Abraham Eraly - The Age of Wrath - A History of the Delhi Sultanate

Shia and Sunni, despite their differences, are both orthodox sects. Sufis are on another religious plane altogether; they are mystics and are regarded as heretics by many orthodox Muslims. Even al-Biruni, though he was generally quite broadminded, was censorious about Sufism, and condemned it for its flighty mysticism and lack of intellectual rigour and sophistication. Sultan Ghiyas-u-din Tughluq also disapproved of Sufis. A rigidly orthodox Muslim, he once summoned Nizamuddin Auliya, the great Sufi sage of medieval India, to the court to appear before a jury of orthodox theologians, and forced him to acknowledge, at least outwardly, the error of his ways.

Sufis hold that god realisation cannot be achieved through conventional religious practices, but only though obsessive, passionate devotion to god, and by awakening one’s intuitive faculties through intense meditation. Such meditation, Sufis believe, would enable the devotee to gain insights into the true nature of god, and that this knowledge would liberate him from all worldly bonds, so that he becomes one with god. Typically, Khwaja Moinuddin, the founder of the Chishti sect in India, claimed: ‘For years I used to go around the Kaaba, now the Kaaba goes around me.’

Many of the peculiar beliefs and practices of Sufis arose out of their conviction that doomsday, the end of the world — the day of final divine judgement and the arrival of Mahdi, the redeemer — was at hand, and that man should prepare himself earnestly for that day by ridding himself of all his temporal concerns, and thus transcend the human condition. Sufis therefore detached themselves from society, lived in seclusion, practised self-mortification, and indulged in dervish practices like rapturous singing and dancing, to induce in themselves spiritual ecstasy and to fall into a trance, and thus disengage themselves totally from the mundane world. Often they spoke in a cryptic language, not so much to say anything, as to create an otherworldly ambiance.

The beliefs and practices of Sufis were in many ways similar to those of the Bhakti cults of Hinduism, but while the Bhakti sages usually functioned within society, Sufis usually functioned outside society. In that they were rather like yogis. And yogis evidently did have some influence on some Sufi sects in India, whose members took to performing yogic exercises, particularly controlled breathing. Some Indian Sufi leaders even called themselves rishis, as the Hindu sages did. And some of them took Hindus as disciples.

Sufis in medieval India were divided into three major orders: Chishti (popular in Delhi and the Doab, and had poet Amir Khusrav as one of its distinguished followers), Suhrawardi (of Sind), and Firdausi (of Bihar). The best known Sufi sage of the early medieval period was Nizamuddin Auliya of the Chishti order, who had a large number of followers among the ruling class in Delhi. But the followers of Sufism, compared to the general Muslim population in India, were quite small even at the height of the movement’s short-lived popularity, because the renunciatory and asocial character of the sect was not suited for the common people.

SOME OF THE Muslim mystic sects were quite weird in their practices, like some of the Hindu mystic sects. The oddest of them was the Qalandar sect, a loosely organized group of antinomian wandering dervishes. Their early history is obscure, but they probably originated in Iran or Central Asia, from where they entered India around the twelfth or thirteenth century. Qalandars were contemptuous of all social and religious conventions, habitually used psychedelic drugs, and considered themselves above all laws, including the Sharia laws. Unlike most Sufis, they shaved their head and face, even their eyebrows, wore iron rings on their ears and fingers, and went about clad in coarse, hip-length woollen blankets. Some members of this sect fitted a short iron rod transversely into their penis, to prevent any possibility of sexual intercourse by them.

Ibn Battuta once saw a performance by Qalandars at Amroha in Uttar Pradesh. ‘Their chief,’ he reports, ‘asked me to supply him with firewood so that they might light it for their dance, so I charged the governor of that district … to furnish it. He sent about ten loads of it, and after the night prayer they kindled it, and at length, when it was a mass of glowing coals, they began their music recital and went into that fire, dancing and rolling about in it. Their chief asked me for a shirt and I gave him one of the finest texture; he put it on and began to roll about in the fire with it on and beat the fire with his sleeves until it was extinguished … He then brought me the shirt showing not a single trace of burning on it, at which I was greatly astonished.’ In Maldives too Battuta once saw the dervishes perform this fire rite; they, he reports, went into a fire, ‘treading it with their [bare] feet, and some of them ate it (the embers) as one eats sweetmeats.’

The early medieval period was the age of bizarre religious movements in India, in Hinduism as well as in Islam. Firuz Tughluq in his autobiography describes some of these sects, and the action he took to suppress them. One such heretic leader of the age was Rukn-ud-din, who claimed to be the Mahdi; Firuz set the rabble on him and had him killed—‘the people rushing in tore him to pieces and broke his bones into fragments,’ he writes with approbation. Firuz also mentions a heretic in Gujarat who ‘used to say “Ana-l-Hakk” (I am god), and instructed his disciples that when he said these words they should say, “Thou art, thou art!” … He was put in chains and brought before me … I condemned him to punishment …’

ISLAM WAS AN aggressively proselytising religion, but there is no evidence of any extensive use of violence by Muslim rulers in India to force conversions. Though there were many instances of sultans converting Hindus into Islam by force, most of them were incidental to military campaigns. The sultans did not actively seek conversions, for their object in conquering India was to gain power and wealth, not to spread religion, though religion did subserve their other goals.

The greatest number of Hindu coverts to Islam came from the under-classes, who sought to gain socio-economic emancipation through conversion, by freeing themselves from the bondage of the Hindu caste system. As Muslims, their careers were no longer confined to their old degrading caste functions, so they could rise to whatever position they merited by their aptitudes and skills. And, more than anything else, conversion radically transformed their social status, from that of the underclass to that of the upper class.

‘The heathens of these parts daily become Moors to gain the favour of their rulers,’ writes Barbosa about what he observed in Bengal. Sometimes there were mass conversions, following clan or tribal decision. This was fairly common in north-east and north-west India, the predominantly tribal regions of the subcontinent. But most of the individual conversions were in urban areas — in rural areas there was very little for Hindus to gain by becoming Muslims, while in urban areas conversion opened up a whole new world for them, for economic as well as social advancement.

There were a few conversions to Islam from the Hindu upper castes also, of men who sought to advance their careers by becoming Muslims. Even some rajas and chieftains became Muslims, so as to retain their power. Conversion also freed Hindus from the obligation to pay jizya, though this does not seem to have been a major factor. Sufis too played a role, though only a small role, in attracting Hindus to Islam. In several cases, Hindu converts to Islam continued to observe their old sectarian socio-religious practices. Thus it was reported that Hindu converts to Islam in Punjab continued to worship their old village deities even after their conversion. Such practices were fairly common in other regions of India also.