants, and work people are all Hindus. In our native countries, the tribes that inhabit the plains and deserts have all names, according to their respective families, but everybody, whether they live in the country or in villages, have names according to their families. Again, every tradesman has received his trade from his forefathers, who for generations have all practiced the same trade (William Erskine’s translation, 1826, p. 332)
It does not show any contempt or prejudice against the Hindus.
The uninterrupted activities of neo-Vaishnavite sect at Mathurā between Agra and Delhi and his cordial relations with local Hindu chiefs is another proof of his liberal views. According to “Vīr Bhānūdaya Kāvyam” he had friendly relation with Raja Bīr Singh Deo, the Baghela King of Arail.
Babur’s mention on 17th January 1528 A.D. that after dismounting near Kachwa he ‘encouraged its people’ has been construed as a protection to those jogies who were having secret learnings and Muslim followings.
Beveridge identifies Kachwa with Kajwarra of Ibn Battuta and writes:
“Ibn Battuta writes of the people of Kajwarra that they were jogies, yellowed by asceticism, wearing their hair long and matted, and having Muhammadan followers who desired to learn their (occult) secrets. If the same interaction existed Babur’s day, the Muhammadan following of the Hindu ascetics may well have been the special circumstance which led him to promise protection to those Hindus, even when he was out for the Holy-war’ against Medni Rai.”
Here it should be remembered that Firoz Shah Tughlaq had inflamed a person to death for making a Muslim his follower and Aurangzeb issued the Firman of 1669 A.D. to demolish all such centres where Muslims came for acquiring knowledge from Hindu scholars. But Babur was liberal not only to tolerate it but even encourage those jogis.
Similarly, Babur’s invitation to Hindu nobles in his royal feasts, too, is a gesture of his liberality. On 18th December, 1528 he held a grand feast and invited a number of envoys which included Hindu envoys. In his diary Babur wrote thus:
“On Saturday the 6th of the month (Rabi II) there was a feast at which were present Qizil-bash (Red-headed), and Auz-beg, and Hindu envoys.” (p. 630)
Thereafter Babur informs that ‘when the dinner was placed, the Hindustani jugglers were brought in and performed their tricks, and the tumblers and rope-dancers exhibited their feats. The Hindustani sleight-of-hand men do several feats which I never saw performed by those of our countries.’
Then he narrates those tricks in detail and the way he admires them shows that he has no grudge against Hindustani natives.
(7) Guru Nanak Dev’s poignant narration
However, it does not mean that Babur was not a cruel warrior. His tyranny in the Punjab compelled a saintly votary of peace. Guru Nanak Dev to condemn him in these severe words in Guru Grantha:
आसा महला
खुरासान खसमाना कीआ हिंदुसतानु डराइआ।।
आपै दोसु न देई करता जमु करि मुगलु चड़ाइआ।।8।।
ऐती मार पई करलाणे तैं की दरदु न आइआ।।9।।
करता तूं सभना का सोई।
जे सकता सकते कउ मारे ना मनि रोसु न होई।।1।। रहाउ
सकता सीहु मारे पै वगै खसमै सा पुरसाई।।
रतन बिगाडि़ बिगोए कुतीं मुइसा सार न काई।।
आपे जोडि़ विछोड़े आपे वेखु तेरी वडिआई।।2।।
जे को नाउ धाराऐ बडा साद करे मनि भाणे।।
खसमै नदरी कीड़ा आवै जेते चुगै दाणे।।
मरि मरि जीवै ता किछु पाए नानक नामु वखाणे।।3।।5।।39।।
Its English translation is as follows:
Aasaa, First Mehl:
Having attacked Khuraasaan, Baabar terrified Hindustan.
The Creator Himself does not take the blame, but has sent the Mugal as the messenger of death.
There was so much slaughter that the people screamed.
Didn’t You feel compassion, Lord? 1
O Creator Lord, You are the Master of all.
If some powerful man strikes out against another man, then no one feels any grief in their mind. 1 ll Pause ll
But if a powerful tiger attacks a flock of sheep and kills them, then its master must answer for it.
This priceless country has been laid waste and defiled by dogs, and no one pays any attention to the dead.
You Yourself unite, and You Yourself separate; I gaze upon Your Glorious Greatness. ll2ll
One may give himself a great name, and revel in the pleasures of the mind, but in the Eyes of the Lord and Master, he is just a worm, for all the corn that he eats.
Only one who dies to his ego while yet alive obtains the blessings, O Nanak, by chanting the Lord’s Name. 3.5.39.
(translation by Islam Kotob)
The background of this heart-rendering lamentation of Guru Nanak Dev is the general massacre of the people and cruel treatment to thousands of prisoners at Bajaur and other places in Punjab. This barbarous act on the part of Babur was to strike terror in the indifferent or hostile populace. In this pathetic poem of Nanak Dev Babur’s cruelty is highlighted but here also the religious bigotry is not mentioned. Babur was, no doubt, a cruel warrior who could go to any extent to vanquish his foe. But after the surrender of the rivals he was usually considerate to them and very liberal in his treatment to his opponents.
(8) Charges against Babur
After his decisive war with Rana Sangram Singh the erection of Hindu heads in hill shape was an act of cruelty. He wrote thus:
“All the Hindus slain, abject (khwar, var. zar) and mean,
By matchlock-stones, like the Elephants’ lords,
Many hills of their bodies were seen,
And from each hill a fount of running blood.
Dreading the arrows of (our) splendid ranks,
Passed they in flight to each waste and hill.”
(Baburnama, Beveridge’s translation, p. 573)
After the victory over the Rana he assumed the title of Ghazi (Victor in a holy war) and wrote the following quatrain entering tughra on the Fath-nama:
For Islam’s sake, I wandered in the wilds,
Prepared for war with pagans and Hindus,
Resolved mysel
f to meet the martyr’s death.
Thanks be to God ! a ghazi I became. (ibid, p. 575)
Of course, it is a religious bias but it is in the wake of an almost impossible victory, over one of the greatest warriors India has ever produced – Rana Sanga.
Similarly, erection of ‘a pillar of pagan-heads on a hill north-west of Chanderi was another act of cruelty. Beveridge comments:
“Babur’s account of the siege of Chandiri is incomplete, inasmuch as it says nothing of the general massacre of pagans he has mentioned of f. 272. Khwafi Khan Khar records the massacre, saying that after the fort was surrendered, as was done on condition of safety for the garrison; from 3 to 4000 pagans were put to death by Babur’s troops.”
If this is true, it is a slur on otherwise a very frank and truthful author.
Charges of religious bigotry have been labelled against Babur by many modern historians on account of the following incidents:
(i) The reference to the erection of the pyramids of skulls of the Hindus in his Memoirs.
(ii) the declaration of Jihad against Rana Sangram Singh and Medni Rao of Chanderi.
(iii) the massacre of a number of surrendered soldiers in the fort of Chanderi and the frequent use of the word ‘Kāfīr’.
His war against Rana Sangram Singh and Medini Rao of Chanderi were acts of an ambitious and expansionist ruler. While waging war, he took the refuge of religion to instill confidence and enthusiasm amongst his frightened soldiers. The massacre of a number of surrendered soldiers at Chanderi cannot be justified, and it was an ignominious act of total brutality but not that of religious ferocity. Similarly, the erection of the pyramids of skulls of the Hindus had much more the element of cruelty than that of religiosity. It was trait of many monstrous monarchs in the medieval period. But one must not forget that after the conquest Babur did not invariably indulge in the wanton demolition of Hindu temples, nor did he ever promote forcible conversion of the Hindus to Islam. He did not prohibit the religious assemblies and the movement of Hindu pilgrims and saints from one place to another. He behaved gracefully with the son of Rana Sangram Singh and other Hindu chieftains. At least six Hindu Rajas including Raja Bikramjit (second son of Rana Sanga) accepted Babur’s suzerainty and paid tributes. Even S.R. Sharma has admitted “there is no evidence of his ever having destroyed temple or otherwise persecuted the Hindus on account of their religion.” In the light of these facts it is very unjust to associate him with the demolition of the Rāma temple at his birthplace.
Ayodhya Revisited Page 20