The Book of Muinuddin Chishti

by Mehru Jaffer

  The concept of equality peaked at this time, as slaves became sultans. The Slave Dynasty of northern India ruled for about eighty-four years. Aibak, Iltutmush and Balban, three of the greatest rulers of the Delhi Sultanate, had all been slaves, sold, bought and often resold in their younger years. Aibak’s four-year rule is remembered as a just and strict one when roadside thieves and thugs beat a retreat and prosperity spread among the population. Due to his generous nature he came to be affectionately called ‘Lal Baksh’.

  The Oxford History of India by Percival Spear describes Aibak as a typical specimen of the ferocious Central Asian warrior of the time, merciless and fanatical. His valour, liberal-thinking and profuse generosity towards his comrades endeared him to the historians of his age; they praised him as a beneficent and victorious monarch. His gifts, we are told, were bestowed upon hundreds of thousands, and his slaughters likewise were by hundreds of thousands.

  K.A. Nizami’s Some Aspects of Religion and Politics in India during the Thirteenth Century points out that resistance to Muslim invaders came mainly from the privileged classes in India and the Rajput aristocracy. If the masses had decided to resist Turkish rule in India it would not have been possible for invaders to rule over even an inch of Indian territory. But the majority of the Indian population was excluded from the military by Rajput rulers and from temples by the Brahmins.

  However, it must be remembered that the story of the Muslim conquest as seen from the Hindu point of view is hardly available except in myths that still exist, often in exaggerated forms. The most familiar narratives are derived from authors like Mountstuart Elphinstone, a nineteenth-century Scottish historian and governor of Mumbai, whose History of India (published in 1904) is valuable but is based on materials supplied mainly by Muslim sources and often reflects the prejudices of historians who wrote in Persian. Peter Hardy, author of Historians of Medieval India, says that for many Muslim historians of the time the Hindu subjects were never interesting in himself, but only as a convert, tax payer or corpse.

  The invaders’ rapid success in India is attributed to their pitiless aggression that made resistance terribly dangerous and could not always be evaded by humble submission. It was a natural policy for the conquerors, few in number, to frequently deal with revolts among the great mass of Hindus. War and numerous skirmishes between Rajput and Turkish soldiers continued, clearly proving that India did not succumb to Turkish domination overnight. The countryside remained predominantly Hindu with Muslim dominance in urban areas.

  In The Chishtis: A Living Light, Muneera Haeri mentions that Aibak and later Muslim rulers taxed Hindu rulers and landowners. But the actual collection of revenue and the administration of lands was left largely in the hands of Hindus. The numerical superiority of the indigenous people ensured that the Turks were never able to maintain control and power without the support of the Hindu population. In fact it must have been impossible for outsiders to defeat the Rajput rulers without help from large sections of ordinary people, belonging mainly to populations dispossessed within Hindu society.

  It must, therefore, be surmised that the reaction of much of the Hindu urban populace to their invaders was not an overtly hostile one. The benefits that came from the new developments in trade and commerce further encouraged them to co-operate with the newcomers. Strict sectarian militancy belonged to later generations. The Hindu trader and craftsman were practical men, the spiritual beliefs of potential customers or commercial backers would have been of little concern provided their own way of living was not disrupted.1

  It is important to know about the people in power during Muinuddin’s lifetime as Muinuddin had made Ajmer his home. Muinuddin’s stay here was further facilitated, it is believed, by the arrival from Delhi of Syed Husain Mashadi as military governor to Ajmer. Mashadi was a pious man and enjoyed ample trust of the Hindu population of Ajmer.

  If Muinuddin did share a special relationship with the military governor he was obviously not averse to the idea of keeping a healthy distance from those in power, as his spiritual heirs did. At this time the community of Persian-speaking Muslims of Central Asian origin must have been small around Ajmer and Delhi, making it easier for them to socialize with each other. Besides, the state of affairs of that transitional time may have prompted Muinuddin to play a more active role in advising authorities in dealing with the local population than may have been necessary for later Chishti teachers.

  People of Turkic origin were mostly warriors rather than spiritual people. However, some among them were more pious than others, like Iltutmush, who ruled for twenty-six years after the death of Qutubuddin Aibak. Iltutmush played a pivotal role in making sure that the clergy and the mystics did not clash. Attracted to both this world and the one beyond, he chose Qutubuddin Bakhtiyar Kaki, Muinuddin Chishti’s disciple, as his spiritual adviser.

  Iltutmush was Aibak’s slave but because he was brave and capable he was sent as governor to Gwalior, and Badaun too came under his administration. He married Aibak’s daughter and when Aram Shah, Aibak’s son, showed no interest in governance, it was only natural for Iltutmush to succeed Aibak to the throne of Delhi. Iltutmush completed the construction of the Qutb Minar, the victory pillar Aibak had commissioned after he had conquered Delhi, and built a beautiful, seven-vaulted mosque in Ajmer, adorned with long inscriptions in the Kufic script streaming down in plaits.

  Iltutmush was considered a successful ruler because of his political savvy and for providing social stability to the country. He suppressed dissidence in Kirman and Ghazni and won over the people of Uch, Multan and Lahore. His popularity soared after he was able to avoid a clash and diplomatically turn away the Mongol marauder Chenghis Khan (who had already destroyed large parts of modern-day Afghanistan, Iran and Iraq, including Sistan, the birthplace of Muinuddin) from Delhi.

  History records that during his raid of Central Asia Chenghis Khan had chased Jalaluddin, a Persian ruler from Khwarezm in Uzbekistan, down to the Indus river near Attock. In desperation Jalaluddin had asked for refuge in Delhi. Aware that any help to an enemy could well tempt the Mongol to turn his wrath upon India, Iltutmush sent a message to Jalaluddin saying that the climatic as well as political heat of Delhi would possibly harm his royal highness, so it may be better if Jalaluddin stayed away from Delhi. This forced Jalaluddin to sneak away into Iran through Sind. Predictably Chenghis Khan followed on his heels and India was spared a barbaric attack. A great military strategist, Iltutmush soon conquered Bengal, Malwa, Bhilsa and Ujjain, and expanded the southern limits of his empire to Narbad. In Delhi he crowded his court with scholars, scientists, seers and soldiers.

  As a young man in Nishapur, Iltutmush had spent time with Sufi masters and in Delhi he allowed the mystical movement to flourish under his reign. Iltutmush visited Multan, a key centre of learning, to pay respects to Bahauddin Zakariya, the Suhrawardiyya saint. He made Persian the language of administration and welcomed scholars from Arabia and China.

  The clergy and Iltutmush shared a mutual respect for each other and that is why there was no protest when Iltutmush chose his daughter Razia instead of his debauched son as successor to the throne of Delhi. Razia ruled without wearing the veil and regularly appeared in public, riding on an elephant. Chishti texts from the thirteenth century and records of court historians also indicate that when Islamic jurists opposed music as an evil, Iltutmush, then sultan of Delhi, favoured the arguments of the music-loving Chishtis.

  However, Iltutmush’s admiration for Kaki created many enemies for the mystic. Once, Muinuddin was forced to rush to the capital city with the intention of getting his disciple to live with him in Ajmer for his safety. It is said that as they walked away from Delhi towards Ajmer, a sea of people led by Iltutmush trailed behind. Muinuddin was so moved by the respect his disciple enjoyed that he advised Kaki to remain in Delhi, which became his spiritual realm and where he lived till his death in 1235. He built his home on the outskirts of the city, across the Yamuna river and is buried in the M
ehrauli neighbourhood of Delhi. Kaki was famous for his frequent flights of ecstasy and it is he who led all the debates in the court of Iltutmush, passionately defending the importance and legality of sama, the spiritual musical concerts practiced by the Chishti order.

  Muinuddin frequently visited Kaki in Delhi and Iltutmush always appeared to pay his respects to the sage. There was much excitement amongst the three when Usman Harwani, Muinuddin’s master, whom Muinuddin had not met for over three decades, visited Delhi before his death in 1220. Harwani talked at length to Muinuddin and inspired him to write Kanjul Asrar, a spiritual guide in Persian for Iltutmush.

  Throughout the reign of the Mughals (between 1526 and 1858) Sufis were extremely influential and readily provided spiritual guidance to the empire. Among the Mughal emperors Akbar was most deeply drawn to spirituality and to the mystical works of Sufi poets. The great Mughal said that he might not belong to any Sufi order but he believed in them from the bottom of his heart. Akbar liked to call himself a king who was a slave of the dervishes.

  Akbar had possibly inherited the cultural openness and religious syncretism he practised as a family tradition. Although Babur and Humayun had put faith aside in the interest of temporal gains, Chenghis Khan, their ancestor, had participated in Nestorian, Christian, Muslim and Buddhist religious rites and Timur Lenk had appreciated Sufism.

  In such an environment, and with such a family background as his, and having the kind of intellectual and spiritual susceptibilities which he had, it was natural that Akbar should go foraging far afield in religion. In doing so, he was pushing along a path that was already open, though he went farther than most.2

  Akbar was introduced to Sufism early in life by Abdul Latif, his tutor. Towards his late twenties Akbar got worried that he was getting on in age but did not have an heir. He confided his concerns to Salim Chishti of Fatehpur Sikri, his spiritual master. A devotee of Muinuddin and himself a revered saint, Salim lived in the solace of the rocky hills of Sikri. He assured Akbar that he would soon have an heir.

  When Akbar’s Rajput wife conceived, he sent her to Sikri for her confinement. She remained close to Salim’s auspicious lodge in the hope of benefiting from the spiritual potency of the place. The son, born in August 1569, was named Salim after Akbar’s spiritual master. Salim later came to be known as Jahangir, one who holds the world. Akbar was so overjoyed at the birth of the future emperor that he distributed gifts generously. He felt greatly indebted to Salim Chishti for his wish being fulfilled and took care of the saint as long as he lived. He also fulfilled the dervish’s wish of listening to Tansen’s entrancing music as he lay on his deathbed.

  After his death Akbar built a snow-white tomb in filigreed marble over Salim’s grave which still stands, at once humble and magnificent against the red sandstone city of Fatehpur Sikri. Akbar met regularly with leaders of different religions and many renowned poets in this house of worship. It was probably in these environs that the seeds of Deen-e-ilahi, a religion close to Akbar’s heart, embracing all humanity, were first sown.

  The discussions in the Hall of Worship, the Ibadatkhana, built at Fatehpur Sikri, were presided by Akbar and attended by Sunni ulama, Sufi sheikhs, Hindu pandits, Jains, Zorastrian and Catholic priests, the latter mostly from Potuguese Goa. Akbar ordered the translations of the Atharva Veda, the Ramayana and the Mahabharata. Abdulqadir Badauni, the Indo-Persian historian of the time, in his monumental work Muntakhabut Tawarikh writes, ‘The empire had grown in extent … His majesty has thus leisure to come into nearer contact with ascetics and the disciples of his reverence, the late Moin, and passed much of his time in discussing the word of God and the word of the Prophet. Questions of Sufism, scientific discussions, inquiries into philosophy and law were the order of the day.’3

  Three months after the birth of Salim, Akbar walked from Agra to Ajmer, his head unadorned by a crown, covering 360 kilometres bare feet, in sixteen stages, averaging 23 kilometres a day, to experience for himself the silent strength of Muinuddin’s shrine. Akbar continued to perform his pilgrimage to Ajmer till 1579.

  Although royal patronage was frequently forthcoming for Sufi mystics, they have often faced opposition and persecution as well. Even though Sufis do not challenge anyone on a battlefield, this covert aspect of Islam has seldom failed to breed paranoia in the powerful.

  The early years of the tenth century witnessed the climax of a sharp orthodox Muslim reaction against the individualistic transcendentalism of the Sufis who were contemptuous of human judgement. This culminated in the public execution in 922 in Baghdad of Mansoor al-Hallaj, the Persian mystic who in a moment of trance declared that he was the truth: ‘I am God.’

  Many Sufi masters felt that it was inappropriate to share mysticism with the masses, yet Hallaj openly did so in his writings and through his teachings. He made many enemies and rulers felt threatened by him. Appalled at the merciless murder of Hallaj, later Sufi masters thought it best to compromise with traditionalism and accept theology.

  The reconciliation of orthodoxy with mysticism within Islam was largely the achievement of the great theologian and mystic al-Ghazali. He propagated that the personal, emotional relation of the individual to the divine was the core of popular Islam. He believed that man’s perfection and happiness consist in trying to imitate the qualities of the Perfect One but few are equipped to withstand the severe discipline that is required. Human beings are more likely to discover the real attributes and purposes of divine reality through mystical experience.

  In winning over Islam to this view, al-Ghazali won for Sufism an abiding home in Muslim orthodoxy. In doing so, however, he pared away some of the more extreme forms of mystic expression. He refused to try to express what he himself had experienced. To divulge the secrets of Lordship is unbelief. Al-Ghazali held Sufism back from pantheism; at the precise moment of supreme illumination there is still a distinction between the creator and the mystic.4

  However, the wisdom of al-Ghazali could not stop the persecution of mystics. Shahabuddin Suhrawardi, who had perfected Persian parables and preached the illuminationist philosophy based on a neo-Platonic idea of the soul’s descent into the body, was executed at the age of thirty-five in Aleppo in 1191. Suhrawardi had preached that different human beings bask in different gradations of divine light although everyone possesses the potential of attaining the same intensity of self-awareness. For his beliefs Suhrawardi was charged with attempts to corrupt religion.

  By the fourteenth century most of the towns in north India had their own saint. In the popular Islam practised by the lower strata of society these saints were venerated as miracle makers, bearers of divine blessings, intercessors and patrons of various social groups and artisans. Throughout history, though, eminent representatives of the Muslim community have worried over the growth of the cult of the saint. There are books full of criticism of this wild growth, of boundless syncretism and of what they consider the downright erosion of religio-cultural boundaries. By virtue of their proximity to the people and ascetic way of life, a Sufi saint evoked greater love, and therefore authority, than the official experts of religion. Unlike mystics in search of transcendental communion with the saint, ordinary people make a pilgrimage for more utilitarian and temporal reasons—recovery from an illness, getting rid of the evil eye, winning lawsuits, wishing for more money, the birth of a son, the marriage of a daughter or even the death of an enemy—and all pious efforts to limit pilgrimage to Sufi shrines have always been in vain.

  Official Islam has always looked upon the cult of saints with suspicion. In the strict monotheism of Islam the worship of objects and people, even saints, is seen as polytheism and as a terrible sin. Among the Sunni sects, the Hanbali Muslims and more recently the Wahhabis want to purify Islam of all outside influences. Indian leaders of the Sunni Hanafi school declared the cult of saints unauthorized and an error. Shah Walliullah, spiritual leader of Indian Sunnis and known as the renovator of faith in the eighteenth century, has even said that thos
e who make pilgrimage to Ajmer are sinners, having committed a crime that is greater than murder or adultery.

  In 1818 the British annexed Ajmer and after that Ajmer Sharif lost all patronage of the state. In the twentieth century Turkey decided to create a modern nation state out of the embers of the disintegrating Ottoman Empire. Kemal Ataturk, the father of modern Turkey, wanted education, administration and culture in his country to be as European as possible. He took a series of dramatic measures to modernize Turkey and part of the secular revolution was to cut the roots of Islam. Ataturk banned Sufi orders from the land of Jalaluddin Rumi. The ban was however lifted in the 1950s and the whirling dervishes continue to perform at the urs of Rumi in Konya every December.

  Closer to our time, Stalin closed down 26,000 mosques, and by 1989 there were just eighty mosques left in all Uzbekistan. But under this thin carapace of institutionalized worship, whose leaders were forced into compromise with Moscow, there swarmed an undergrowth of unofficial mullahs and holy men. The most fervent centres of worship and objects of secret pilgrimage became not the regulated mosques but the shrines of venerated Sufis.

  Rulers have been restless and uncomfortable with the success of Sufism in society. It results perhaps from the frustration of not being able to access the inner world of individuals, the heart, that piece of territory that cannot be conquered by anyone. The stoic reaction of the Sufi to the decay of the outer world perhaps provokes the mighty everywhere, making them angry at not being able to control the life of individuals who choose to turn away from their patronage to embark on a private journey of the soul.

  Scholars on Sufism

  Most religions are easy to explain because their manifestations in the outer world, their rites and rituals, are obvious, but Sufism is a concept so esoteric that it defies definition.